AthlonX2Amazing! Radeon better watch out nvidia is about to release a monster.:)

AthlonX2Amazing! Radeon better watch out nvidia is about to release a monster.:)

btarunrThe way NVIDIA is handling clock-domains on GK104 is bound to confuse the living shit out of enthusiasts. We'll dedicate an entire page to making sense of it in our review.

Wrigleyvillainlol same comment gen after gen after gen. Not saying it isn't true even just that it's funny how you always hear the exact same shit every time (whether it is true or not).

.Tk1,536 CUDA cores on an 195w thermal envelope? Sounds fake to me.

I'm aware that the new 28nm process brings several benefits to the table, but I really doubt that the new process plus tweaks on NVIDIA's architecture would make viable for them to get roughly three times as much CUDA cores to work at ~1GHz.

Let's just wait for official numbers.

nvidiaintelftwwell since the Cuda cores have been simplified and less complex and smaller it makes sense. I love when people claim things are fake, but then get proven wrong when the thing releases. I never judge anything till i see Wizz's review, I only remain optimistic.

nvidiaintelftwwell since the Cuda cores have been simplified and less complex and smaller it makes sense. I love when people claim things are fake, but then get proven wrong when the thing releases. I never judge anything till i see Wizz's review, I only remain optimistic.

.TkWell, I have the right to claim it's fake since the source is unofficial and 'cause the numbers seem a lil' bit absurd.
Nevertheless, I'd be really impressed if NVIDIA would actually get along with the numbers shown on that spec. sheet, but what I really can't understand (considering that leaked slide to be authentic) is why would NVIDIA favour a lower TDP when they could just crank up some more CUDA cores or even clocks to extend their possible performance leadership?

Crap DaddyMaybe it's already cranked up?

brandonwh64Its all hyped up on mountain dew?

Crap Daddyplus a few red bulls

Imsochoboso amd is making theirs more advanced and nvidia simplify...

anyways, 1536 with 1000 mhz on 195W tdp is abit hard on my brain, not saying it's impossible.
either they are giving up tesla or making a diffrent gpu tree for that if it's true is my guess then.

AMD made one other major change to improve efficiency for Barts: they’re using Redwood’s memory controller. In the past we’ve talked about the inherent complexities of driving GDDR5 at high speeds, but until now we’ve never known just how complex it is. It turns out that Cypress’s memory controller is nearly twice as big as Redwood’s! By reducing their desired memory speeds from 4.8GHz to 4.2GHz, AMD was able to reduce the size of their memory controller by nearly 50%.

BenetanegiaWell I don't know if fake or not, but they are not so hard to believe if you think about what is really going on. I bet you are thinking 1536 @ ~1000 Mhz vs 512 @ ~800 Mhz, but that is not the case. It's 1536 @ ~1000 Mhz (not all the time, dynamic clocks) vs 512 @ ~1600 Mhz. Needing to clock only to 1000+ Mhz instead of 1600++ Mhz posibly allows for much smaller, simpler and cooler SPs.

I always use the same example and I know it's not about SPs, but it's one of the most clear ones I can find in recent history, and everything applies to electronics to some extent:

www.anandtech.com/show/3987/amds-radeon-6870-6850-renewing-competition-in-the-midrange-market/2



"By reducing their desired shader speeds from 1.6 Ghz to 1 Ghz, Nvidia was able to reduce the size of their shader processors by nearly 50%" sounds alien in the light of the above fact? Not to me at least and with (active) die size reduction comes a hefty power reduction too, not to mention the inherent lower power consumption derived from being run at 1 Ghz instead of 1.6 Ghz, remember exponential power curves.

Imsochobomhz and die size have nothing in common....

Benetanegialol of course they do.

Imsochoboheat and die size have a relation -> heat and mhz have, not mhz and die size directly.

BenetanegiaYes it does. If you want an electronic device to clock higher you have to shorten the path between input and output and that means going parallel with (duplicating at transistor level) a lot of things that would otherwise be serial and means you have to invest much more transistors on it. That takes up much more space and transistors and that also means more complicated control & logic, which once again means more transistors. Which once again means more active transistors for the same job, which means higher TDP, which means higher temps, which actually means higher TDP, which actually means lower posible clocks, which actually means you have to invest even more transistors in order to achieve a certain clock, which means higher TDP and the process keeps going on and on and on.