R420 & NV40 So close you can smell them.

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
videoclone

videoclone

Golden Member
Jun 5, 2003
1,465
0
0
OK Maybe not that close but they should be here in the next few months anywayz

For now ive added up all the crap dodgy illegitimate guesstamating info from around the net and this is the result.

Nvidia NV40
- 0.13u
8x2 true Piplines
256bit Memory bus
256MB GDDR2 or GDDR3
600Mhz Core
1500Mhz Mem
CinFx 3.0
PS 3.0

ATI R420
- 0.13u or 0.15
12x1 Piplines
256bit Memory bus
256MB GDDR2 or GDDR3
xxx Mhz Core
xxxx Mhz Mem
Smart Shader 3.0
PS 3.0

Ok ..My question is if they do end up being these spec's do you guys think the R420's 12x1 Piplines would be better then the NV40's 8x2 Piplines
I always thought the more the better and the 4x2/8x1 mixed mode with the Geforce FX5900 turned out to be nothing special. Whats your view/knowledge on the matter?
 
MDE

MDE

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
13,199
1
81
I've also seen that R420 could be 8x1 still, but with highly improved efficiency. Also they're going to have 256 bit memory buses, not 256 Mb ;). IMO, it's probably going to come down to whose driver team has more time with production cards to get fast and stable drivers out the door.

EDIT: and it'll be either DDRII (not GDDRII) or GDDR3
 
Jeff7181

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
1500 Mhz RAM sounds kinda high... I thought we approached a time where memory bandwidth wasn't limiting anything, and that it was mainly the GPU that was holding everything back since lots of GPU power is required for pixel shaders and whatnot.
 
P

Pete

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
4,953
0
0
So that's what that smell was.

Yeah, B3D rumors put the R420 at 8x1 but with improved shaders. 130nm definitely, though, as I don't see how they would compete at 150nm this generation.
 
vshah

vshah

Lifer
Sep 20, 2003
19,003
24
81
not to mention ati already has had success with .13 with the 9600xt
 
B

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
1500 Mhz RAM sounds kinda high... I thought we approached a time where memory bandwidth wasn't limiting anything, and that it was mainly the GPU that was holding everything back since lots of GPU power is required for pixel shaders and whatnot.
Click to expand...

If you have a 'paired' architecture that is true for a lot of upcoming games, but there are some uses for very fast RAM. One is AA. With MSAA and enough functional Z check units you are limited by bandwith. Based on the rumors that have NV40 around 50GB/sec bandwidth nVidia has spent a considerable amount of time with the NV40 on significantly improving AA(rumored to be considerably better then anything out now, although I don't see the point honestly).

Also there is the fact that they are rumored to be building an 8x2 part. Running mem in sync with the core you can't give a core beyond 8x1 enough data with a 256bit part. By running async and cranking the mem speed up it is possible to get at least closer to the theoretical limit. It is further possible(although I haven't heard anything supporting or denying this) that they may use another hybrid solution where this part could operate as a 16x0 part for stencil ops, which would mean they would need to push some monster bandwith in order to feed it.

The big push for needing bandwidth isn't like it was a few years ago, but you can still find plenty of uses for more yet.
 
A

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
I've heard multiple places that ATi is just moving the R300 core to .13 and improving pixel shaders further for the R4XX series, and obviously faster memory and PCI-Ex. Of course its all BS speculation at the moment.

The upper hand for ATi in that situation though would be drivers, They would barely have to update catalysts at all to support R4XX series cards.

Where as nVidia is definately doing a full redesign from the ground up, and performance could be anywhere from dismal (a few % faster than NV3X) to stellar (100% faster than NV3X).
 
G

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
I am looking forward to the next round of the GPU war. I am mainly interested because eventually I will be upgrading and would like to have a R420 or NV40 in my system.
 
L

lifeguard1999

Platinum Member
Jul 3, 2000
2,323
1
0
1500Mhz Mem is too high. Take a look at the press releases from any of the memory Manufacturers. None have announced anything close to that speed yet.
 
rbV5

rbV5

Lifer
Dec 10, 2000
12,632
0
0
I've heard multiple places that ATi is just moving the R300 core to .13 and improving pixel shaders further for the R4XX series
Click to expand...

IIRC, its largely based on the RV350 core (already .13)...very basically 3X RV350 (4x1)3 = 12x1. I could be completely FOS on this one:)
 
L

lifeguard1999

Platinum Member
Jul 3, 2000
2,323
1
0
Well, I stand corrected Acanthus. I'll bet the 1.6GHz memory is expensive. Maybe too expensive for a $500 graphics card.
 
R

Richdog

Golden Member
Feb 10, 2003
1,658
0
0
Originally posted by: lifeguard1999
Well, I stand corrected Acanthus. I'll bet the 1.6GHz memory is expensive. Maybe too expensive for a $500 graphics card.
Click to expand...

When it is mass-produced i'm sure they more than cover costs, lol.
 
S

spam

Member
Jul 3, 2003
141
0
0
ATI made a commitment or a statement that it would double the speed/performance of the previous generation of it's GPU. They did not manage to do that with the move from 9500 to 9700, does the R420 nomenclature indicate a doubling of the current generation's performance? It may not be meaningful to game performance if it doubles Quake 3 fps or other older games.
 
rbV5

rbV5

Lifer
Dec 10, 2000
12,632
0
0
ATI made a commitment or a statement that it would double the speed/performance of the previous generation of it's GPU. They did not manage to do that with the move from 9500 to 9700, does the R420 nomenclature indicate a doubling of the current generation's performance? It may not be meaningful to game performance if it doubles Quake 3 fps or other older games.
Click to expand...

The 9500 followed the 9700, it didn't preceed it and is using the SAME CORE, as in same gen part. Whether R4xx "doubles" the performance of the R3xx part is yet to be seen.
 
zephyrprime

zephyrprime

Diamond Member
Feb 18, 2001
7,512
2
81
Well, I stand corrected Acanthus. I'll bet the 1.6GHz memory is expensive. Maybe too expensive for a $500 graphics card.
Click to expand...
Remember, the DDRII'ness of the stuff makes it only a little more expensive than 800mhz ddr-1. Plus, with the 0.11 micron manufacturing, it shouldn't be so expensive after initial high prices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom