Tuesday, December 13th 2011
GeForce Kepler 104 and 100 GPU Specifications Compiled
A quick stroll through our previous article about how the GeForce Kepler family of next-generation GPUs is laid out, would tell you that GeForce Kepler 104 (GK104), is going to be NVIDIA's answer to AMD's Tahiti. GK104 will be a high-performance (≠ high-end) GPU by NVIDIA that will have many of the features that were reserved for its previous high-end GPUs (such as a 384-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface), but will not be NVIDIA's most powerful GPU in the series. The throne will be kept empty for GK100, which will comply with NVIDIA's "go all in" design ideology for high-end GPUs.
3DCenter.org compiled a few specifications of the GK104 and GK100. They go like this:
GK104
Source:
3DCenter.org
3DCenter.org compiled a few specifications of the GK104 and GK100. They go like this:
GK104
- 640 to 768 CUDA cores
- 80 to 96 TMUs (depending on what the CUDA core count ends up being)
- 384-bit GDDR5 memory interface, 48 ROPs
- Built on the 28 nm TSMC process
- Products based on this will launch in the first quarter of 2012
- 1024 CUDA cores
- 128 TMUs
- 512-bit GDDR5 memory interface, 64 ROPs
52 Comments on GeForce Kepler 104 and 100 GPU Specifications Compiled
285 had half the shaders of the 480, got 71% of the performance.
Safe to assume the 580 to 680 relationship will be similar?
Remember, before Fermi, Nvidia was the king of power-efficiency - who's to say they've not gotten over that mistake now?Classic. The 480 had a little under double the raw computational performance of the 285. But double performance does not equal double FPS, because there are other factors. I'm sure you could find a graph showing the 480 outperforming the 285 by more than 100% if you looked in the right places (I'm thinking where the 1GB frame buffer is exhausted).
I rather reserves my judgment when the actual cards are released.
The article fails to mention that the GK100 is not due for at least another year and that is according to nVidia's times scales so large pinch of salt required.
Comparing the spec of an AMD chip launching in Jan and possible nVidia chip lauching 12 months later is not exactly apples for apples is it now.
(please don't say it's this site www.4gamer.net/games/120/G012093/20111124085/) My jap aint too good.
And this table looks very, well.. very.
With a different architecture comes a different way of doing things. Fermi can pack more SPs in the same die area/transistor budget than Tesla (or ir can do 64 bit much faster, depending of we are talking about GF100/110 or the lower end ones), but they are less efficient in general because they share more resources. For example the GTX460 with 336 SPs is about as fast as the GTX285.
Once we compare any Fermi card against anoother Fermi card, scaling is near perfect though and this is most likely going to be inherited to Kepler.Fermi was the foundation to a new architecture. It was like a 5 story building with foundations of a 20+ story building. It's overkill, innefficient in a way, yet necessary and unnavoidable. Remember R600? ~750 million transistors 320 SP, RV670 680 million transistors, same 320 SP, RV770 800 SPs, 2.5x the amount, more than double the performance, only 995 million transistors. Look how far the architecture reached after that in terms of SP count using the same "foundations" (efficiency did suffer a bit), same thing is posible with Kepler. Fermi was the fist step, the beachhead so to speak (i.e. R600), Kepler will be the balanced chip (i.e. RV770), and Maxwell if rumors are true and is still based on the same overall arch it will be less efficient than Kepler (bottlenecked in some ways) (i.e. Evergreen), but arguably still more efficient (perf/die area) than a new architecture would be.
GF110 did/does not have 768 cores. Bad info is bad info.