Sunday, April 20th 2014
![NVIDIA](https://tpucdn.com/images/news/nvidia-v1719085767169.png)
NVIDIA GM204 and GM206 to Tape-Out in April, Products to Launch in Q4?
It looks like things are going horribly wrong at TSMC, NVIDIA and AMD's principal foundry partner, with its 20 nm manufacturing process, which is throwing a wrench into the works at NVIDIA, forcing it to re-engineer an entire lineup of "Maxwell" GPUs based on existing 28 nm process. Either that, or NVIDIA is confident of delivering an efficiency leap using Maxwell on existing/mature 28 nm process, and saving costs in the process. NVIDIA is probably drawing comfort from the excellent energy-efficiency demonstrated by its Maxwell-based GeForce GTX 750 series. According to a 3DCenter.org report, NVIDIA's next mainline GPUs, the GM204 and GM206, which will be built on the 28 nm process, and "Maxwell" architecture, will tape out later this month. Products based on the two, however, can't be expected before Q4 2014, as late as December, or even as late as January 2015.
GM204 succeeds GK104 as the company's next workhorse performance-segment silicon, which could power graphics card SKUs ranging all the way from US $250 to $500. An older report suggests that it could feature as many as 3,200 CUDA cores. The GM204 could be taped out in April 2014, and the first GeForce products based on it could launch no sooner than December 2014. The GM206 is the company's next mid-range silicon, which succeeds GK106. It will tape out in April, alongside the GM204, but products based on it will launch only in January 2015. The GM200 is a different beast altogether. There's no mention of which process the chip will be based on, but it will succeed the GK110, and should offer performance increments worthy of being a successor. For that, it has to be based on the 20 nm process. It will tape-out in June 2014, and products based on it will launch only in or after Q2 2015.
Source:
3DCenter.org
GM204 succeeds GK104 as the company's next workhorse performance-segment silicon, which could power graphics card SKUs ranging all the way from US $250 to $500. An older report suggests that it could feature as many as 3,200 CUDA cores. The GM204 could be taped out in April 2014, and the first GeForce products based on it could launch no sooner than December 2014. The GM206 is the company's next mid-range silicon, which succeeds GK106. It will tape out in April, alongside the GM204, but products based on it will launch only in January 2015. The GM200 is a different beast altogether. There's no mention of which process the chip will be based on, but it will succeed the GK110, and should offer performance increments worthy of being a successor. For that, it has to be based on the 20 nm process. It will tape-out in June 2014, and products based on it will launch only in or after Q2 2015.
51 Comments on NVIDIA GM204 and GM206 to Tape-Out in April, Products to Launch in Q4?
As for in Intel, I am pretty sure 14nm is ready and has been for some time but they are delaying purely from financial stand point, why spend billions on new facilities to save millions on smaller chips?
But if they had other big players paying to use their fabs then it makes financial sense again.
As for a competition stand point, Intel is not competing in the discrete gaming graphics card world so that shouldn't coming into play.
Hell, I think it would be really cool if Intel just bought nVidia outright! We would get amazing on board graphics, with excellent drivers and some absolute monstrous discrete graphics chips as everything is in house in the most advanced processes on the planet.
BTW, considering that NVIDIA has had some experience with Maxwell (GM107) and has had lots and lots of experience with 28 NM (3 years worth of experience at least), GM104 and GM106 should be a worth while upgrade. Even if NVIDIA is one year late to the 20 NM party, it won't matter because 20 NM production will be in full swing by then. It doesn't. Right now, people in the PC space are ready to buy Intel's GPUs (or their SoCs for Smartphone and Tablets) because their process advantage compensates their architecture disadvantage. If Intel shares their process with NVIDIA or AMD, they lose their business in those markets. The CPU market is declining so it makes no sense for AMD to use Intel's fabs.
It would be a super upgrade for the anyone still on a 570-580 Fermi, but even a original GTX680 owner would have a tough call if 20Nm might end up showing a say 14mo from now? Or is 20Nm even future away?
1. Pricing of current cards at the time of launch
2. Anything AMD may have as an answer
3. Whether the architecture tweaks produce a tangible benefit over the previous cards in the pricing segment. I went from an overclocked GTX 670 (for all intents and purposes a GTX 680) to a GTX 780 based solely upon needing a cheap, solid performer at 2560x1440. The graphs tell me that the difference between the two cards is 31% (Palit GTX 670 Jetstream / EVGA GTX 780 SC), but the reality is that the 670 just isn't cut out for that resolution, which becomes more apparent when overclocking is factored into the equation. Who knows? possibly not even TSMC. By 20nm I presume you mean TSMC's CLN16FF process, since the planar 20nm (CLN20SOC) isn't suitable for high power GPUs, and neither Nvidia or AMD are using the process - at least not for GPUs.
So you have a choice, design your next architecture around the next process node and hope the ramp of TSMC's process is smooth, or use the existing process to tune the architecture in readiness for a process change. The latter gives you proof of concept at minimal risk whilst introducing new SKUs (sales and marketing). AMD are already on record as saying that they won't be using 20nm this year, so have obviously come to the same conclusion.
nVidia I can understand, as Huang has been openly bitching and moaning about the price/transistor curve of 20nm for a long time, which TSMC responded by saying it was blip that would not hold true in later nodes. Also remember that nvidia came quite a bit later to 28nm, and this may be carbon-copy of that situation going on three years later, where-as amd launched in late 2011, and nvidia a quarter or so later.
Lisa Su stated in Q413 AMD was taping out a 20nm chip last quarter (and referenced 14nm at CPA as this quarter). It would seem awful strange to suddenly abandon ship at this late stage, as they must have known the prices and realistic production schedule. I always assumed they would tape out designs at the initial fab doing production (that Apple is using) last quarter,and start production in ~May when TSMC is expanding production to other facilities and truly going to be doing mass production. My hope was their plan was whatever issues came out of initial tape-out/samples could be figured out before that mass production time period, as it seemed a logical scenario, and would mesh with a late-year release of products (~May/June + ~6 months). Anyone that was expecting any kind of availability on a new generation chips before that was, with all due respect, crazy. TBH, I don't think Lisa Su saying they are 'in the design phase' really goes against that thinking, nor does saying this year will be 28nm (as this would be end of year at earliest, and probably not in huge availability.) I could see it going either way (q414 or early 2015), but for all intents and purposes it makes sense to call it a 2015 process.
As for nvidia going to 28nm for another round of big chips, I really don't see the point. Yeah, there are some efficiency improvements to be made versus gk104 and gk110 that could probably make sense on 28nm (like getting a 770-like product under 225w, a native to compete with Pitcairn, or more-efficient 48 ROP design than GK110), but the overall difference, price to create all those chips, and their over-all lifespan seems like a losing battle. When you know going in you'd be buying a new product at full price on an old 28nm process (that already has efficient products, which are getting cheaper by the day) and we'll be seeing 16nm in a year or so...it seems like a really iffy proposition.
Who says 20nm isn't suitable for gpus and they are not using it? Just because it is aimed at lower voltage/less leakage/lower clock doesn't mean a crapload of transistors could not run at a relatively low clock...being gpus are so parallel. Even if they do run it at a higher voltage, it's still a 1.2x or so clock gain in the same power envelope up to wherever the voltage/power curve is, granted which is probably lower than 28nm. The reason why it's aimed at SOC is because at a lower voltage (~.9v) it is supposedly around 1.3x more efficient, and hence the greatest benefits will be in low-voltage chips. Given how much logic will be needed to get a decent chip size for bus width (even with cache to supplement the small die sizes they may want 6GB, or a 384-bit bus) while not having a lot of power savings, low-clocks could very well make sense. (1.9x density, 1.2-1.3x power savings depending on clock/voltage).
Did you really think that 750 Ti was a fluke? It was a test run. It was their beta test to see if Maxwell at 28nm would offer any benefit. Looks like it did. Expect a full transition for the next generation of cards to begin at once. It'll affect the overall clockspeeds and it'll probably make the chips bigger than nVidia likes (with a few cuts to their feature sets), but the real meat and potatoes of Maxwell was always performance per watt anyway, so being a bit bigger shouldn't hurt it as much as it has earlier products.
Also, remember nVidia announced (relatively) recently they were focusing on building mobile device GPU's first and then scaling up from there instead of the reverse. Prioritizing 20nm for Tegra while pushing discrete GPU's to 28nm again would just be that strategy taking shape.
Not surprised. Disappointed, yes. I'm curious to see what they release in May/June to go with Intel's latest releases. nVidia doesn't usually let a big Intel launch go by without at least hinting at a new product refresh/launch.
I'm expecting a bunch of rebrands. AMD did it a few months back, so why can't nVidia get away with the same, right? This is what happens when AMD doesn't compete. Nobody else does, either. Intel and nVidia both doing refreshes would be really indicative of that.
Now, given the lead-in time between design > mask tooling > tape out, how long have Nvidia and AMD both known that CLN20SOC wasn't going to meet their requirements, or have AMD and Nvidia just decided to not use the process node by choice - which would be a first as far as I can recall. With all these supposed gains it must come as real surprise that no one is particularly interested in CLN20SOC for GPUs then. A mobile orientated GPU of low power/good efficiency per watt would be an ideal fit it would seem, and is something that is obviously missing from AMD's line up. So, ideally suited to CLN20SOC, yet AMD have already poured cold water on GPUs at 20nm for this year. Strange no?
I'm pretty sure Apple hasn't gobbled up all of TSMC's 20nm capacity.
I swear I saw the Cryovenom 290 reviewed by Ocaholic as well and it also managed 1300MHz (with extra voltage), but I can't find the review???
Higher temps, not so good overclocking and default weaker chip. Expected clock for Hawaii is
1100-1200MHz, over 1150 you need water.
Never mind for GK110 owners, special people who have full unlocked chip this news is not so bad. We have performance and time to wait even end of 2016 and premium of Maxwell 20nm. Who bought Titan SLI before 1 year will play games 2 years on premium chip. Other who need performance maybe is time to think about GK110 with 2880 CUDA instead of first Maxwell successor of GK104. If they need performance and still have Fermi or something else. It's not smart wait something when you don't have scheduled date for 2-3-4 weeks and known specification on table.
hoping for 1250+ when it gets wet :D
but i agree it is cooling limited.
Actually, sorry this discussion is getting off topic.
As for 20nm GPUs, the process is one factor, but I'm also guessing that full DirectX 12 compliance is another, as is thechoice of what memory controller to use and validate- as I'm pretty certain that launching a 20/16nm GPU with GDDR5 comes under the heading "last resort"
TSMC's own roadmap prior to the high performance CLN20G cancellation actually makes it pretty clear that CLN20SOC is low power optimized