Friday, February 22nd 2008
GeForce 9 Series Roadmap Updated
Enjoy. The little dashes indicate unavailable data, and the asterisks indicate unconfirmed data (which should still be reasonably accurate).Please follow the source link for a chart of the current speculated clocks and/or specifications.
Source:
Nordic Hardware
66 Comments on GeForce 9 Series Roadmap Updated
I did and will continue to believe anands perspective about the r600 design and do believe that ati did have a better design...that was underperforming for its specs...and if you look at the 2900xt throughout its life time you can see noticeable improvements in every driver release...and when you look at the the 3800 series especially in perf/per watt in comparison to the 2900xt =big improvement... and in the performance improvements over the 2900xt although not as great as we would want the 3800 series is much more efficient in all aspects of the tech'.
the r770 core has been said to be 50% than that of the r670, and i believe that ati has stated that the r700 will be multiple cores and ati has given the indication that they want to continue to push mutiple gpu thing and this was why the 3870 x2s performance and acceptability was so important... and so far it looks good eventhough it needs work..
this i believe Nvidia knows that they can only push the g80(92) core so much....and i believe that is why we see so much delays in their products. ati can only move up so no matter what they cant go wrong...and they did say that back in november ati was making these 3800 series cards for hardly anything and with the recent price drops to 189 just simply state how much cheaper the 3800s were compared to 2900s( to build). and from what i have heard from a couple of my friends in the industry they are still making a decent profit even at this price point. NVIDIA 'got' its hands full.
ATI rules... The R770 is supposedly going to have 1 Tflop of processing power and will be over 1 billion transistors. I expect to see quite noticeable performance increases over the 8800 and 9xxx series.
it's just like CPU's.... single core/single socket came first, then single core/dual socket(2xcpu's)
then dual core/single socket.... dual core/dual socket....quad core/single socket...now quad core/dual socket. i expect GPU's will be the same fashion. soon we will hear that someone has a dual core GPU that runs better than a sli/crossfire setup.
look at the pentium-d and core2 quads, they are not native dual(p-d) or quad(c2q) they are 2 chips on one pcb, now it dosnt mean they didnt work, just as 2 pcb gx2's work, but, the designs lazy and as normal with nvidia its about pure bruit force not about doing things smarter.
we shal see, but i look at the 9xxx cards as fail,i have an 8800gt 512, works fine, but drivers are still buggy on xp 64 :P
i guess thats why AMD's logo is "A Smarter Choice"
i was neither a fan of amd or intel back inthe p3 and older days, both where great chip makers, i loved my k6-2, and my dual celeron and my p3 550e@733, then the p4 came out, and was total crap, all about pure clocks and bruit forceing the market.
i was a huge nvidia fan till.....the fx line, 5800ultra did my respect for them in hard core.....
nvidia tryed to cheat with the fx lines dx9 support, and it ended in EPIC FAIL, the cards where slow as hell, unless you cheated and forced games to run un partial persission mode (made them look worse then normal full persission mode) it was just....arg......a card 1/4 the price of the 5800ultra was about 3-4x as fast in dx9 mode......thats INSAIN.
well they learned but then the 6-7-8 endup being evolutions on a common design theme, just more bruit force involved.
blah, i run an 8800gt, its a good card with blah driver support.
amd/ati are at least trying to innovate and creat new designes insted of just sticking more popes/rops on a core and more shaders.
hell if it had been nvidia going from the x1900 to the 2900 they would have just combine 2 cores and called it a new core, 32rops and 96 shader units..........god that would be a beastly card tho :P
but ati went a diffrent way, and now that ati and amd are one, amd is continuing to head that way, and i think it will work out, the r6*0 cores to me really look like an intermediat design core, they do the job, they have their flaws, but they have alot of potential.
im happy where i am for now, but im excited to see where this "war" will go next, i hope its to ati focing nvidia to innovate again insted of just add more rops/shader units to current designs....
The drivers for my 8600 gts's are crap! they have big stability problems especially when oced
but yea its def going to be very interesting watching the war over the upcoming months,
currently building a spider platform cant wait till its finished!
Did anybody get mad when intel released the wolfdale. After all, it was just a die shrink. If they had more competition we would have the 45 quads, thats just how it goes. Nvidia is getting alot of competition from ati in the mid to low end market, so they are focusing on that while throwing out a few cards that will continue to dominate on the high end.
And, personally, I would rather the technology be perfected before being put on the market, as long as some tweaks allow for increased performance. Plus, after the 9xxx series, you would expect the numbering system to change, and probably the tech will as well. Its all just speculation at this point though.
if ATI can trump NV by simply redesigning and making a dual gpu card, their nxt gen cards coming out, especially if dual core are gonna crush some NV
they already have the innovation and experience at designing all-in-one card pcb's, so they are already a step ahead of nv in that respect.
so when it comes to multiple gpu cards, are NV still gonna be using multiple pcbs? coz thats just not smart, and seriously lacks innovation.
So whenever they tout 9XXX x2 or whatever, its really 2 cards, which therefore should be compared to 2x HDxxx x2 cards ;)
the x2 was not 75% longer than the 3870
The length arguement also sounds off for the reason someone else mentioned. For Nvidia that might be an advantage but by itself it's not really an advantage b/c it's appearently possible to do it while not exceeding previous precendents.
remmber their are ways with smart design to avoidthe pitfalls you speek of.
more pcb layers for example allow higher complexity and lower noise, thats why most ram sticks today at 6 or even 8 layer pcb's, so your argument tho "logical" is also false.