GT300 clockspeeds

Tempered81

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2007
6,374
1
81
A1 Silicon Samples tested at 700/1600/1100(4400).

Nvidia G300-samples with 700/1600/1100 MHz

Only yesterday we had reported that NVIDIA's upcoming high-end desktop chip G300 successful tape-out would have been overcome and is currently in A1-Stepping exists, which may already be the finale.
Now we can offer the frequency of the present samples, which Nvidia is already very happy to be so final that they also could be used.

Consequently, running samples in the G300-A1-Stepping with 700 MHz chip clock, 1600 MHz shader clock and 1100 MHz memory clock operation - the latter we have already indicated in our previous news on the tape-out to.
Based on the already detected shader units and the width of the memory interface can also be the first accurate, quantitative comparisons up.

As we already reported, the G300 is more than 512 instead of 240 shader units. The rough structure, namely, that it continues to 1D-shader units, the per bar MADDEN and MUL can calculate, will probably remain intact, so that is already broken, that the current samples in a theoretical computing capacity of as much as 2457 Gigaflops come.
Nevertheless, the comparison with the G200, representing GTX 280, limping slightly, because the G300 is no longer a classical SIMD units act, but MIMD-like units, reveals the pure, quantitative compared to 163 percent higher computing power.

Also, the memory bandwidth is now with the knowledge of the memory clock will be taken into consideration. Thus, at 1100 MHz Nvidia to also impressive 281.6 GB / s come. Quantitatively, this corresponds to net against the GTX 280 exactly 100 percent more memory bandwidth.

Theoretical statements about the TMU and ROP performance, despite the fact that a known clock chip has not yet been made, because their number is not yet known or, in the case of the ROPS not even sure if it continues to fixed-function units will act .

We will contact you regarding Nvidia G300 to keep up and in a forthcoming reports on the current power samples received.

source:
http://translate.google.com/tr...e&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
I can only imagine such an increase in local bandwidth is due to their wanting this to become a high end computing part? Should be an interesting part either way. Cant wait to see some benchmarks. Unfortunately I think CPU's will be a major limitation when this debuts.
 

error8

Diamond Member
Nov 28, 2007
3,204
0
76
This will probably bring at least the double in performance of a gtx 280/285.
 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
You do realize that these "512 MIMD cores" and clockspeeds etc. are just speculation posted as news.
 

error8

Diamond Member
Nov 28, 2007
3,204
0
76
Speculations or not, this ddr5 on 512 bits idea ,has been in numerous news/speculations by now and it has really good chances to become a fact, hopefully. ;)
 

Wreckage

Banned
Jul 1, 2005
5,529
0
0
I think the Inq is going to drop a brick in their shorts when this card is released.
 

Blazer7

Golden Member
Jun 26, 2007
1,136
12
81
Originally posted by: error8
This will probably bring at least the double in performance of a gtx 280/285.

I wonder if PCI-E 2.0 will be sufficient for this one :D

Originally posted by: Wreckage
I think the Inq is going to drop a brick in their shorts when this card is released.

You mean another one? :p

 

Soleron

Senior member
May 10, 2009
337
0
71
If there's no IPC increase over GT200 then that's only a 15% increase in speed* over the current GTX295. Unless they put two on a PCB which is not their stated long-term strategy.

*8% clockspeed increase and 7% core count. And no, I didn't just add 8 and 7.
 

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
Originally posted by: Blazer7
Originally posted by: error8
This will probably bring at least the double in performance of a gtx 280/285.

I wonder if PCI-E 2.0 will be sufficient for this one :D

I'm sure it will be....but I'll bet the next wave of mobos released after P55 chipset will have PCI-E 3.0.
 

error8

Diamond Member
Nov 28, 2007
3,204
0
76
Originally posted by: Just learning
Originally posted by: Blazer7
Originally posted by: error8
This will probably bring at least the double in performance of a gtx 280/285.

I wonder if PCI-E 2.0 will be sufficient for this one :D

I'm sure it will be....but I'll bet the next wave of mobos released after P55 chipset will have PCI-E 3.0.

Yeah, it's about to be released in 2010, isn't it? So, it's just in time, for the gtx395, probably. :)
 

MarcVenice

Moderator Emeritus <br>
Apr 2, 2007
5,664
0
0
Just a fyi, they claim to be working with 'thebrightsideofnews', aka theo valich. It's as bad as theinq. Hardware-infos imo just wants cheap hits. But, just to be sure, I'm bookmarking any speculative article, and we'll see who was telling the truth (or was actually close to it) and who wasn't.

In a different light, an equally credible (or not credible) person wrote this: http://www.theinquirer.net/inq...dia-gt300-architecture

An article that at least to me, didn't look like complete bullshit (if half of it is true, things aren't looking as bright *pun intended* as charlie would like us to believe)
 

Sheninat0r

Senior member
Jun 8, 2007
515
1
81
Originally posted by: Soleron
If there's no IPC increase over GT200 then that's only a 15% increase in speed* over the current GTX295. Unless they put two on a PCB which is not their stated long-term strategy.

*8% clockspeed increase and 7% core count. And no, I didn't just add 8 and 7.

Err, GT300 is not at all comparable to GT200. GT300 is a MIMD part, while the GT200 is a SIMD part; completely different. Their architectures are more different than the 7 series vs. the 8 series.
 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
Originally posted by: Soleron
If there's no IPC increase over GT200 then that's only a 15% increase in speed* over the current GTX295. Unless they put two on a PCB which is not their stated long-term strategy.

*8% clockspeed increase and 7% core count. And no, I didn't just add 8 and 7.
First:
GTX 295 - 1242MHz * 480SP
G300-A1 - 1600MHz * 512SP

SingleGT300-A1 would have 37.4% higher shader performance than twoGT200.

Also:
-GTX295 is SLI solution and not 100% efficient
-GTX295 has bottlenecks in area of memory and G300-A1 wouldn't have these problems.





 

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,110
64
91
Originally posted by: MarcVenice
Just a fyi, they claim to be working with 'thebrightsideofnews', aka theo valich. It's as bad as theinq. Hardware-infos imo just wants cheap hits. But, just to be sure, I'm bookmarking any speculative article, and we'll see who was telling the truth (or was actually close to it) and who wasn't.

In a different light, an equally credible (or not credible) person wrote this: http://www.theinquirer.net/inq...dia-gt300-architecture

An article that at least to me, didn't look like complete bullshit (if half of it is true, things aren't looking as bright *pun intended* as charlie would like us to believe)

Yeah I'm not impressed with the hit rate of any of these guys at this time.

Thankfully for us enthusiasts they all have such diametrically opposing versions of "reality" that in a matter of months not only will we either have GT300 hitting shelves or not, we will also know which site/author to truly treat as absolute BS without question going forward.

They've all provided their own litmus test, now we just sit back and see which turd floats to the top come Nov.

And if Charlie is wrong then he won't skip a beat, at all, he'll be off prepping his anti-NV blogs regarding GT400 be "most assuredly disastrously late per my sources". How much of a beat did he skip when all his Phenom hype crap never came true (dancing in the aisles, that one).
 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
AMD doesn't need to find more efficient architecture to fight against GT300.. just make RV870 to be "dual RV740" with DX11 capability; it would have 1280SP and size would be around 250mm^2. They could put three of these on one card and it would still be cheaper solution than single GT300.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: Rusin
AMD doesn't need to find more efficient architecture to fight against GT300.. just make RV870 to be "dual RV740" with DX11 capability; it would have 1280SP and size would be around 250mm^2. They could put three of these on one card and it would still be cheaper solution than single GT300.

While the actual cost of the chip may be lower the complexity of the card design wouldnt necessarily make it cheaper. Now they need to design for 3 sets of memory, 3 sets of lanes, interconnectivity and power. The idea of smaller cores and placing them on a card isnt a bad idea. But it has limitations.
 

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,219
55
91
In order to be competitive with GT300, I would hazard a guess and say ATI would need at least 3 R740 cores on 1 card, AND improve their computing ability for DX11 compliance under Windows 7. Or Apples latest at the time of launch. First and foremost though, ATI needs to escape their current architecture (Vec5).IMHO.