Friday, April 22nd 2016
NVIDIA GP104 "Pascal" ASIC Pictured
Here are two of the first pictures of NVIDIA's upcoming "GP104" graphics processor. This chip will drive at least three new GeForce SKUs bound for a June 2016 launch; and succeeds the GM204 silicon, which drives the current-gen GTX 980 and GTX 970. Based on the "Pascal" architecture, the GPU will be built on TSMC's latest 16 nm FinFET+ node. The chip appears to feature a 256-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, and is rumored to feature a memory clock of 8 Gbps, yielding a memory bandwidth of 256 GB/s.
Sources:
ChipHell, AnandTech Forums
56 Comments on NVIDIA GP104 "Pascal" ASIC Pictured
Not sure how you can get excited about that. Launch price will probably be close tpo what the faster 980ti is now too.
The 1080ti is rumored to launch in July as well, but I HIGHLY doubt that. maybe Nvidia's way of making people hold off of the Polaris/ Vega train.
I am from Iran and one of the users who give so much to this site lovely head
Excuse me, I use Google translator for English
I will be grateful as complete and accurate answer my question
My first question: Is it really 970 RAM NVIDIA's deliberately manipulated?
Second question: Does Nvidia's 1080 and 1070 will be the name of Pascal cards? Do Rival AMD are angry?
A2: Nobody publicly will tell you with 100% certainty that GTX 1080 and GTX 1070 are the names. The people who know that are the ones at NVIDIA and people who received samples, and are signed on a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). People that work in AIB companies like Asus, Gigabyte and MSI for example.
I'm one of the NVIDIA subject-but I think that the 970 of VRAM were intentionally manipulated because of the tests that I see little difference between full HD Darren but when 2K or 4K is the amount of defective VRAM broadcasting 970 makes the difference and 970 are 980
Third question: What is really the difference between anger and nano because not all properties except one were 50Mhz core Clock frequency Nano - the descendants of frames between them in games too
And despite the conspiracy theories, miscommunication does happen:
www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=amd%20800%20million
Keeping it local:
www.techpowerup.com/156123/amd-realizes-that-bulldozer-has-800-million-less-transistors-than-it-thought
AMD Realizes That Bulldozer Has 800 Million LESS Transistors Than It Thought!
Anyhow, Fury and nano are very close in games. Nano uses less power. For the same price, I would go with the Fury personally.
I think some made too big of a deal on the GTX 970 vRam debacle. It is still a great card at 1080p and 1440p in some cases. Having 4 GB instead of 3.5 GB vram at full speed would not have changed it's capabilities.
My thoughts exactly. Performance GPUs from green camp won't be on sale before autumn imho.
I didn't pay much attention back in the "Pixel Pipeline" days, I caught that train after is set sail, with an X800 back when 7950GT and GTX was king of the mole hill. the x800 had 12-12-12 is all i know, maybe it was 8-8-8..... I don't know what the numbers represented back then, just that they were Pixel pipelines, I assume they mean the same thing. So what's with the "Unified Shaders?" Meh, all hoop-la....
Even having red or green say "we have this many" it's like AMD vs Intel.... So what? If they are garbage cores then who cares.
Meh, now I'm just making myself look dumb. LOL.....:laugh:
I'll quit before I finish my first beer before this gets out of hand!
Today everything is programmable, unified shading units process both pixels and vertices and layout of the pipes is not fixed (graphics pipelines are kind of virtual today and exist in software - we have DX11 graphics pipeline and DX12 graphics pipeline mapped completely to two different but universal parallel compute architectures that may or may not be used for graphics).
Today with 16nm and all the optimization done on a level of a single unified shader processor, they get smaller so they can put much more of them on the same surface. Now, the balance is: do we need less smart shader processors but more of them, or smarter shader cores and less of them?
The trend seems to be towards more less smart cores with better cache systems ... which is in line with the approach that favors parallelism.
GP104 with GDDR5X, here you go
GP104 should have 1920-2048 cores not 2560 cores.
"Analysts say"... AMD "poised to gain market share" yada yada, Q2 Polaris for the win, CPU licensing deal with Chinese, GPU deal with Apple, promises of "sweet deals" on perf/dollar and perf/watt front
Ye, I'll keep my fingers crossed. AMD back into game would be good for all consumers.
But of course, none of that is actually anywhere near true until they release the products. For now, AMD is still clawing it's way back up and Intel and Nvidia are pissing about on other work.
Google Translate Translate does not forgive good
I feel certain familiar forgive or Iranians or Persians you're right?
It fills the same slot the 980 does now (upper mid-level), so I'm not sure why you would compare it to 980Ti. Is it very likely to equal or come very close to the 980Ti in performance? Yes, which is a win all around for consumers, as it will be cheaper than the current 980Ti flagship.