NVIDIA Readying GeForce GTX 550 Ti for March

[btarunr]

NVIDIA is reportedly working on a new mainstream GPU for a mid-March launch. The graphics giant is planning to name it GeForce GTX 550 Ti, that's right, "GTX" prefix and "Ti" suffix monikers being extended to the core mainstream, in place of the typical "GTS". The new GPU will be based on the 40 nanometer GF116 silicon. Its exact specifications are not known, except that the GPU will use a 128-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, and will be pin-compatible with GF106, on which is based the GeForce GTS 450. Its performance is estimated to be up to 35% higher than ATI Radeon HD 5770. Due to an electrical redesign over GF106, the GTX 550 Ti is expected to have a TDP of just 110W, nearly the same as that of the GTS 450, except having higher performance. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti is slated for release on 15 March, 2011.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[devguy]

"Ti" suffix monikers being extended to the core mainstream

:shadedshu

How I miss when Ti was the pinnacle marker.

 

[zsolt_93]

So this will end up at GTX460 price, right. As the GTX560Ti ended up at almost gtx 470 level, this should be right there. I was having hopes that it will come cheap as a 450. What will happen to the 460, is it going to be phased out already. I hope that a 540 is coming too till the summer with ~GTS450 performance.

 

[arnoo1]

plz nvidia

plz nvidia focus on keplar, i want new gpu's! xd

 

[erocker]

plz nvidia focus on keplar, i want new gpu's! xd

Me too, but you're jumping the gun a bit. End of the year at least. In relation to this story, one of the latest driver beta builds has this 550 Ti card and the upcoming 590 listed!

 

[JrRacinFan]

Why don't they just call this a rebadged 460? =/ here we go again with nVidia flogging the market and fogging the consumer, coming from an nVidia loyal customer.

 

[erocker]

Why don't they just call this a rebadged 460?

Because it's not?

 

[JrRacinFan]

Because it's not?

I know that but from a performance/price perspective it would be the same, right? Iunno....

 

[lisburnni]

heard about this card and the 590 earlier on another forum, the names appeared on a new driver that was quickly removed ( 266.77) seems good so far

 

[HalfAHertz]

But the GTS450 didn't have any disabled units last time i checked. So they'll try to get over 35% more performance from the same chip on the same process aaand keep the same power envelope?

I'd sure like to see that.

 

[newtekie1]

Why don't they just call this a rebadged 460? =/ here we go again with nVidia flogging the market and fogging the consumer, coming from an nVidia loyal customer.

For the same reason AMD doesn't call the 6870 a rebranded 5870... But yeah, it is just nVidia flogging the market and consumer... It is all nVidia...

I know that but from a performance/price perspective it would be the same, right? Iunno....

Not likely. I don't think any amount of overclocking is going to close the ~40% performance gap between the GTS450 and GTX460.

 

[_JP_]

This will beat my card by 35%? Damn. As long as prices drop on current GF 4xx cards. Tired of seeing GTX480s going for 300€ here...and GTX 460 for ~150€ (avg.).
*Wonders when will nVidia will bring back other monikers...like GeForce GTX 590 Ultra or GeForce GTS 540 MX*

 

[TAViX]

For the same reason AMD doesn't call the 6870 a rebranded 5870...

the 6870 and 5870 are different GPU's...shadedshu:shadedshu

just check the specs.

 

[NC37]

A 460 rebadged would be a 550 with a GF106 pin out? Yeah thats using the ole noggin :lol:

Seriously tho, NV, drop the freaken 460 prices finally!!

 

[Benetanegia]

But the GTS450 didn't have any disabled units last time i checked. So they'll try to get over 35% more performance from the same chip on the same process aaand keep the same power envelope?

I'd sure like to see that.

And who says it's the same chip? It has never been stated it's the same chip afaik and I don't think it will be the same, because GF106, the way it was, didn't make a lot of sense. I know, from our perspective, it does make sense to assume it's the same chip "fixed", because GF110 and GF104 were just that, but GF116 is quite different IMO, read below.


IMO GF106 was an experiment. I mean, the chip itself had 192 SP (and related stuff like TMU, SFU...) and a 192 bit memory interface (1:1 ratio), that didn't make any sense to me (especially since they disabled 64 bits on the actual cards), except for Nvidia trying to find out more about their Fermi architecture. To try out different combinations of SP/ROP etc. It's just a theory, but I think that once they got first GF100 silicon back, they found out something was wrong (obviously) and as an alternate solution to the problem, they might have decided to experiment a little with the cut down versions. On GF104 they increased the SP to ROP ratio compared to GF100 and in GF106 they decreased it (GF104 = 3:2 , GF100 = 4:3 , GF106 = 1:1). This way they could know which combination works best for which tasks and so they can better design future chips (i.e Kepler), which no doubt will be based on Fermi's base architecture.

What does all this mean for GF116? Well according to my own theory and assumptions, GF116 may very well be a very different animal than GF106... The higher SP-to-ROP ratio on GF104/114 clearly won in regards to gaming performance and so it makes more sense to apply a high ratio on GF116. GTX550 is going to have 128 bit again and this time around it sure doesn't have any disabled, they will just not be there to egin with. Instead they could have added another SP cluster or two* in there which would make up for the performance improvement they are talking about. ROP partitions take up more silicon space than SPs after all.

* In fact, I'm going to make a wild guess/speculation and I'm going to bet that GF116 is still some sort of experimental chip and will sport 64 SP wide clusters (4x16 SP) instead of 48SP (3x16) and 32SP (2x16) on GF104/114/106 and GF100/110, respectively. 64 SPs always made sense in my head, more than 48 anyway. Every cluster or SM has dual schedulers after all, so with 3 SIMDs, one scheduler is idling every odd cycle.

the 6870 and 5870 are different GPU's...shadedshu:shadedshu

just check the specs.

And the chip on the GTX550 has nothing to do with the one in GTX460, that's why newtekie1 said that... shadedshushadedshu

 

[newtekie1]

the 6870 and 5870 are different GPU's...shadedshu:shadedshu

just check the specs.

Yes, that's exactly my point. The GTX460 and GTX550 are different GPUs as well, way different, check the specs yourself.

 

[blibba]

Fully enable the bus ffs :/

 

[Flanker]

let's see how this does against 6850...

 

[Completely Bonkers]

the GTX 550 Ti is expected to have a TDP of just 110W

Not impressed. In 2011, that is a hot and thirsty card for OC 450 performance.

 

[Over_Lord]

:sigh:

now they are gonna MILK the Ti brand, just like EA milks COD and UBI milks Assassin's Creed, and now EA wanna milk Dead Space also...

 

[newtekie1]

:sigh:

now they are gonna MILK the Ti brand, just like EA milks COD and UBI milks Assassin's Creed, and now EA wanna milk Dead Space also...

It only works when people still remember the Ti brand, and people don't. Hell, I barely remember it.

 

[wolf]

I don't quite know what to think of this yet, I wouldhave expected GF116 to just be a GF106 with everything enabled and the same electrical enhancements used in 110 and 114, making the card 192 sp, 192 bit, 24 ROPS and higher clocks with the same ballpark power consumption, IMO that is all they needed to justify a GTS/X '550'

I guess we'll have to wait and see how this GPU fleshes out.

 

[Over_Lord]

It only works when people still remember the Ti brand, and people don't. Hell, I barely remember it.

Err I meant Ti with reference to GTX560 Ti.

Now we'll have GTX590 Ti and all that shit..

 

[cdawall]

Err I meant Ti with reference to GTX560 Ti.

Now we'll have GTX590 Ti and all that shit..

no we wont go reread the first post GTX+Ti==GTS

 

[Over_Lord]

what? ^^