Friday, September 3rd 2010
NVIDIA Slips in GeForce GT 420 Desktop Graphics Card
Without making any public announcement (because it's not meant for retail sale), NVIDIA listed its GeForce GT 420 graphics card. This product is available to OEMs only. The GT 420 is derived from the Fermi architecture, and is fully compliant with the latest PC graphics technologies, including DirectX 11 and OpenGL 4. NVIDIA's reference design is low-profile and single-slot, it draws all its power from the PCI-Express slot.
Under the hood is a 40 nm graphics core (perhaps GF108), it has 48 CUDA cores, and connects to 2 GB of memory across a 128-bit wide DDR3 memory interface, with 28.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The core is clocked at 700 MHz, CUDA cores at 1400 MHz, and memory at 900 MHz (1800 MHz effective). Display outputs include DVI, HDMI (full-size), and a detachable D-Sub connector. The card has a maximum power draw of 50W. Later down the line, one can expect NVIDIA to make a consumer GeForce SKU with the same specifications.
Under the hood is a 40 nm graphics core (perhaps GF108), it has 48 CUDA cores, and connects to 2 GB of memory across a 128-bit wide DDR3 memory interface, with 28.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The core is clocked at 700 MHz, CUDA cores at 1400 MHz, and memory at 900 MHz (1800 MHz effective). Display outputs include DVI, HDMI (full-size), and a detachable D-Sub connector. The card has a maximum power draw of 50W. Later down the line, one can expect NVIDIA to make a consumer GeForce SKU with the same specifications.
34 Comments on NVIDIA Slips in GeForce GT 420 Desktop Graphics Card
That could handle Source games and 1080p great I bet. Wonder what it will cost once it hits etail.
Running dx11 = no frame rate satisfaction
by the time it gets here, GT 240 will still run better in many scenarios; plus it could be cheaper
Both of em are 40nm, so what's the catch ? :roll:
But I'm glad that they decided to use 128-bit bus with this one. 64-bit bus belongs in the past (ATi!), even for low-end and/or HTPC GPU-s... I guess it's the OEMs that have something to do with this. At least partially...
Why did they go for 2gb of memory on a low profile card? They should have went for 1gb at the most. Even just 512mb would have been viable and would have also have halved the TDP to only 25-30W which is much more acceptable for a HTPC ...
:laugh:
The website for any of you who haven't seen it yet
FAIL... again...
It's slow but you're so high it doesn't matter.
I can picture the gamers now, not caring about their shitty frames because they're off their tits. :laugh:
I agree, kind of pointless, but consumers seem to really think DX11 is a necessity, even if the card can't actually use the DX11 features. I never understood that, but you see it from people even here on the forums.Don't be surprised if we see an even lower end card with a 64-bit bus, probably G 410 or something.
Really, when you get that low end, memory bus doesn't really matter, it just makes the card more expensive.
256MB should be enough for the amount of graphics power the chip has.
Anyway, i got a question: is this card faster than mine?