Tesselation review by xbitlabs

[PingviN]

Well, the inefficiency of Fermi is killing its sales. Don't you agree?

I say showing up to the party 6 months late is killing Fermi.

 

[Zstream]

Caring about die size was "invented" when there was nothing else to argue with. So now it's the norm when an average gamer could care less. IMHO.

Shrug. I don't care about tessellation right now. Just as much as I care about dx11. It will take a few years to use these features efficiently. Nvidia has the upper hand but I don't believe it is the best way to go.

I would have preferred that they keep the core count down and still keep the old architecture. This was believed for the fermi delay.

 

[Keysplayr]

Well, the inefficiency of Fermi is killing its sales. Don't you agree?

I think Pingvin stated the correct cause. I do not agree with your assessment.
And besides, most people don't buy graphics cards for their efficiency. As Zstream said, all that matters is the end result. GF100 delivers on the performance front, and GF104 looks even better with the re-work.

 

[evolucion8]

Fermi has a better Tessellation implementation, period. But Cypress implementation is good enough for today's games, by the time that newer games comes and uses Tessellation properly, newer architectures will come with decent performance for it.

 

[Keysplayr]

Fermi has a better Tessellation implementation, period. But Cypress implementation is good enough for today's games, by the time that newer games comes and uses Tessellation properly, newer architectures will come with decent performance for it.

That's good. Kind of the same argument for PhysX. Or no it's an entirely different situation?

 

[evolucion8]

That's good. Kind of the same argument for PhysX. Or no it's an entirely different situation?

It is a different situation because unlike Tessellation, PhysX only work on nVidia hardware and its adoption is mediocre at best. Tessellation brings something new in the game that works with current vendors, nVidia had to brive companies to implement PhysX on their games, and companies just took that money and implemented cheap effects, besides Batman AA, I had yet to see an application that impress us with nice phisics effect using PhysX.....

So, please stay on topic and stop the derailing, we're talking about tessellation here, not PhysX, if you want to talk about PhysX, open a new thread, thanks!!

 

[Scali]

It is a different situation because unlike Tessellation, PhysX only work on nVidia hardware and its adoption is mediocre at best. Tessellation brings something new in the game that works with current vendors, nVidia had to brive companies to implement PhysX on their games, and companies just took that money and implemented cheap effects, besides Batman AA, I had yet to see an application that impress us with nice phisics effect using PhysX.....

If nVidia can 'persuade' developers to include PhysX effects to make nVidia hardware look better... it should be even easier to 'persuade' them to (over)use tessellation to make nVidia hardware look better, since tessellation works on all hardware. That's what you're saying?

 

[Wreckage]

It is a different situation because unlike Tessellation, PhysX only work on nVidia hardware and its adoption is mediocre at best.

Physx did just about as well as DX10/10.1 and it currently has more titles than DX11. But I digress.

As for NVIDIA's dominance in tessellation, that's just one advantage of having a brand new architecture built for DX11.

 

[Janooo]

I say showing up to the party 6 months late is killing Fermi.

I disagree. 460 is more than 6 months later and sells well. There are many NV customers that will go back to NV from 5800/5700 cards.

 

[Keysplayr]

It is a different situation because unlike Tessellation, PhysX only work on nVidia hardware and its adoption is mediocre at best. Tessellation brings something new in the game that works with current vendors, nVidia had to brive companies to implement PhysX on their games, and companies just took that money and implemented cheap effects, besides Batman AA, I had yet to see an application that impress us with nice phisics effect using PhysX.....

So, please stay on topic and stop the derailing, we're talking about tessellation here, not PhysX, if you want to talk about PhysX, open a new thread, thanks!!

Not derailing, just using the PhysX argument showing the similarities to your tesselation argument, and how what is good for the goose is not good for the gander according to yourself. And why on earth would you call paying to include a feature, a bribe? Because it's Nvidia? I must say, you make it very hard to stay exactly on topic when you go off on tangents like this. I'll try to ignore it.

 

[Janooo]

I think Pingvin stated the correct cause. I do not agree with your assessment.
And besides, most people don't buy graphics cards for their efficiency. As Zstream said, all that matters is the end result. GF100 delivers on the performance front, and GF104 looks even better with the re-work.

You don't have to agree, that's fine. I believe my observation is more accurate than yours.

 

[Keysplayr]

I disagree. 460 is more than 6 months later and sells well. There are many NV customers that will go back to NV from 5800/5700 cards.

That's probably because now that it's six months later, a lot of people are looking for their "refresh". 460 is new blood. If GTX4xx and HD5xxx launched on the very same day last year, well, it's common sense how things would have turned out.

 

[Pantalaimon]

just using the PhysX argument showing the similarities to your tesselation argument

Evangelize all you want, but PhysX is still the parsley on the steak that most people don't miss, when it's not there.

 

[Janooo]

That's probably because now that it's six months later, a lot of people are looking for their "refresh". 460 is new blood. If GTX4xx and HD5xxx launched on the very same day last year, well, it's common sense how things would have turned out.

???
What it would be? That common sense?

 

[Scali]

I disagree. 460 is more than 6 months later and sells well. There are many NV customers that will go back to NV from 5800/5700 cards.

I don't think the GTX460's success has much to do with any kind of perceived efficiency.
Firstly I think it's a huge help that it's in a lower price segment than the Fermi cards that went before it. Lower price segments will always have better sales volumes than the high-end.
Secondly, it probably helps a lot that the GTX460 has a very good price/performance ratio, which resulted in a lot of good reviews and recommendations on the web.
The 5850 also outsells the 5870, not because people think it's more efficient... just because it's cheaper and better value for money.

 

[Keysplayr]

Evangelize all you want, but PhysX is still the parsley on the steak that most people don't miss, when it's not there.

Right. Just like tesselation. Right now. You called it evangelizing while agreeing with me. Ok then.

 

[Keysplayr]

???
What it would be? That common sense?

Janooo, lets get this question out of the way before we go further. Are you going to disagree with me on every point just for the sake of disagreeing with me? Or do you and I think 100% opposite of each other at all times in all situations? Either way, I think the GTX series would have sold just as well as the 5xxx series had they both launched at the same time back in September of 09. If you disagree, I'd like to know why.

 

[3DVagabond]

I don't think the GTX460's success has much to do with any kind of perceived efficiency.
Firstly I think it's a huge help that it's in a lower price segment than the Fermi cards that went before it. Lower price segments will always have better sales volumes than the high-end.
Secondly, it probably helps a lot that the GTX460 has a very good price/performance ratio, which resulted in a lot of good reviews and recommendations on the web.
The 5850 also outsells the 5870, not because people think it's more efficient... just because it's cheaper and better value for money.

It's also cooler running and, while not particularly efficient, is less demanding power wise (Until you start OCing the piss out of it. Then it's Fermi roots show up in spades.). This helps it out as well. It probably still isn't making much money for nVidia, though. Maybe the 106/108 will start to fix that?

Efficiency isn't a problem for current ATI cards. All of them are efficient. There's no reason to chose one ATI card over another for efficiency.

 

[Scali]

It's also cooler running and, while not particularly efficient, is less demanding power wise (Until you start OCing the piss out of it. Then it's Fermi roots show up in spades.). This helps it out as well.

I don't really think so.
To the uninitiated it's still a card that requires two PCI-e connectors, just like the most powerhungry cards on the market.
I think only a very small percentage of the market knows anything about power efficiency, let alone that they'd actually care. I don't think it really influences sales figures.

Efficiency isn't a problem for current ATI cards. All of them are efficient. There's no reason to chose one ATI card over another for efficiency.

I disagree. The 5830 certainly has efficiency problems. On forums everywhere you see people recommending the 5770 or 5850 instead. 5830 is generally considered a poor buy, main reasons being high power consumption and low performance.

 

[Grooveriding]

Janooo, lets get this question out of the way before we go further. Are you going to disagree with me on every point just for the sake of disagreeing with me? Or do you and I think 100% opposite of each other at all times in all situations? Either way, I think the GTX series would have sold just as well as the 5xxx series had they both launched at the same time back in September of 09. If you disagree, I'd like to know why.

I would disagree going on the fact that nvidia is cutting prices and ATI is not. If sales of the 5XXX series had started to fall off because of competition from nvidia, ATI would have cut prices, they haven't cut anything but the 5830.

There may be something to be said for ATI making a better name for themselves than nvidia has this round with their better execution of a DX11 part and that momentum is still driving sales.

That said, the 4XX series parts are getting cheaper every day and still keep dropping, they must not be selling. You don't drop prices if your products are selling.

I think ATI just offered better products this time. Nvidia did come late, but they also released parts with some major flaws and made the mistake of releasing them too expensive.

I think it also lends credence to the common sense and good judgment of the majority of video card buyers, that things like physx, 3d and cuda are not able to drive sales for nvidia. They've proven themselves to be non-starter features that are more fluff than substance and have gained no traction.

 

[Keysplayr]

I would disagree going on the fact that nvidia is cutting prices and ATI is not. If sales of the 5XXX series had started to fall off because of competition from nvidia, ATI would have cut prices, they haven't cut anything but the 5830.

There may be something to be said for ATI making a better name for themselves than nvidia has this round with their better execution of a DX11 part and that momentum is still driving sales.

That said, the 4XX series parts are getting cheaper every day and still keep dropping, they must not be selling. You don't drop prices if your products are selling.

I think ATI just offered better products this time. Nvidia did come late, but they also released parts with some major flaws and made the mistake of releasing them too expensive.

I think it also lends credence to the common sense and good judgment of the majority of video card buyers, that things like physx, 3d and cuda are not able to drive sales for nvidia. They've proven themselves to be non-starter features that are more fluff than substance and have gained no traction.

Or, as has been said a few times already, Nvidia may just be clearing stock as fast as possible to make room for the new stuff. Common sense and good judgement? C'mon dude, it was due to lack of option, nothing more nothing less. ATI had their DX11 part out 7 months before Nvidia did. They were gobbled up. 7 months. That's a whole product cycle refresh period.

 

[evolucion8]

Not derailing, just using the PhysX argument showing the similarities to your tesselation argument, and how what is good for the goose is not good for the gander according to yourself. And why on earth would you call paying to include a feature, a bribe? Because it's Nvidia? I must say, you make it very hard to stay exactly on topic when you go off on tangents like this. I'll try to ignore it.

That's the best you can do? Twisting somebody's else point of view derailing a thread? What is good for the goose is not good for the gander? WTH? Tessellation is far more promising than PhysX, Tessellation reached more games in a year than PhysX had done in two, so please stay on topic

If nVidia can 'persuade' developers to include PhysX effects to make nVidia hardware look better... it should be even easier to 'persuade' them to (over)use tessellation to make nVidia hardware look better, since tessellation works on all hardware. That's what you're saying?

Nope, nVidia may have a powerful Tessellator, but if they try to code it to make it unplayable with Cypress, it will be barely playable on Fermi, specially with the GTX 480 because the GTX 465 and GTX 460 only matches the HD 5870 in Tessellation according to Xbit lab's review. Damn, so many nVidia fans here and no one neutral, pityful, nvTactics ruining another nice thread.

Or, as has been said a few times already, Nvidia may just be clearing stock as fast as possible to make room for the new stuff. Common sense and good judgement? C'mon dude, it was due to lack of option, nothing more nothing less. ATI had their DX11 part out 7 months before Nvidia did. They were gobbled up. 7 months. That's a whole product cycle refresh period.

Common sense? There's no common sense in the market, it is called capitalism, and the GTX series isn't selling well, nVidia just rolled up fermi, what they could possible introduce now? Please, they can barely produce the GF104 in decent amounts because of the low yields, they're not gonna introduce 4 SKU's from the same GF104 (Probably they could do it like they did with the G92 once it matures more, stupid customers)

 

[3DVagabond]

I don't really think so.
To the uninitiated it's still a card that requires two PCI-e connectors, just like the most powerhungry cards on the market.
I think only a very small percentage of the market knows anything about power efficiency, let alone that they'd actually care. I don't think it really influences sales figures.

I think most people who are buying "high end" cards are more knowledgeable and, for the most part, are that small percentage that do know. And, if they do know they probably (not always, of course) care.

I disagree. The 5830 certainly has efficiency problems. On forums everywhere you see people recommending the 5770 or 5850 instead. 5830 is generally considered a poor buy, main reasons being high power consumption and low performance.

The 5830 doesn't have "efficiency problems" per se. It's a crippled chip. It uses the power that a Cypress chip uses. It just doesn't give the performance back, because it's a crippled/defective chip. If I'm not mistaken, it still uses less power than the gtx-460 though and that's considered efficient by nVidia standards.

 

[PingviN]

I disagree. 460 is more than 6 months later and sells well. There are many NV customers that will go back to NV from 5800/5700 cards.

So you say, what you have to back that statement up? Got some sales figures?

 

[3DVagabond]

Or, as has been said a few times already, Nvidia may just be clearing stock as fast as possible to make room for the new stuff. Common sense and good judgement? C'mon dude, it was due to lack of option, nothing more nothing less. ATI had their DX11 part out 7 months before Nvidia did. They were gobbled up. 7 months. That's a whole product cycle refresh period.

They aren't releasing them one quarter and EOL'ing them at the end of the next quarter because they are a shining success. The GF100 is a majorly flawed chip. The GF104 is better, but still isn't yielding fully functioning chips. Everyone's talking about replacing the entire enthusiast range of cards by nVidia with GF104 variants. At this point in time, it's still not a fully functional chip. It seems to be the best they can come up with though.