IntelUser2000
Elite Member
- Oct 14, 2003
- 8,686
- 3,785
- 136
(Also, I see you live in BC. What city if ya don't mind me asking? I live in Kelowna.)
LOL, you live quite far from me. I live in Surrey. Already 2 people from BC in Anandtech.
(Also, I see you live in BC. What city if ya don't mind me asking? I live in Kelowna.)
LOL, you live quite far from me. I live in Surrey. Already 2 people from BC in Anandtech.
Where did you hear that? Besides, this is a new arch. We really don't know what the relationship is for performance/shader ratio yet. It could be that even a 384 shader Fermi could outperform a 480sp GTX295. We don't know yet.
If this was a revolution in shader architecture, they would have hyped that up at the conferences. My impression was that the big changes are on the memory and cache side: ECC, L2, support for more languages, and other GPGPU changes. Even RV770 didn't get much % increase in performance per shader.
I think it's safe to assume no more than 5-10% increase per shader at the outside.
I wish they could explain the whole ECC thing. If it is implemented like system memory then these things will be bad at overclocking, I hope it is some new type of system.
From what I've seen, ECC happens by reserving a portion of the on-card RAM for ECC purposes.
Rather than desktop RAM which has an extra chip to make 9 instead of 8, with the 9th being for ECC, they just reduce the available capacity, meaning the 6GB card is something like 5.2GB, and the 3GB is more like 2.5GB.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/io_1258360868914.html
Footnote i:
i With ECC enabled, user available memory will be 2.625GB for a C2050 and to 5.25GB for a C2070
If this was a revolution in shader architecture, they would have hyped that up at the conferences. My impression was that the big changes are on the memory and cache side: ECC, L2, support for more languages, and other GPGPU changes. Even RV770 didn't get much % increase in performance per shader.
I think it's safe to assume no more than 5-10% increase per shader at the outside.
Personally I don't care if the GPU I buy runs at 1MHz and has one shader, so long as the performance is there. If Fermi delivers on the performance front, I don't think it should really matter what it's specs are. I think all this shows (if true) is that Nvidia may have over shot what is feasible on current technology (with prices people are willing to pay). But if it still clobbers the 5870 and is priced right, who cares what the specs are?
With that being said, I think Nvidia slipped up this round with a very late part compared to the competition. Of course we haven't seen a single bench yet, so we'll have to wait and see.
If this was a revolution in shader architecture, they would have hyped that up at the conferences. My impression was that the big changes are on the memory and cache side: ECC, L2, support for more languages, and other GPGPU changes. Even RV770 didn't get much % increase in performance per shader.
I think it's safe to assume no more than 5-10% increase per shader at the outside.
IINM, this is the first time Nvidia will release a new architecture on a new man. process. Trying to think back, but it's all blurry now. LOL. Egg Nog and stuff.
With above statements I agree . But man this thing with Intel /NV and the FTC is going to get ugly read the above patent.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6989838/claims.html
With above statements I agree . But man this thing with Intel /NV and the FTC is going to get ugly read the above patent. You think maybe that NV has infringed on this patent . As I understand it that is the case. I wish NV would close that can of whoop ass as its going to stall the industry.
I think intel's piss poor excuse of an IGP in a majority amount of PC's has stalled the industry more than anything the FTC or Nvidia can do at this point.
Because businesses, by far the largest segment of the PC market, buys cheap, reliable machines to play Crysis in their offices amirite.
And while we at IGPs, Both Nvidia & ATI parts are trash compared to their own budget standalone cards.
Nemesis, why bring the patent discussion into here when there is a very comprehensive thread going on about it? Your first post was already moved to the relevant thread.
That patent is for a hardware emulator of portions of a rasterizer, an idea so stupid I don't think Intel will ever have to worry about defending it
I think intel's piss poor excuse of an IGP in a majority amount of PC's has stalled the industry more than anything the FTC or Nvidia can do at this point.
How is comparing it to the RV770 relevant? RV7XX isn't a new architecture, so obviously your not going to see much of a % increase in the performance per shader. It's just a new configuration and with Eyefinity added.
Hay why are you confused, IGP are not for gaming . They are for cheap graphics and low power. You have a bit of a shock coming real soon . You guys are confusing as all hell . Ya talk about netbooks like they should be gaming Pcs LOL.
Their pretty good actually considering the power envolope they have to fit in. It's also that OEM's tend to go with the shitty versions. Alienware is one company that uses Nvidia's best integrated chips. Like the 260/280m chips. 280m has 126 of cores. Can pump out some pretty good graphics for a laptop.
Anyways, I never said anything about nvidia in my post you are quoting, nor did I say anything about netbooks. BUT ---- last time I checked the ION could do gaming and was still extremely affordable.