nVidia G(T)300 already taped out, A1 silicon in Santa Clara

[JasonPC]

After holding out with my 8800 GTS for so long I think I will be going with GT300.

[K007]

depending on the price i am gonna keep an eye on gt300.

when gt200 came out initially the price was way rip off -.-

[CaptNKILL]

The faster the high end GPUs get, the faster the mid-range and mainstream products get. Eventually this will all filter down, as it always has, and anyone who wants to play the latest games on a budget will be able to grab something as fast as a GT300 for $100.

Look at the $90 9800GT. That card completely destroys the 7900GTX that cost $650 just 3 years ago.

When good graphics cards are affordable, games that take advantage of them will sell just fine. It may take a little while, but the games will come. :D

[Toss3]

The faster the high end GPUs get, the faster the mid-range and mainstream products get. Eventually this will all filter down, as it always has, and anyone who wants to play the latest games on a budget will be able to grab something as fast as a GT300 for $100.

Look at the $90 9800GT. That card completely destroys the 7900GTX that cost $650 just 3 years ago.

When good graphics cards are affordable, games that take advantage of them will sell just fine. It may take a little while, but the games will come. :D

One thing that has got me wondering about the G300 is whether nvidia is going to have a mainstream DX11 part at all; they used the G92 as their mainstream part with the G200, but now that we're about to switch to DX11 they have no part equal to the G92 and my guess is that scaling back a G300 is going to be an expensive process(as it would have been with the G200, which is why they used the G92).

[jlippo]

One thing that has got me wondering about the G300 is whether nvidia is going to have a mainstream DX11 part at all; they used the G92 as their mainstream part with the G200, but now that we're about to switch to DX11 they have no part equal to the G92 and my guess is that scaling back a G300 is going to be an expensive process(as it would have been with the G200, which is why they used the G92).
There wasn't any need to use anything else than G92 for main stream as G200 series wasn't anything else than a speed bump from G80, same as from GF3 to GF4.

They will have DX11/SM5 mainstream part, but most likely we will have to wait some time for it.

[shadow001]

The faster the high end GPUs get, the faster the mid-range and mainstream products get. Eventually this will all filter down, as it always has, and anyone who wants to play the latest games on a budget will be able to grab something as fast as a GT300 for $100.

Look at the $90 9800GT. That card completely destroys the 7900GTX that cost $650 just 3 years ago.

When good graphics cards are affordable, games that take advantage of them will sell just fine. It may take a little while, but the games will come. :D


True,but that's a process that takes 3 years at least,while cards keep doubling in rendering power much faster than that(18 months or less).


Some developers even stated that DX10/DX11 games,written specifically for DX10/DX11 hardware,with no fallback to DX9 at all,will only really happen in large volumes once Nintendo/microsoft/sony,release DX10/DX11 capable consoles,and that might not happen for another 2~3 years.

[Sowk]

How can anyone say we will have 2 much power...

you need 3 X 285 to get Crysis /Crysis Warhead at 60 FPS at 1920X1200. and it still dips below 60 alot of times. 3 X G300's would still drop under 60 FPS in some spots.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-285-review--3way-sli/17

and this is only in gamer mode... Not even the best mode.

If Crysis was at 500FPS average 120 Min + then I would say we can work on better graphics in games.

I will probably get 2 G300's but I won't say I have 2 much power... NEVER!!!! :)

[hell_of_doom227]

I am getting SLI GTX300 as soon as it gets released. Tri SLI i can not justify, it's overkill. I bet my i7 will be bottleneck for SLI GTX300 setup :)

[CaptNKILL]

True,but that's a process that takes 3 years at least,while cards keep doubling in rendering power much faster than that(18 months or less).
Cards haven't doubled rendering power in quite a while. I made a post several months ago comparing the fill rate and bandwidth of several cards and the only cards that have massively improved in all areas over the 8800GTX (released in November 2006) are the dual-GPU solutions. Yet you can still get a card for $100 that will match an 8800GTX (which cost me $650 personally), and it will be more efficient... and that's just after 2 1/2 years.

We don't get huge increases like the 8800GTX very often, but GT300 seems like it could be one. And based on how many G80\G92 based cards we have on the market now, we're likely to see the GT300 scaled in various ways to accommodate everyone eventually. Even before that though, once the GT300 is released the prices of other cards are going to drop. Once people can get a GTX 260 for under $150, or a 9600GT for $50 developers will be able to sell much more demanding games without alienating 90% of their customers. The games are most likely already in development in anticipation of this, because that's just how PC gaming works.


Some developers even stated that DX10/DX11 games,written specifically for DX10/DX11 hardware,with no fallback to DX9 at all,will only really happen in large volumes once Nintendo/microsoft/sony,release DX10/DX11 capable consoles,and that might not happen for another 2~3 years.
I don't think DX9,10 or 11 are really all that important. Crysis still looks significantly better than most other games in DX9 mode, and it still requires a strong graphics card.

Newer versions of DX may allow more features but a graphics card is still going to do its thing whether its running on DirectX 11 or DirectX 9.

[josiahsuarez]

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/13855/1/
TSMC 40nm process is in bad shape
Written by Fuad Abazovic
Tuesday, 26 May 2009 07:58


A lot of leakage


The guinea pig customer and chip, RV740 40nm are not exactly flying out of TSMC's manufacturing lines as we've learned that 40nm was a slow and bad transition for TSMC. As you could imagine by know, RV740 and Radeon 4770 are not available in hundreds of thousands and due to its great performance it gets solld out quicky, but the part of the reason is that yields are bad and ATI can not produce as much as market wants.

TSMC is the one to blame as their 40nm process has a lot of leakage and bad yieds. The company is working on many Nvidia’s mobile and desktop chips as well as on ATI’s new desktop chips, all 40nm and we can only hope that yields will get better.

Nvidia should unveil the notebook 40nm generation GPU at Computex and it should find its way to many gaming notebooks, especially the ones with P55 chipset and Quad core Clarksfield notebook CPU scheduled to come in Q3 2009. Oh yes, Intel calls this platform Calpella.

We also heard that 40nm node is a really difficult one closely resembling a walk in the park, being followed by big dragons dropping napalm all over and trying to bite your head off. That’s how easy it is.

hopefully ~4 months wil be enough time to set things in order

[Atomizer]

Cards haven't doubled rendering power in quite a while. I made a post several months ago comparing the fill rate and bandwidth of several cards and the only cards that have massively improved in all areas over the 8800GTX (released in November 2006) are the dual-GPU solutions. Yet you can still get a card for $100 that will match an 8800GTX (which cost me $650 personally), and it will be more efficient... and that's just after 2 1/2 years.

We don't get huge increases like the 8800GTX very often, but GT300 seems like it could be one. And based on how many G80\G92 based cards we have on the market now, we're likely to see the GT300 scaled in various ways to accommodate everyone eventually. Even before that though, once the GT300 is released the prices of other cards are going to drop. Once people can get a GTX 260 for under $150, or a 9600GT for $50 developers will be able to sell much more demanding games without alienating 90% of their customers. The games are most likely already in development in anticipation of this, because that's just how PC gaming works.

This is exactly why I havent felt the need to upgrade, I am still using my 8800GTX that I bought almost exactly 2 years ago(prolly around the 25th of May), and while a GTX280 would be a decent upgrade, it still doesnt seem worth it to me.
I am however very interested in building a new computer once the new cards come out, along with Windows 7 etc.

[shadow001]

Cards haven't doubled rendering power in quite a while. I made a post several months ago comparing the fill rate and bandwidth of several cards and the only cards that have massively improved in all areas over the 8800GTX (released in November 2006) are the dual-GPU solutions. Yet you can still get a card for $100 that will match an 8800GTX (which cost me $650 personally), and it will be more efficient... and that's just after 2 1/2 years.

We don't get huge increases like the 8800GTX very often, but GT300 seems like it could be one. And based on how many G80\G92 based cards we have on the market now, we're likely to see the GT300 scaled in various ways to accommodate everyone eventually. Even before that though, once the GT300 is released the prices of other cards are going to drop. Once people can get a GTX 260 for under $150, or a 9600GT for $50 developers will be able to sell much more demanding games without alienating 90% of their customers. The games are most likely already in development in anticipation of this, because that's just how PC gaming works.


It goes beyond the raw numbers like fillrate and texturing speed or memory bandwith,since we're not taking into account how efficient the GPU is at actually using the available fillrate/texturing speed and memory bandwith,which does go thru improvements as well.


18 months ago,the GTX280 or the HD4870 were still about 6 months away from being released yet,as they've only been with us for about a year now,so the best at the time were in fact the HD3870 from ATI and the 8800GTX from Nvidia.


By the time the HD4870 or the GTX280 are close to celebrating their 18 month birthday(late this year),we'll have the GT300 and the RV870 on store shelves.




I don't think DX9,10 or 11 are really all that important. Crysis still looks significantly better than most other games in DX9 mode, and it still requires a strong graphics card.

Newer versions of DX may allow more features but a graphics card is still going to do its thing whether its running on DirectX 11 or DirectX 9.

Not quite,since one of the main features in DX10 is what allows the cards to perform better than they could with DX9,no matter how well coded it is....

Overhead management in terms of reducing the number of direct 3D API calls that the CPU's have to process...It basically makes the graphics cards less CPU dependant for the same graphics workload,compared to running the same code in DX9 mode,so it allows better for performance in DX10 mode.


Obviously,this would only matter if there were pure DX10 games with no fallbacks to DX9 at all,and here were are,2 1/2 years since vista's official release,and still no pure DX10 games.

[CaptNKILL]

It goes beyond the raw numbers like fillrate and texturing speed or memory bandwith,since we're not taking into account how efficient the GPU is at actually using the available fillrate/texturing speed and memory bandwith,which does go thru improvements as well.


18 months ago,the GTX280 or the HD4870 were still about 6 months away from being released yet,as they've only been with us for about a year now,so the best at the time were in fact the HD3870 from ATI and the 8800GTX from Nvidia.


By the time the HD4870 or the GTX280 are close to celebrating their 18 month birthday(late this year),we'll have the GT300 and the RV870 on store shelves.





Not quite,since one of the main features in DX10 is what allows the cards to perform better than they could with DX9,no matter how well coded it is....

Overhead management in terms of reducing the number of direct 3D API calls that the CPU's have to process...It basically makes the graphics cards less CPU dependant for the same graphics workload,compared to running the same code in DX9 mode,so it allows better for performance in DX10 mode.


Obviously,this would only matter if there were pure DX10 games with no fallbacks to DX9 at all,and here were are,2 1/2 years since vista's official release,and still no pure DX10 games.
Stormrise was DX10-only... but it wasn't very good, so i guess that doesn't count for much. :p

Anyways, I'm not even sure exactly what this conversation is about anymore. So, I'm just going to stick with what I said before. As long as affordable hardware is available to make the latest games look good and run smoothly, people will be happy. When new hardware is released, it makes better hardware more affordable. More games are made to support that hardware, and the cycle continues.