[speculation] NV35

[MuFu]

I think they're launching with production qualified samples at E3. Then the review NDA expires in the first week of June. Not 100% on that though...

MuFu.

[Sazar]

Originally posted by MuFu
I think they're launching with production qualified samples at E3. Then the review NDA expires in the first week of June. Not 100% on that though...

MuFu.

keep us posted though :)

100% has never been a requirement for news leaks :D

[marcocom]

DDR1 is slower. the law of physics doesnt change because of 3dmark

256bit bandwidth sure comes in useful for 6xFSAA/8xAF/1600x1200 and ive seen C&C:Generals, Morrowind, 3dmark at those settings and its just aweful pretty... but if you play FPS shooter games and want the highest performance during multiplayer OpenGL games with custom skins and multi-textured particles flying and multiple characters moving on-screen...the faster clock is still the faster clock.

am i wrong about that? doesnt clockspeed/ramspeed still mean anything?

its gonna be odd considering upgrading to a slower card when the nv35 releases. i will have better benchmark scores, but better FPS gaming performance?

educate me on how that works, please.

[GlowStick]

actually the access of DDRII is slower *CURRENTY* mainly because its so new..

i could be completely wrong though.

[Lezmaka]

Theoretically, DDR1 and DDR2 at the same clockspeed should perform the same. But DDR2 has higher latency, so in practice, DDR2 would provide lower performance than DDR1 at the same clockspeed.

More bandwidth is more bandwidth. It doesn't matter if you get it by increasing the clockspeed or bus width. There will come a point where more bandwidth doesn't help in certain situations because it's limited by other factors.

[Ninja Prime]

am i wrong about that? doesnt clockspeed/ramspeed still mean anything?

Not really wrong, it's just that clockspeed/ramspeed now takes a back seat to architecture(doing the same things better and faster at the same clockspeed), and now higher bandwidth (the main purpose behind higher ramspeed) can be achived without high clockspeed. The clock speed wars are for CPU's, which, IMO could take a lesson from the graphics industry.

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by marcocom
DDR1 is slower. the law of physics doesnt change because of 3dmark

I don't think that is entirely true. ddrII has increase latency over ddrI, but it also has a higher burst transfer to help make up for that shortcoming. Not entirely sure whether it equals out or not, of course. So clock for clock ddrI may have a performance advantage, it probably has a heat advantage, and it's cheaper.

Although you are right, ddrII is the future, it's speeds will ramp up and ddrI will not be able to compete performance-wise.

256bit bandwidth sure comes in useful for 6xFSAA/8xAF/1600x1200 and ive seen C&C:Generals, Morrowind, 3dmark at those settings and its just aweful pretty... but if you play FPS shooter games and want the highest performance during multiplayer OpenGL games with custom skins and multi-textured particles flying and multiple characters moving on-screen...the faster clock is still the faster clock.

am i wrong about that? doesnt clockspeed/ramspeed still mean anything?

You are incorrect. The faster clock does not always win. Look at AMD vs Intel. The first P4s had several hundred MHz advantage in clockspeed over P3s and Athlons, yet their performance was lower.

Clockspeed is not everything. It is one way to achieve a goal.

For example, NV30 has ddrII clocked at 500MHz and a 128bit bus. This gives 16GB/sec of bandwidth. Having 400MHz ddrI and a 256bit bus would give 25GB/sec of bandwidth. Obviously 25 is higher than 16 by a large amount.

Example 2, a video card with 2 pipes clocked at 200Mhz each vs a video card with 8 pipes clocked at 100MHz each. Which has more fillrate and is faster, all other things being equal(bandwidth, etc). Obviously the 8 pipe 100MHz card is has twice the fillrate.

[MuFu]

The Inq now say 450/850MHz for the Ultra and finally got the name right.

That makes more sense to me than 450/450MHz, although 425MHz DDR-I is still very high.

MuFu.

[MuFu]

P.S. My guess:

256MB 5900 Ultra@425/850MHz - $499
128MB 5900 non-Ultra@425/850MHz - $399
128MB 5800 non-Ultra@400/800MHz - $299
128MB 5600 Ultra@350/350MHz - $199

...at least until NV36 ramps. :)

[GlowStick]

Originally posted by MuFu
P.S. My guess:

256MB 5900 Ultra@425/850MHz - $499
128MB 5900 non-Ultra@425/850MHz - $399
128MB 5800 non-Ultra@400/800MHz - $299
128MB 5600 Ultra@350/350MHz - $199

...at least until NV36 ramps. :)

What will the price of the 256mb 9800Pro be then? Or will they roll the price of the 128 9800 back and put the 256 at 399

[volt]

The only way 9800P can compete with NV35 is the price. It will be an interesting match.

[Uttar]

AFAIK, it'll likely be:
R350 256MB vs NV35 256MB ( $499 )
R350 128MB vs NV35 128MB ( $399 )

The $399 segment will probably fall in nVidia's hands, at least for a while - but the $499 segment still remains a mystery, since we got no idea just how good the R350 256MB will really be...


Uttar

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by Uttar
AFAIK, it'll likely be:
R350 256MB vs NV35 256MB ( $499 )
R350 128MB vs NV35 128MB ( $399 )

The $399 segment will probably fall in nVidia's hands, at least for a while - but the $499 segment still remains a mystery, since we got no idea just how good the R350 256MB will really be...


Uttar

Hmm, you don't think ATI will lower the price of the R350?

:(

[incurable]

Originally posted by volt
The only way 9800P can compete with NV35 is the price. It will be an interesting match.
Much more important to me than the price ($399? $499? both is absurdly high, IMHO) is whether we're going to see dual DVI consumer versions of either company's high-end products, any news on that?

Anyway, unless nVidia improves FSAA dramatically with NV35, I'd rather take a hit in frame rates and enjoy the superior IQ of ATi's latest.

cu

incurable

[Richthofen]

"
Anyway, unless nVidia improves FSAA dramatically with NV35, I'd rather take a hit in frame rates and enjoy the superior IQ of ATi's latest
"

you know what's funny?
I can turn that sentence into a complete different direction.

'Anyway, unless ATI improves AF dramatically with R350 or whatever is following, I'd rather take a hit in frame rates and enjoy the superiour IQ of Nvidia's latest :)

[MuFu]

Originally posted by Richthofen
you know what's funny?
I cant turn that sentence into a complete different direction.

You're right - you can't. And that *is* funny. ;)

MuFu.

[flick556]

Originally posted by Richthofen
"
Anyway, unless nVidia improves FSAA dramatically with NV35, I'd rather take a hit in frame rates and enjoy the superior IQ of ATi's latest
"

you know what's funny?
I cant turn that sentence into a complete different direction.

'Anyway, unless ATI improves AF dramatically with R350 or whatever is following, I'd rather take a hit in frame rates and enjoy the superiour IQ of Nvidia's latest :)

It would be wild if nv35 could handle 16xaa with decent frame rates that would have to make people recognize superior IQ.I even read 16xAA is playable on 5800 at low resolution. Just think of a review nvidea 8xAA is much woarse then ati's, but wow they can do 16xAA and still compete in frame rates.

[Uttar]

Wouldn't be surprised if 16x MSAA was playable at resolutions like 1024x768 or 1152x768 on a NV35
Too bad it doesn't support 16x MSAA :P


Uttar

[Richthofen]

i wasnt referring to AA.

I know that nvidias AA is inferiour in terms of IQ but i also know its AF is better than that of the competition.
I just consider both sides.

[flick556]

Originally posted by Uttar
Wouldn't be surprised if 16x MSAA was playable at resolutions like 1024x768 or 1152x768 on a NV35
Too bad it doesn't support 16x MSAA :P


Uttar

newest drivers allow nv30 16xAA

[Uttar]

Originally posted by flick556
newest drivers allow nv30 16xAA

I was talking of MSAA :) The NV30 only supports 16x by mixing 4x SSAA and 4x MSAA.
That is significantly slower than true 16x MSAA.


Uttar

[GlowStick]

Originally posted by incurable
Much more important to me than the price ($399? $499? both is absurdly high, IMHO) is whether we're going to see dual DVI consumer versions of either company's high-end products, any news on that?

Anyway, unless nVidia improves FSAA dramatically with NV35, I'd rather take a hit in frame rates and enjoy the superior IQ of ATi's latest.

cu

incurable

399$ isnt absurdly high, 499$ is pushing it, but as a high end card buyer, if ati and nvidia decided to jack up their high ends to 499 for all of them eg 9800pro 499, id grudgingly pay it! : ( i dont think they would expect to sell many though!~

[flick556]

Originally posted by Uttar
I was talking of MSAA :) The NV30 only supports 16x by mixing 4x SSAA and 4x MSAA.
That is significantly slower than true 16x MSAA.


Uttar

ooh yea your right about that.