# NVIDIA Taunts AMD's GCN Architecture Performance



## btarunr (Jan 25, 2012)

As AMD's Radeon HD 7900 series is finding ground in the market, and NVIDIA's competitive product line still without a concrete launch schedule, the mind games have begun. In an interview to NordicHardware, a senior NVIDIA official said that NVIDIA expected more from AMD's new GPU family. "Honestly, we expected more from our competitor's new architecture," the official said, indicating two interrelated things: 
AMD's Southern Islands GPU family's performance levels are well within NVIDIA's expectations
NVIDIA's new architecture will be a lot more powerful than Southern Islands, because it was prepared keeping in mind a faster architecture from AMD than what Southern Islands ended up being
This latest comment could even release some pressure off NVIDIA to rush in a competitive product line.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Jan 25, 2012)

There could be some truth to this if they're really countering AMD's top end chip with a rushed midrange chip.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 25, 2012)

With 6 months extra development time Im sure they can do something. Of course they better deliver now with this kinda trash talking.


----------



## xkche (Jan 25, 2012)

"Honestly, we expected more from our competitor’s new architecture,"

Add to this comment:

"but, we take the price of AMD HD7000 like base for ours GTX600 GPU's"

I think that AMD and NVIDIA has a "pact" for prices :shadedshu


----------



## vega22 (Jan 25, 2012)

was anybody blown away by the 7970?

i mean for a double drop in fab tech its not beating the old 580s by that much unless you overclock the nuts off it.

history says the new nv mid range will be on par with the last high end so for amds "top" card to only be 15% ish better than that it doesnt bode well as the 660 should beat the 580 due to the drops in fab tech.

meh all pie in the sky till nv put something in w1z's hands anyway 


question in my mind is how much are amd sand bagging and is there more to these cores than they have shown.


----------



## Tenxu24 (Jan 25, 2012)

Many words and a lot of smoke Nvidia, but AMD have already been advanced in this generation launching their products = more sales.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-7970-crossfire-review/ 

Surely the new gtx 680 graphics card will cost $ 650 or more. I'm not willing to spend that if within 2 or 3 years will be released another video card with better performance.


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Jan 25, 2012)

xkche said:


> "Honestly, we expected more from our competitor’s new architecture,"
> 
> Add to this comment:
> 
> ...



Companies use non-verbal price fixing now. Every so often there's a little price scuffle but the primary objective is to slide your cards in between the competition's based on overall performance rather than compete on price.


----------



## Delta6326 (Jan 25, 2012)

It's a never ending cycle sure give NV 6 months, I sure hope they can beat AMD, then give 6 months after that to AMD and sure I hope they can beat NV. It just gos on and on...


----------



## claylomax (Jan 25, 2012)

xkche said:


> "Honestly, we expected more from our competitor’s new architecture,"
> 
> Add to this comment:
> 
> ...



There is no pact; high end graphics cards always cost a lot when release, especially when they have no competition. How much was the 8800 Ultra at release?


----------



## Volkszorn88 (Jan 25, 2012)

AMD has the upper hand because they released 79xx series first. Who knows how long it will take nvidia to release their new gpus.

Now here's the best part, if and when nvidia's new gpus crush the 79xx series, they're going to cost way more than 500 bucks and AMD will look at this and say "lol k well now we can start working on the 8k series" 

In the end, it works out beautifully for consumers.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 25, 2012)

TheMailMan78 said:


> With 6 months extra development time Im sure they can do something. Of course they better deliver now with this kinda trash talking.



Abso-fucking-lutely.  Pie in face if their cards don't rock the planet.  Though I have a feeling given the recent reports from CD at S/A that NV may indeed have a good thing coming.  And if you can stand the site at all, have a look at how much he's been lambasted by it's users for suggesting NV (and i paraphrase CD) 'are going to win this round on about every single metric'.
And yes, despite what people think about CD, one thing he is not, is an NV fan, at all.

Edit: check out his pricing rumours at semi-accurate.  I'm not linking as he has strange track back things going on.


----------



## jpierce55 (Jan 25, 2012)

TheMailMan78 said:


> With 6 months extra development time Im sure they can do something. Of course they better deliver now with this kinda trash talking.



Fully agreed. Of course Nvidea should be 15% stronger or more if they are following 3 months later or MORE!!!


----------



## Octavean (Jan 25, 2012)

They had me until they used the word "Honestly”,…….


----------



## xkche (Jan 25, 2012)

claylomax said:


> There is no pact; high end graphics cards always cost a lot when release, especially when they have no competition. How much was the 8800 Ultra at release?



Jajaja... yes... but look the actual prices and tell me: Why the prices do not down?.

And i think that when the GTX600 come to retail, they will be more expensive... :S 
i hope be wrong

Sorry for my english


----------



## jpierce55 (Jan 25, 2012)

Going off topic here, I have a personal opinion on that issue, and I don't think it is exactly a price pact. More like a lets make a maximum sales pact:

1. Only 2 companies= little competition.
2. They realize some people upgrade to something new EVERY release, and those people will go Nvidia or AMD.
3. They quit releasing at the same time as each other in hopes to take advantage of #2.

Not to mention as g-cards get faster people will not upgrade as much, and fewer people will go for the ultra-high end cards. That causes the price to go up as well.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 25, 2012)

Dont you guys remember when both ATI and Nvidia got fined for price fixing?


----------



## entropy13 (Jan 25, 2012)

Delta6326 said:


> It's a never ending cycle sure give NV 6 months, I sure hope they can beat AMD, then give 6 months after that to AMD and sure I hope they can beat NV. It just gos on and on...



What? 

HD 5870 - Sept 22 '09
***6 months***
GTX 480 - Mar 26 '10 (AMD ahead by 6 months)
***8 months***
GTX 580 - Dec 9 '10 (previous-gen is 8 months old)
***5 days***
HD 6970 - Dec 14 '10 (Nvidia ahead by 5 days; previous-gen is 14 months old)
***12 months***
HD 7970 - Dec 21 '11/Jan 9 '12 (previous-gen is 12 months old)
***3 months***
GTX Kepler April '12 (AMD ahead by 3 months; previous-gen is 15 months old)

And as you can see, the Fermi-Kepler interval (15 months) is just like the 5800-6900 interval (14 months). It's not like "taking too long" is exclusively Nvidia.


----------



## Isenstaedt (Jan 25, 2012)

I don't care if they can beat AMD in the high end. I care about the mid-range, where AMD is winning right now. I want to go back to Nvidia because of the options their drivers have.


----------



## entropy13 (Jan 25, 2012)

Isenstaedt said:


> I don't care if they can beat AMD in the high end. *I care about the mid-range*, where AMD is winning right now.



Exactly. That's why the mid-range card from Nvidia is supposedly on par to AMD's high end. This is not Nvidia's high-end yet.


----------



## semantics (Jan 25, 2012)

Lol all this shit talking, i'm surprised they can keep numbers and graphs from popping up while doing all this dick waving.



_ALB_R3D X said:


> interesting fact is that everytime I visit the forum under Graphic Cards the number of users on the AMD tab has always been higher than nVIDIA and sometimes even double!Personally I'm more than happy with both my 6950 and I will patiently wait for Kepler release to verify or LMFAO for the above statement...


Might be becuase everyone is unhappy and need help resolving issues with their GPU's 

Either way i want to see kepler just to see what nvidia was pushing on Charlie to make him say nice things.


----------



## _ALB_R3D X (Jan 25, 2012)

interesting fact is that everytime I visit the forum under Graphic Cards the number of users on the AMD tab has always been higher than nVIDIA and sometimes even double!Personally I'm more than happy with both my 6950 and I will patiently wait for Kepler release to verify or LMFAO for the above statement...


----------



## badtaylorx (Jan 25, 2012)

what i took away from a report i read at s/a is that the new nv chips will be a GK104 and the flagship will be 2-Gk104's on a single chip because Gk110 got scrapped....so i have NO doubt that what basically amounts to 660 sli on a single chip would blow away a 7970 based on the fact that EVGA's 560 ti twin is roughly equal to it allready


----------



## erocker (Jan 25, 2012)

If Nvidia has a card that's better, release it. Otherwise anything they say without proof, without even an inkling of a demo is just marketing for themselves in hopes that people will not buy their competitors product.


----------



## Volkszorn88 (Jan 25, 2012)

erocker said:


> if nvidia has a card that's better, release it. Otherwise anything they say without proof, without even an inkling of a demo is just marketing for themselves in hopes that people will not buy their competitors product.



qft


----------



## ace80 (Jan 25, 2012)

Maybe trash talk but im sure they're gonna take the performance crown again.
What i want to know is if they can challenge in the power efficiency, AMD (Ati) seem to have that sewn down especially in xfire/sli


----------



## Crap Daddy (Jan 25, 2012)

So one guy from NV says to Nordic hardware something we all now by now, that the 7970 isn't quite a killer, at CES some weeks ago. This is no news. 

I think very few think that NV isn't capable to put out a card with better performance that the top AMD card, this was the case in the last years. The question is when? 

I am not interested personally in buying a new card this year, there's no DX12, no demanding or very interesting games for me in perspective so by the time I will be in the market for a new card NV will be there with a competitive product in mid-high range which is all I care. 

But all this gossip and rumors are fine. I like talking about this.


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 25, 2012)

hah ^^ I agree with this post.  The only way anyone will get excited about this is if prices go down and games come out that can use the power at 1080P (where the average shmoes like me game)


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jan 25, 2012)

I don't care i just want to see some kick ass performance ill keep my HD 7970 until i see Nvidia has some think to offer then ill sell it.


----------



## Horrux (Jan 25, 2012)

the54thvoid said:


> Abso-fucking-lutely.  Pie in face if their cards don't rock the planet.  Though I have a feeling given the recent reports from CD at S/A that NV may indeed have a good thing coming.  And if you can stand the site at all, have a look at how much he's been lambasted by it's users for suggesting NV (and i paraphrase CD) 'are going to win this round on about every single metric'.
> And yes, despite what people think about CD, one thing he is not, is an NV fan, at all.
> 
> Edit: check out his pricing rumours at semi-accurate.  I'm not linking as he has strange track back things going on.



I want to see them win on the 3D mark per dollar metric. I just do, for once.

It's very cute to release a chip that's say, 20% better than the competition's fastest chip, but when it costs 50% more, is it really THAT great an accomplishment?

This is nothing new, the Geforce 2 Ultra, back in... 2000 I think, cost $800 at launch. Bravo.

But nVidia's frothing-at-the-mouth fanbois never, ever cease to epeen with the "yeah but nV has THIS CHIP which is 20% faster than the fastest Radeon" preening like champions of righteousness while they try to run BF3 with their SLI GT 240*...


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 25, 2012)

The one thing that comes to mind here is, OC ceilings. I do agreee the stock 7970's I hoped were a bit faster, but then I see people getting 400mhz OC's on the GPU... thats just insane. I was happy with 150mhz on my 6950. So I don't think NV will have any issues coming out with a faster card, but will it have that much untapped power is the real question.


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (Jan 25, 2012)

Why should I care?

Nvidea has several extra months, they'd better perform better.
Nvidea has not produced any numbers.  No numbers mean they haven't provided any proof.

Beyond those two points, Nvidea has done little more than cock slap the consumer.  Proving that your chicken is the largest, without actually proving it, is worthless.  Wake me when they release performance figures.


----------



## Horrux (Jan 25, 2012)

1Kurgan1 said:


> The one thing that comes to mind here is, OC ceilings. I do agreee the stock 7970's I hoped were a bit faster, but then I see people getting 400mhz OC's on the GPU... thats just insane. I was happy with 150mhz on my 6950. So I don't think NV will have any issues coming out with a faster card, but will it have that much untapped power is the real question.



It looks like AMD is letting the board makers make all the extra money by building cards that will be much faster than stock. Letting board makers differentiate from each other would be a master move on the part of AMD, especially if nV releases GPUs specced at the top of their clock ranges. Board makers LOVE to be able to put out a unique products and low-clocked GPUs let them do just that.


----------



## _ALB_R3D X (Jan 25, 2012)

HD7950 is coming...will it be another price/performance monster???
From what I've seen so far prices should be ~400eur in my region 420$ for US maybe!


----------



## OneCool (Jan 25, 2012)

nV talking smack with nothing to back it up........ OH WOOW 


Hardware speaks for its self and since they dont have shit to show their just blowing smoke.

Atleast AMD has something on the table nV  

As far as their next release AMD has alot of overclocking headroom and at least another 3 months to work on it


----------



## Casecutter (Jan 25, 2012)

Wow it really getting thick now... sounds like thier after making a marketing "faux pa" having executives beating the drum and start promises without any numbers?  

Sounds like bantar should've titled it "Wait for Me, please"...  :shadedshu


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 25, 2012)

Horrux said:


> It looks like AMD is letting the board makers make all the extra money by building cards that will be much faster than stock. Letting board makers differentiate from each other would be a master move on the part of AMD, especially if nV releases GPUs specced at the top of their clock ranges. Board makers LOVE to be able to put out a unique products and low-clocked GPUs let them do just that.



I agree, for the tech savvy people who want to save money, they can buy a reference card and clock it themselves. For the non-tech savvy people they are usually fine with spending a bit more money to have the OCing done for them. Seems like a win/win/win to me. Having a card that has almost a 50% OC ceiling, I mean how can you go wrong, if the next NV top dog is 20% faster, that won't be enough unless it has a good OC roof as well. Otherwise the older AMD cards OC'd variants will be just as fast.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jan 25, 2012)

I lol at many people here. This is not an statement from Nvidia. This is what a rep in CES told one guy from NH in the backstage. This is not any conspiracy. And as much as you guys hate it, it is probably true.

Wake up, Nvidia won this round and that's it.


----------



## OneCool (Jan 25, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> Wake up, Nvidia won this round and that's it.



nV won 


So nVidia doesnt even need to release hardware and they win


----------



## radrok (Jan 25, 2012)

OneCool said:


> nV won
> 
> 
> So nVidia doesnt even need to release hardware and they win



I think that it doesn't take much to realize that the GTX 580 isn't much far from the 7970 and the former is based on 40nm tech node.
As much as I'd say to wait before saying anything I think Nvidia does not have to put much effort to surpass the HD 7970.
And no, don't say that the 7970 overclocks better because that's mostly thanks to the 28nm node and the next Nvidia chip will probably overclock as good as the 7970.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jan 25, 2012)

OneCool said:


> nV won
> 
> 
> So nVidia doesnt even need to release hardware and they win



TBH not really, if you can do 2+2. Apparently you guys believe that Nvidia won't release a card at all, or that their new card will be worse than Fermi despite using 28nm, because that's the only posible way in which Nvidia fails to win this round with ease. Wake up.

- HD7970 == 4.3 billion transistors.
- GTX580 == 3 billion transistors. +50% == 4.5 billion
- GTX 560 ti == 1.95 billion transistor. x2 == 3.9 billion (how does GTX560 ti SLI perform against HD7970 again??)

- Kepler more efficient than Fermi. 

End of story.


----------



## erocker (Jan 25, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> I lol at many people here. This is not an statement from Nvidia. This is what a rep in CES told one guy from NH in the backstage. This is not any conspiracy. And as much as you guys hate it, it is probably true.
> 
> Wake up, Nvidia won this round and that's it.



I have no doubt that Kepler will be a faster card, it's the principal that people are talking about. If you want to construde it as "hate" by all means I doubt people care.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 25, 2012)

erocker said:


> I have no doubt that Kepler will be a faster card, it's the principal that people are talking about. If you want to construde it as "hate" by all means I doubt people care.



It better be 6 months AFTER the 7970.


----------



## devguy (Jan 25, 2012)

Problem is, is when nVidia releases their first Kepler, it's gonna probably be priced higher than the 7970, and then AMD will likely counter by releasing the 7990 at the same time, for only a little more.  I don't know for sure, but expect the 7990 to wipe the floor with whatever Kepler nVidia launches in Q2.

Then, it'll be a while still before nVidia outs their supposed "high-end" Kepler, or a dual-gpu of their own.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jan 25, 2012)

I find it funny how Green remarks like this yet they have nothing... Sounds like Green is really worried


----------



## Benetanegia (Jan 25, 2012)

TheMailMan78 said:


> It better be 6 months AFTER the 7970.



April is only 3 months after January. March is 2 in case they paper launch it after all. They said they would wait until there's sufficient stock, but things can easily change. TSMC recently reported that ramp up is going faster than they first thought.



eidairaman1 said:


> I find it funny how Green remarks like this yet they have nothing... Sounds like Green is really worried



The funny thing is people pretending that a comment made off the record by a representative, is any kind of strategy. 99% of what can be read in NH is just the writers interpretation of what the rep said. And the only thing that he said is "Honestly, we expected more from our competitor’s new architecture." Which is just probably true. Everything else is the writers analysis.


----------



## TRWOV (Jan 25, 2012)

With 6 months more of development they better beat the 7970. Anything less would be underwhelming to say the least.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 25, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> April is only 3 months after January. March is 2 in case they paper launch it after all. They said they would wait until there's sufficient stock, but things can easily change. TSMC recently reported that ramp up is going faster than they first thought.



By the time this retails they will have had 6 months more development time. If Nvidia cant beat em with that then Nvidia is done for.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jan 25, 2012)

TheMailMan78 said:


> By the time this retails they will have had 6 months more development time. If Nvidia cant beat em with that then Nvidia is done for.



Why did they have 6 more months of development? If it is released 3 months later, it's released 3 months later, period or 2 or 4, because that still remains to be seen.

But how much more has been in development we do not know. GCN is a new arch that was suposed to be released when Cayman, but was delayed until 28nm, so it's been in development for 1 more year than Kepler, probably.

EDIT: Also having x months more to develop means absolutely nothing in this market. What can be done is tighly related to the manufacturing process and the limits are the same today as they will in 9 months. Look at Cayman, released 1 year after Cypress, and it was faster than Cypress, but also increased die size and power consumption accordingly. They had 1 more year, but...


----------



## Yellow&Nerdy? (Jan 25, 2012)

They better perform well, after all they have more time do develop it. SI was merely a shrunk NI, so obviously there won't be quantum leaps in performance: just some added processing units and higher clocks, with lower power consumption and better overclocking. I'm just hoping the prices will be more affordable after Nvidia steps in and AMD can't price their cards so high.


----------



## v12dock (Jan 25, 2012)

Typical nvidia


----------



## Andrei23 (Jan 25, 2012)

Until Nvidia actually comes up with something good to counter AMD's efforts it needs to shut it's f***ing mouth.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jan 25, 2012)

Wow, so much anger and hatred based on one off the cuff remark.

Chill out.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 25, 2012)

Here is something even more interesting.


----------



## wiak (Jan 26, 2012)

this aint news, everyone know nvidia will be faster and use alot more power, its a matter of how nvidia works


----------



## erocker (Jan 26, 2012)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Here is something even more interesting.



Even translated I can barely understand what they are saying.


----------



## OneCool (Jan 26, 2012)

erocker said:


> Even translated I can barely understand what they are saying.




I was killing brain cells trying to read it in Google translate


----------



## ViperXTR (Jan 26, 2012)

@Nvidia:


----------



## seronx (Jan 26, 2012)

erocker said:


> Even translated I can barely understand what they are saying.





			
				caiye1225 said:
			
		

> Three times the wages of five hair was a five, didn't grab tickets at this time will certainly be able to attract a large number of forced



I agree


----------



## claylomax (Jan 26, 2012)

How about this? http://www.chiphell.com/thread-349641-1-1.html  EDIT: Translate.


----------



## Nihilus (Jan 26, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> TBH not really, if you can do 2+2. Apparently you guys believe that Nvidia won't release a card at all, or that their new card will be worse than Fermi despite using 28nm, because that's the only posible way in which Nvidia fails to win this round with ease. Wake up.
> 
> - HD7970 == 4.3 billion transistors.
> - GTX580 == 3 billion transistors. +50% == 4.5 billion
> ...



Fanboyism in all its glory.  Forget real benchmark results or performance/watt.  It's performance/ transistor count that concerns 99% of the consumers.  
Anyway, for you reading pleasure:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/processor-architecture-benchmark,2974-15.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_count


----------



## 20mmrain (Jan 26, 2012)

I know I will get slack for this but here it goes.....

This really reminds me of the GTX 480 vs HD5870 match up. In which Nvidia rushed their chip into production just to gain back some of the product market. But what happened??? Well because Nvidia did this we got a GTX 480 (Which was really an unfinished GTX 570) that ran way to hot, showed up to the customers house DOA on a regular basis, and if not DOA it would often die shortly after little loose.(Of course there are a lot of exceptions I am just using blanket statements) Not to mention just being a huge power hog. 
In the mean time.... AMD designed the HD6970 which while didn't beat the GTX 580 when finally released it did a really great job in the price vs. performance category.
The way I am speculating this will play out is Nvidia will release the GTX 680.... Which will be really a GTX 770/760. This will compete very well against the HD7970. But because it was rushed I believe it will have a great deal of many problems.  Even if the GTX 680 doesn't end up having any issues it will still buy more time for AMD just to release another version (A better higher clocked version) of the HD7970.
While I have no doubt Nvidia will have no problem beating AMD's 25% to 30% performance lead.... you got to wonder if it was AMD's strategy.... release something conservative just to keep Nvidia on their toes and push them to release something before they are ready.
Of course I have nothing telling me this is how this will play out. It is all just speculation. But people say that history repeats it's self and I think it will again in this instance.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jan 26, 2012)

Nihilus said:


> Fanboyism in all its glory.  Forget real benchmark results or performance/watt.  It's performance/ transistor count that concerns 99% of the consumers.
> Anyway, for you reading pleasure:
> 
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/processor-architecture-benchmark,2974-15.html
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_count



Those have to be the most irrelevant links that I've ever seen posted on a forum. Pff you could try better than that crap. 

Sure most people don't care about transistors. Most people are stupid too.

GPUs are made of transistors. Whether people care about transistors or not, they are key and if a 3 billion transistor GPU (GF110) is so close to a 4.3 billion transistor GPU from the competitor, you better bet that a GPU with 50% more transistors and similar architecture will smack such competitor.

Maybe you can't warp your simple mind around the concept that GPUs are made of transistors and that more transistors means you can create more powerful GPUs if the architecture accompanies, but that's how it works.

GCN is the first time that AMD uses 1D shaders and that's one of the reasons their transistor count went up so badly. GCN is the fisrt AMD GPU to support half rate double precision, which requires a lot of transistors to implement. Transistors yes, not fairy dust. GCN also implements a lot of cache and memory management features, which also require a lot of transistors. And all of the above is why Tahiti is so big for so little performance gain.

Fermi already had all of this, or most of it, so Nvidia does not need to spend horrendous amounts of transistors again, on top of the ones they already spent on Fermi. Unlike GCN vs VLIW, Fermi vs Kepler won't be characterized by a large increase in transistor count per work unit. It's simples, simple math. Now get your head out your ass and start thinking, before calling others fanbois.


----------



## seronx (Jan 26, 2012)

GF110: Fermi 16 SMs -> 512 CUDA Cores
GK112?: Kepler 32 SMs -> 1024 CUDA Cores
GM110: Maxwell 128 SMs -> 4096 CUDA Cores

So, abouts from official sources that talk about Maxwell being ~10 TFLOPs

Fermi -> 1581.056 FMA GFlops (512 x 4 x .772) 512 Cores at 772MHz
Kepler -> 3481.6 FMA GFlops (1024 x 4 x .850) 1024 Cores at 850MHz
Maxwell -> 9945.088 FMA GFlops (4096 x 4 x .607) 4096 Cores at 607MHz

Estimations by Seronx^ not related to official sources above






Calculations based on this and official sources


----------



## Aceman.au (Jan 26, 2012)

No doubt Nvidia will have a stronger card BUT will it be putting out enough performance to make it viable price to performance wise. Can't wait for the first release of Nvidia and a big drop on price for the 7970. Might even wait longer for a 7990!

Time will tell...


----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Jan 26, 2012)

ok, so if kepler is faster than amd 7000, what is the price? $700 or $650 for a single card? do they really know that our economy gonna crash again.


----------



## seronx (Jan 26, 2012)

mrthanhnguyen said:


> ok, so if kepler is faster than amd 7000, what is the price? $700 or $650 for a single card? do they really know that our economy gonna crash again.



It will be the same price as the 580GTX

GK104 is a 16 SM part like Fermi 

probably less actually in price since it is just Same Trannies + Clock Rate increase I would say GK104 will be

512 CUDA Cores with a clock near ~950 or so

512 x 4 x .950 = 1894.4 FMA GFlops
vs
512 x 4 x .772 = 1581.056 FMA GFlops

1894.4/1581.056 => ~1.20x
and if it has more SMs even better each SM you add though will probably decrease the clock about ~15-33MHz

G104 has two rumors about it is SM count which is either 16(512) or 24(768)

768 x 4 x .686 => 2107.392 FMA GFlops


----------



## nikko (Jan 26, 2012)

Amd will love punishing early adopters with prices. Hope they will still love amd back after this. Nvidia can release GTX580 at 28nm half the chip size, e.g. 250mm2 and still beat the big 350mm2 child amd has produced with clock speeds alone. 250mm2 chip card costs 140$ for the ti version at launch. and probably 70$ when the time comes.


----------



## seronx (Jan 26, 2012)

nikko said:


> Amd will love to punishing early adopters with prices. Hope they will still love amd back after this. Nvidia can release GTX580 at 28nm half the chip size, e.g. 250mm2 and still beat the big 350mm2 child amd has produced with clock speeds alone. 250mm2 chip card costs 140$ for the ti version at launch. and probably 70$ when the time comes.



520mm² <-- 580GTX

GK104 -> 300-360mm²

Just saying


----------



## Nihilus (Jan 26, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> Those have to be the most irrelevant links that I've ever seen posted on a forum. Pff you could try better than that crap.
> 
> Sure most people don't care about transistors. Most people are stupid too.



The quote is relevant to your transistor post which showed transistor relationship to performance, which shows how transistor count trends have no merit on product success or performance - not the Nvidia rep comment

Most people are stupid as they don't care about transistor count?  All hail the elitist tech master!   I realize most people are a little nerdy on this site, but you my friend are as disconnected from reality as they come!  :shadedshu


----------



## radrok (Jan 26, 2012)

While I agree with you, Benetanegia, I think that you sure have a harsh way to make your point


----------



## nikko (Jan 26, 2012)

seronx said:


> 520mm² <-- 580GTX
> GK104 -> 300-360mm²



Yes, I was hypothesising about GTX650 that would give the 7970 a run for it's money. cause 660 will clearly be classes above it. with more processors than 580 and more frequency, it's just insane how much better it could look and how easely they could end up with big transistorial non-sesne like amd.


----------



## Super XP (Jan 26, 2012)

More Nvidia fluff, trying to convince people to wait for there cards. While NV is blowing smoke, HD 7900 Series Radeons are selling like hot cakes.


----------



## Steevo (Jan 26, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> Sure most people don't care about transistors. Most people are stupid too.



Yeah cause more transistors immediately means more performance.


----------



## neko77025 (Jan 26, 2012)

this is funny.  First off what do you think A competitor is going say.   "Aww Man, were fucked, oh well get them next time" ... of course they have too say something like this, they have too save their rep.  

Fact is, AMD showed up first to the party with their new Lamborghini 7970.  They got the party started, all the bitches took turns taken A ride.  Come 2:01am Nvida is going Show up in their new Ferrari ... but its too late all the bitches are drunk and not going care.  Oh whats this, AMD went and got their new 7975, 7980,7985 .. (cause we all know they are coming, Stocked OCed verson).

Late is Late.


----------



## seronx (Jan 26, 2012)

nikko said:


> Yes, I was hypothesising about GTX650 that would give the 7970 a run for it's money. cause 660 will clearly be classes above it. with more processors than 580 and more frequency, it's just insane how much better it could look and how easely they could end up with big transistorial non-sesne like amd.



It is actual going to be a 680GTX because 7970 performs about the same as a 900MHz 580GTX

512 CUDA Core GK104(100) will be around 950MHz with a TDP around 200Ws

Nvidia is disappointed because they were going to release a 2048 CUDA part with the 1024 CUDA part

But they can just stick with the 512 CUDA part and just clock it really high and keep TDP within 200W

---Remember this----
GeForce 8800 GTX - 90nm
PCIe 1.1 x16
484mm²
575MHz
128 CUDA Cores

GeForce 9800 GTX - 65nm
PCIe 2.0 x16
324mm²
675MHz
128 CUDA Cores
---------------------

Well they are doing this here:

GeForce 580 GTX - 40nm
PCIe 2.0 x16
520mm²
772MHz
512 CUDA Cores

GeForce 680 GTX - 28nm
PCIe 3.0 x16
~300mm²
~950MHz
512 CUDA Cores


----------



## 20mmrain (Jan 26, 2012)

Let's just say that the replacement for the GTX 560Ti is faster than the HD7970. One thing that might play in our favor then is..... A mid level card that is capable of 3 way SLI. If it is Nvidia's only option for awhile.....to beat the HD7970....It would be really nice to see it. 
The sad thing is gents.... I don't think these cards will release in February like some rumors have said. I have my reasons for saying this. If anything.... I think we will be seeing them around April.


----------



## nikko (Jan 26, 2012)

seronx said:


> ---Remember this----
> GeForce 8800 GTX - 90nm
> PCIe 1.1 x16
> 484mm²
> ...



Yes. the latter had 10% more transistors despite being 128bit less. that means a total of 20% additional space... otherwise 9800GTX would have been 1.9x shrink more or less 250mm2. back then TA/TF were added and 65nm was leaky, they had to add more of those. the chip ended being 324mm2.

Now with 28nm it is possible to have 512 Cores and 256 bit if history repeats itself. More likely 448 at launch, but 2.5Ghz speeds on the shader, that is way better than GTX580.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jan 26, 2012)

nikko said:


> Yes. the latter had 10% more transistors despite being 128bit less. that means a total of 20% additional space... otherwise 9800GTX would have been 1.9x shrink more or less 250mm2. back then TA/TF were added and 65nm was leaky, they had to add more of those. the chip ended being 324mm2.
> 
> Now with 28nm it is possible to have 512 Cores and 256 bit if history repeats itself. More likely 448 at launch, but 2.5Ghz speeds on the shader, that is way better than GTX580.



Just for accuracy. Remember that G92 had the display chip integrated on die, whereas in G80 it was a standalone chip too. Without that addition the chip would have been << 300mm2.



Steevo said:


> Yeah cause more transistors immediately means more performance.



On GPU? With the same/similar architecture and no DX API change? As sure as hell it does. 



radrok said:


> While I agree with you, Benetanegia, I think that you sure have a harsh way to make your point



I have no love for people who insult for no reason and before they even tried to think abuot what I said and what it means, no.


----------



## Thefumigator (Jan 26, 2012)

Its not the first time nvidia says they are "confident" and they have a "better product going on" just after an ATI release.


----------



## magibeg (Jan 26, 2012)

Thefumigator said:


> Its not the first time nvidia says they are "confident" and they have a "better product going on" just after an ATI release.



Yea, I believe it's called marketing.

It appears to be working wonders on seronx. By his calculations nvidia is actually going to be surpassing moore's law by a good margin.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jan 26, 2012)

Volkszorn88 said:


> AMD has the upper hand because they released 79xx series first. Who knows how long it will take nvidia to release their new gpus.
> 
> Now here's the best part, if and when nvidia's new gpus crush the 79xx series, they're going to cost way more than 500 bucks and AMD will look at this and say "lol k well now we can start working on the 8k series"
> 
> *In the end, it works out beautifully for consumers.*



No actually is quite the opposite. It work beautiful for nvidia and ATI but definitely NOT for consumers, because there is no price war


----------



## Horrux (Jan 26, 2012)

Prima.Vera said:


> No actually is quite the opposite. It work beautiful for nvidia and ATI but definitely NOT for consumers, because there is no price war



Duopolies ALWAYS maximize the profits for BOTH companies...


----------



## Recus (Jan 27, 2012)




----------



## xenocide (Jan 27, 2012)

Super XP said:


> More Nvidia fluff, trying to convince people to wait for there cards. While NV is blowing smoke, HD 7900 Series Radeons are selling like hot cakes.



Good thing sales are directly equivalent to the quality of the product.  This is especially apparent with the Nintendo Wii, which by your logic is the BEST console this time around.


----------



## Initialised (Jan 29, 2012)




----------



## El_Mayo (Jan 29, 2012)

If this were the case, AMD would end up dropping their prices to stay relevant, right?


----------



## Horrux (Jan 29, 2012)

El_Mayo said:


> If this were the case, AMD would end up dropping their prices to stay relevant, right?



Of course.


----------



## Aquinus (Jan 29, 2012)

...and Bulldozer was supposed to put Sandy Bridge to shame and we can all see that didn't happen. AMD has the product out, it is fast like a bat out of hell, and people are buying it because of that. nVidia can't sell a product that hasn't been released, so until reviews start coming out, I'm skeptical about such claims. (Consider the 7970 vs the GTX 590.)


----------

