I don't know from where did they take those specs, but Nvidia will not release those things. They are absurd. 512 bit?

If GF104 has taught anything, that is that performance on Fermi cards depends mostly/only on shaders and is not by any means based on ROPs/bandwidth.
The only probable GF110 specs are one of these (in order of probability):
1 - 3/2 (three halves) of a GF104, that is 3 GPC (clusters)
specs: 576 SP, 96 TMU, 384 bit, core 750 mhz, < 500 mm^2
performance: GTX480 + 25%
Posibility of a dual GF104 card.
2- GF104 with 4 SIMDs per SM instead of 3 (64 SPs instead of 48), 2 GPC
specs: 512 SP, 64 TMU, 256 bit (it would accompanied with 6 gbps memory for about the same bandwidth as GF100), core 750-800 Mhz, << 400 mm^2
performance: ~ GTX480 +/- 5%
There would be a dual gpu card based on this one.
3- Combination of both, #2 but with 3 GPC or #1 with 4 SIMD.
specs: 768 SP, 96 TMU, 384 bit, core 650-700 Mhz, ~550 mm^2
performance: GTX480 + 50%
#3 becomes posible thanks to the fact that TSMC 40nm is said to have exceeded 55nm yields, and Nvidia not fecking up the fabric like they did with GF100.
Also #2 and #3 can easily exist at the same time, as well as a dual card based on #2. That way:
GF110#2 (512 SP part) >>> Bart at a higher cost
GF110#3 (768 SP part) >>> Cayman at a higher cost
2xGF110#2 (2x512 SP) == Antilles at similar cost
I don't see
Nvidia saying anything anywhere, all I see is a pair of websites speculating, based on the fact that speaking about a posible Nvidia response now that AMD is releasing HD6000 is going to be inflamatory and obtain them a lot of clicks.