• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

nVidia NV20 launch schedule

NFS4

NFS4

No Lifer
http://www.digit-life.com/news.html#976828628

January 6-9, 2001

NV20 "technology" demos are going to be publicly shown at Winter Consumer Electronic Show and at MacWorld but no product details will be announced at these events.

February 27, 2001

Product launch with full product info and product-level promotion at Intel's Developer Forum.
As we previously mentioned NV-20 based products will appear in volumes from NVIDIA's partners in March-April

And just a few words on the chip clock rates at launch: 200MHz core clock, 250MHz DDR memory clock (500MHz). The first NVIDIA NV20 reference board will feature 64MB DDR memory.
 
What no-one complaining about the release date?I guess they must be in the General hardware forum.

🙂
 
maybe this is a good thing, i think by pushin the release date back they might be able to lower the costs. Hopefully the expensive ram will come down a little in costs.
 
Looks like I gotta get my 500 bones ready. The b@stards better have decent 2d this time or it's going right back.
 
thats the same memory as in the ultra right? wonder how they are getting around the bandwidth limitation? and the core! even with the die shrink they can still only run it at 200MHz... must be the heat!
 
Pushing the launch date back would give us more time to save up, which is not so bad for the poor people like me 😀
 
In the next card all I care about are three things.

Multi-sample AA, 32-tab Anisotropic filtering and EMBM.

What ever card has these will get my money.

BTW. EMBM looks SOOOOOO much better than DOT3.
 
Orbis,

I've been telling you guys $500 forever.. Nobody seems to listen to me.. why? Because I work for 3dfx.. sigh.. You guys should have just a tad more confidence in me...

IBMer,

EMBM and Dot3 are just the tip of the iceberg... DX8 hardware allows for all kinds of cool stuff.
 
I've never seen anybody doubt that it will cost $500. That's how much the ultra was when it came out, so i'd say it's not really that surprising.
 
EMBM and Dot3 are just the tip of the iceberg... DX8 hardware allows for all kinds of cool stuff.

I have heard something along the lines of Cube Environment Bumpmapping and Projective Textures as well. But those won't be in games for a while.

I see the Dot3 mapping in Evolva and Giants and while it is better than nothing, EMBM looks better.

Also I want 32-tap Anisotropic filtering to go with that multi-sample AA to make the scene look like it was supposed to a long time ago.
 
Dot3 *should* look better. I guess it just depends on how developers use it...

As for anisotropic, I agree.. 32-tap is the absolute minimum though, IMO.
 
Will everybody, and this includes Dave, STFU about price please???
For all we know it could cost $800 or $100, now I personally dont think 400-500 is a bad guess, but alot of people act like they've seen it in the stores already.

And Dave, NDA or not, you still cant show any evidence, the reason why you cant really isnt all that interesting.

[edit]
And BTW, the same goes for Rampage and Radeon II
[/edit]
 
BTW. EMBM looks SOOOOOO much better than DOT3..

But DOT3 is SOOOOOOOO much more useful 🙂

Not only dull-looking bumps can be done with DOT3, it's actually a very good way to do specular or diffuse per-pixel lighting on any surface - bumps or no bumps - in just one pass. For best results on bumped surface both specular and diffuse should be used (two passes).

I'm very confident that this type of true, DOT3 per-pixel lighting will replace light mapping as the dynamic lighting method in new games in very near future. Imagine... None of those "one meter spheres of light" you see being emitted from moving shots and explosions in Unreal and Quake N engines. None of that unrealistic look of vertex lighting on large polygons.
 
Actually at least when looking at capabilities reported by D3D drivers, there's no 3D-feature differences between GF2/GTS and GeForce 256. Personally I believe that nVidia just began marketing the "Shading Rasterizer" with GTS, while hardware had been there from the original GeForce. GTS's much faster than it's predecessor per clock in DOT3 operations though, since each pipeline can do two lighting passes.
 
Yes, they are the same. The difference is that the GF1 has 4 trilinear pipes and the GTS has 4 bilinear with 2 texture units each.
 
"DaveB3D
Date Posted: Dec/10/2000 3:50 PM
sigh... I wish I could do a mind connection of some kind with you guys.. would be so much easier and you'd be sooo much clearer. the best I can do though is promise you that I know with a fact I'm right (if I didn't, I never would have come to work at 3dfx... as I knew were both companies where headed well enough before i came) and you'll see what I mean in the future... "

I think they lied to you.

So Dave,
When do you start working for Nvidia?
 
No offense but are they going to even offer you a job?

You've made it pretty public that you dont like there technology or there "direction" if you will.

Guess its Canuck country for you, so whats it going to be ATI or Matrox? 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top