Friday, February 26th 2016
NVIDIA to Unveil "Pascal" at the 2016 Computex
NVIDIA is reportedly planning to unveil its next-generation GeForce GTX "Pascal" GPUs at the 2016 Computex show, in Taipei, scheduled for early-June. This unveiling doesn't necessarily mean market availability. SweClockers reports that problems, particularly related to NVIDIA supplier TSMC getting its 16 nm FinFET node up to speed, especially following the recent Taiwan earthquake, could delay market available to late- or even post-Summer. It remains to be seen if the "Pascal" architecture debuts as an all-mighty "GP100" chip, or a smaller, performance-segment "GP104" that will be peddled as enthusiast-segment over being faster than the current big-chip, the GM200. NVIDIA's next generation GeForce nomenclature will also be particularly interesting to look out for, given that the current lineup is already at the GTX 900 series.
Source:
SweClockers
97 Comments on NVIDIA to Unveil "Pascal" at the 2016 Computex
*runs away*
Fab 14(B) - the 16nmFF+ extension fab where GPUs would be manufactured was back up and running quickly.
Techpowerup covered the story but neglected to research what process the fabs actually used for their production. Maybe "TSMC Damaged by Earthquake, Could Impact AMD and Nvidia GPU Production" would get more page views than"TSMC Damaged by Earthquake, Will Impact Apple A9 Production"
"God" might just be evening the score. Visit a natural disaster on Nvidia to offset all the man-made disasters that AMD have had visited upon them and have initiated themselves. If that is the case then AMD better pray for a higher level of divine intervention I suspect.
Groundwork, my ass...
A GPU should be not too noisy, not too power hungry. It should run games smoothly.. I've just listed ALL points average gamers care about.
I could add "oh, and it should last" but then NV definitely cannot boast that, can it? And I'm not talking about DX12.
So, Hawaii fixed rule 3 with PCI-e crossfire but annihilated 1& 2.
Post GTX480, Nvidia haven't really dropped any design balls, 580, 680, 780, 780ti, 980ti. What they have done is create an entirely weird (but not new) price structure with pseudo professional Titan parts. The Titan Z, I will acquiesce to as being hysterically awful.
People can berate Nvidia cards if they want to live in a red misted wonderland but Nvidia make good gaming hardware. And you can't blame Gameworks. There are many AMD titles that play fastest on Nvidia hardware and on brand agnostic games, Nvidia still performs better. Let's not delude ourselves.
As far as being OT, if Pascal is found to be lacking in Asynch (if the warp scheduling is still serialised and not parallelized) then yes, later this year we may well see a true situation where AMD will clearly win some titles and those that don't rely on Async may go Nvidia way. I just hope both brands have good enough cards to avoid game specific performance problems, even when one is far better. A situation where a top tier card doesn't perform in a game because of an architecture deficit which switches title to title would be disastrous.
At least this means I will get a good year or two out of these Tis before the next Ti shows up.I sure hope so, I would love to play around with an AMD card again. But right now they suck major for folding compared to Maxwell cards. Kind of miss folding on the 7970 I had, but that thing was very hot to run 24/7 on an air cooler. But hell, I give that thing was a tank considering it was handling running over 70-75C 24/7 with a OC on it.No kidding, unless you doing some crazy high renderings or something. I could care less about a buttload of RAM since 4k or 8k does not interest me. Give me a good high core clock and ocing ability plus performance/watts. Then I be happy as a lark while folding the crap out of the cards.
I'd also ask you, if you think that the game dev software R&D has no merit, why would AMD spend resources copying the features? The ideas of GeForce Experience, frame pacing, G-Sync, Shadowplay, Optimus and a host of other features of varying merit have all been appropriated by AMD. If they don't add value to the brand do you think that AMD are just pathological imitators? Most neutral observers would probably note that the features help sell the brand and the hardware, and AMD would be foolish not to exploit any opportunity to advance both.
Absolutely gorgeous piece of hardware. If Nvidia had allowed the board partners to do the same to the Titan Z (and of course not be so expensive) that round would have been awesome.
I didn't quite get exactly what you meant when talking about "delivering"... Delivering what?It isn't cheaper, it comes free (with most scaler chips). G-Sync users pay 100$ for something, the only point of which is to ban NVs competitors. Oh, and it limits monitors to only one port. Very convenient.PhysX was BOUGHT and forcefully made exclusive. At best it is "NV bought game development program".
Then you slap another nice sum to bribe devs to use it, and, yay, it's sooo good for customers.
Newer Gsync monitors have more than one input.
"Nvidia said it will offer up to 32GB of RAM per GPU. This will allow for up to five times better performance in what Nvidia calls "deep learning applications" which are applications capable of gathering data and learning to recognize patterns or images. It's also a sign that this card will be for high performance computing, as the majority of video cards have just 2GB of memory."
blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2016/02/23/pratt-gtc-toyota/
"And GPUs, which are key to training a new generation of machines with superhuman capabilities, are at the center of this story (see “Accelerating AI with GPUs: A New Computing Model”)."
Someone is willing to pay a lot of money for this stuff...
There was NO NEED in GSync the way it was done, there was nothing special about variable refresh rate, that stuff was already there in notebooks (that's why it didn't take AMD long to counter). The only drive (and wasted money) was to come out with some "only me, only mine!!!" shit, nothing else.
Had it been a common, open standard, that would have pushed market forward a lot. But no, we have crippled "only this company" shit now. Thanks, great progress.
It's great to have more than one competitive player in the market. It sucks when they play dirty, the way nVidia does.
Strong arm politics all over the place on all fronts: XFX, hell, ANAND BLOODY TECH. Punished, learned the lesson, next time put cherry picked overclocked fermi vs stock AMD. And that's only VISIBLE part of it, who fucking knows what's going on underneath.
A company does NOT need to strong arm journalists and suppliers to build great products.
A company does NOT need to force proprietary APIs to build great products.
You referred to shitty practices as if they were something good (for customers) and worth following.
No, they clearly aren't.