Wednesday, April 13th 2016
NVIDIA Readies Three GP104 "Pascal" Based SKUs for June 2016
NVIDIA is reportedly giving final touches to no less than three SKUs based on the 16 nm GP104 silicon, to launch some time this June. The ASIC markings for the chips that drive these SKUs are "GP104-400-A1," "GP104-200-A1" and "GP104-150-A1." If you recall, NVIDIA last reserved the "-400-A1" markings for the GeForce GTX 980 (GM204-400-A1), and the "-200-A1" for the GTX 970 (GM204-200-A1).
The GP104-150-A1 is a mystery ASIC. Either it will drive a more affordable third desktop SKU based on the GP104, or could signify a mobile SKU. The company plans to launch the products based on the GP104-400-A1 and GP104-200-A1, logical successors to the GeForce GTX 980 and GTX 970, in early June. The GP104-150-A1, on the other hand, could see the light of the day in mid-June.
Source:
HardwareBattle
The GP104-150-A1 is a mystery ASIC. Either it will drive a more affordable third desktop SKU based on the GP104, or could signify a mobile SKU. The company plans to launch the products based on the GP104-400-A1 and GP104-200-A1, logical successors to the GeForce GTX 980 and GTX 970, in early June. The GP104-150-A1, on the other hand, could see the light of the day in mid-June.
47 Comments on NVIDIA Readies Three GP104 "Pascal" Based SKUs for June 2016
You started the very old argument of companies and maximizing profits. Any company that doesn't maximize profits is basically tearing down its own progress, so "Double - You - Tee - Eff'' ?? That's not bits and pieces, it is the core of your argument. Also, I want to point out that you started your first post in this topic with OFFtopic nonsense about some storage solution that will come out. If we are speaking of 'clever'...
Either way if you want to see how it goes with companies that do NOT maximize profits, have a good long look at the great AMD and how their market share has evolved over the past ten years. Have fun :)
The actual process of each new GPU release actually goes a bit different from your line of thinking:
- Current release/gen has a series of price points and performance levels
- Next gen gets announced for the first time, and great improvements are promised
- Many enthusiasts (read: you) jump on the marketing bandwagon and tout all these improvements as 100% factual and overestimate what it means for the next gen
- Next gen gets the first die shots and real information: we see the regular performance increase that we see every gen, which is just about 30% give or take.
- Pricing schemes are discussed. Your argument pops up, and relates it to the previous points.
Do you see where it goes wrong? We over assume what the next gen will bring, we overestimate its performance jump, and then we see that prices are going to be exactly similar like it happens every gen and the performance jump will be quite similar to every previous gen as well.
The bottom line: nothing really changes, but the SAME performance does become cheaper every new release.
Perspective.
If that were the case and if a GTX 1060 performs equal to or better then a GTX 970 (while being cheaper at GTX 960 prices) I would seriously consider buying one. Especially so if there was full VR on Oculus and Vive,...
- GP 104-400 GPU - Titan
- GP 104-200 GPU - 1080
- GP 104-150 GPU - 1070
1080 Ti TBD to counter AMD.GP104-400 GPU - GTX 980 replacement
GP104-200 GPU - GTX 970 replacement
GP104-150 GPU - GTX 980M or GTX 960 replacement.
GP104 will be the first chip to launch, together with GP106, but GP104 will not be a high-end chip (especially given it's size). GP102 will relese before the end of the year, probably as a Titan X replacement.No, wait for GP102. GP104 will probaly outperform today's high end but will position itself as the new (upper) mid-range.If you're waiting for a new high-end product then GP102 will be your bet.
It's not impossible that the GP104-400 could use GDDR5X, but that would mean the supply will be very limited until September. Shipments of GDDR5X has started, but the supply is very limited. But if it turns out that Polaris can't compete with GP104-400, then perhaps it's a smart gamble.
But I still don't get why you insist on faster memory. Which games do actually need more than 8 GHz GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus? (for a GP104 class GPU)
I'm waiting for the GP102, but I don't know if it will use HBM2 or GDDR5X. But either way the memory will be more than fast enough, I'm more curious about how many CUDA cores it will get."Better scaling" doesn't really matter when GTX 980 Ti still beats it.
Keep in mind that the fastest GDDR5 now is 8 GHz, up from 7 GHz used in the GTX 900 series.The money saved on the memory controller and interface is probably more significant than the PCB, which in turn could give room for more CUDA cores.If you knew what the ROPs do then you'll see it works the other way around. Higher resolution, higher samples(AA), etc. increases the load on the ROP, so that should punsh high resolutions.
The problem with Fiji is that it's an outdated architecture with a lot of minor inefficiencies in the design. Just have a look at the "raw" computing power of AMD's chips vs Nvidia, and you'll see they have a problem tweaking their architectures. GCN competed OK with Kepler, but then Nvidia tweaked it and released Maxwell and now is about to release Pascal with a very significant performance increase, while 4th gen GCN is only going to be a "minor" change. (except for the shrink)
1) Developers claiming they didn't get a penny from AMD, as "Project wedidnt'getapennyfromnvidia Cars" developers did
2) You need to slap someObscureCodeCripplingCompetitorAndPreviousGenWithObscureCodeWorksWondersForOurSales into the mix
And then I'll be generous and won't notice the major difference in ads presence in game.
Also as far as I know there have not been 102 SKU's, only 104, 106, 110/100.
Memory overclocks have always given performance boosts. The level of boost varies widely on the title, settings, and resolution though. The higher the res and settings, particularly AA, the more bandwidth that is typically needed.