nVidia shows NV100/GF100 (Fermi) GPU running Unigine DX11 Benchmark!

[josiahsuarez]

sadly, no performance data :(

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/11/17/nvidia-shows-nv100gf100-gpu-running-unigine-dx11-benchmark.aspx
Just as the swarm of AMD "Hemlock" Radeon HD 5970 reviews hit the Internet, nVidia decided to answer in a subtle way - on the company's Facebook page, "somebody" posted a picture showing the desktop version of NV100 GPU - "GF100" in action.

nVidia NV100-Class GPU is action - is this future GeForce 380?
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e16/josiahsuarez/NVDA_NV100_GF100_DX11_675.jpg
nVidia NV100-Class GPU is action - is this the future GeForce 380?

The card in question looks quite ready for retail, as far as lack of wiring goes, and is running Unigine's DirectX 11 benchmark. The corner showing framerates is naturally, "cut by accident" but nevertheless, nVidia has desktop parts working, and in just a few weeks, members of the media and partners should start to see these cards live.

nVidia NV100-Class GPU - Fermi architecture in ASIC formThe board itself packs an 8-pin plus 6-pin power, meaning the GPU and memory can suck up to 300W, giving a very healthy overclocking headroom. In our discussions with members of nVidia staff, clock expectations and performance are running quite high, and if we compare the thermal characteristics of Tesla 20-Generation, you can see that "GeForce 380" has around 107W for overclocking purposes.

If you are wondering why are we calling the Fermi GPU "NV100", the reason is actually quite simple.

The name for the architecture is Fermi, while the previous architecture [GT200] was called Tesla. But the actual ASIC has several different names, depending on product where it is going to end up. As a generation of silicon, Fermi ASIC carries the name NV100 is the name for GPU itself, GF100 is name for the GeForce part, and we saw GT300GL for Quadro parts and GT300 for Tesla on several Tesla-based documents back in early 2009.

[josiahsuarez]

here is where the photo came from

http://www.facebook.com/NVIDIA
NVIDIA Fun Photo of the Week: GF100 (the first GeForce GPU based on the Fermi architecture) running the Unigine Heaven DX11 benchmark!

[gdphk]

Yes, it is fermi geforce version(nana2)

http://bbs.expreview.com/attachments/month_0911/09111815485a62eae5293b0478.jpg

[LordJuanlo]

I hope it isn't another fake card, with a 5870 under the table running the benchmark. But why they haven't showed performance numbers?. Probably because they are not very good... yet

[josiahsuarez]

8+6 pin power

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e16/josiahsuarez/first_working_gf100jpg_1000percents.jpg

[AMC_Duke]

the Pic is released because Nvidia thinks its enough to show the enthusiasts to not buy the 5970 :-D

[Revs]

^ Yup.

[LydianKnight]

Not much of a real 'stay with us, don't go with the competition' message until the performance numbers speak for themselves, but it's still cool to see the benchmark is actually running, at least, it's more than just speculation.

Now we need some numbers, an A3 silicon, and we're on the go ^^

[josiahsuarez]

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16471/1/
For evaluation purposes, testing, playing and toying, Nvidia has been using A2 silicon in its pre-production Fermi-based Geforce cards. The company has quite a few of them inside its fortress and still has not shipped many samples outside of its offices, as it is afraid of leaks.

We have been informed that the A3 version of the chip should be the final one to ship in retail and that the current situation seems feasible for a January launch. However, this launch is likely to take place after CES.

The performance of A2 silicon is good but for some reason, Nvidia has decided to go for A3 silicon on its retail products. This inevitably caused a delay and forced Nvidia to push the product from November to January, and we hope for Nvidia's sake that this will be the last delay.

Multiple internal sources are claiming that January should be the time that the company might start selling Fermi-based Geforce desktop cards.

[shadow001]

Well,i just bought a pair of HD 5970's for some Quad crossfire insanity,and somehow i doubt i'll be missing on graphics power,even at stock clocks,never mind overclocked:


6400 shaders.
320 texture units.
128 Rops.
500 GB/sec of memory bandwith overall.


:D

[Heinz68]

the Pic is released because Nvidia thinks its enough to show the enthusiasts to not buy the 5970 :-D

Good news but can Crysis be played with the picture.:)

[syndicot]

Well,i just bought a pair of HD 5970's for some Quad crossfire insanity,and somehow i doubt i'll be missing on graphics power,even at stock clocks,never mind overclocked:


6400 shaders.
320 texture units.
128 Rops.
500 GB/sec of memory bandwith overall.


:D

Man all those xbox 360 ports are going to really fly now. :)

[shadow001]

Man all those xbox 360 ports are going to really fly now. :)



No doubt about it,but if you think about it,and read the reviews,both companies are getting to the point where you have to use 30" LCD displays and playing with the absolute highest settings to even slow down the cards enough to make benchmarks meaningfull again,and in this case ATI raised that bar to support up to 3 monitors,since they know they have more than enough performance potential to pull off smooth performance in most games.



And in the end,their card is out first,so what's the point in waiting for Nvidia,when there's so much power to exploit right now for gaming,which is what i'll be doing anyhow....If i was a developer and wanted to use the video card for developing software,i might have still waited for fermi,since Nvidia do have a better sfotware infrestructure already in place to exploit that,but i'm not,so the point in waiting is?

[Woodelf]

Maybe by launch time, ATI will have made enough on this run that they can well undercut NV's lowest possible price point.

[Johnny C]

Don't we all just love good competition...

[syndicot]

No doubt about it,but if you think about it,and read the reviews,both companies are getting to the point where you have to use 30" LCD displays and playing with the absolute highest settings to even slow down the cards enough to make benchmarks meaningfull again,and in this case ATI raised that bar to support up to 3 monitors,since they know they have more than enough performance potential to pull off smooth performance in most games.



And in the end,their card is out first,so what's the point in waiting for Nvidia,when there's so much power to exploit right now for gaming,which is what i'll be doing anyhow....If i was a developer and wanted to use the video card for developing software,i might have still waited for fermi,since Nvidia do have a better sfotware infrestructure already in place to exploit that,but i'm not,so the point in waiting is?

Relax, im just messing with you. :)

[shadow001]

Overall,i just don't know what Fermi is all about in the end,since the focus seems to be more aimed toward as GP-GPU product that can also play games,and not the other way around...That's the impression i get since even now,no gaming performance figures are given,yet there's plenty of information regarding it's GP-GPU abilities,and even prices,even though the Tesla and quadro versions are supposedly being released after the desktop gaming one(Q2/2010 for the tesla/quadro version and Q1/2010 for the Geforce version).



Does that sound strange to anyone they'd release more information on a product being released later than the gaming version,which is what most here are interested in,or is it just me?.

[Woodelf]

Overall,i just don't know what Fermi is all about in the end,since the focus seems to be more aimed toward as GP-GPU product that can also play games,and not the other way around...That's the impression i get since even now,no gaming performance figures are given,yet there's plenty of information regarding it's GP-GPU abilities,and even prices,even though the Tesla and quadro versions are supposedly being released after the desktop gaming one(Q2/2010 for the tesla/quadro version and Q1/2010 for the Geforce version).



Does that sound strange to anyone they'd release more information on a product being released later than the gaming version,which is what most here are interested in,or is it just me?.


I've noticed more scientific aspect supporters here too. They probably see us as a bunch of unsophisticated a$$ clowns looking for a new fix to support our xbox porting addictions.(nana2)

[Woodelf]

I just realized something..
I'm an unsophisticated a$$ clown looking for a new fix to support my xbox porting addiction.

with a nana (nana2)

[candle_86]

quite honestly untill DX11 games come out there isnt a good reason for people with GTX260's or better aka HD4870's to upgrade right now. The HD5770 is 160 bucks and can run 99% of games minus crysis with full aa and af at 1920x1200

[syndicot]

quite honestly untill DX11 games come out there isnt a good reason for people with GTX260's or better aka HD4870's to upgrade right now. The HD5770 is 160 bucks and can run 99% of games minus crysis with full aa and af at 1920x1200

I agree, my overclocked GTX 275 should continue to hold me over till next summer when there will be better prices and more cards to choose from.

[shadow001]

True in most cases,simply because developers have to make their games run on the average configuration smoothly enough to be playable at decent resolutions and in game quality settings,as it directly translates into more copies sold if the game is good


I'm just crazy enough to want that same game running at high resolutions,using 3 monitors with in the game options maxed out and extremely high levels of AA and AF....Basically,i don't even bother look at the game's minimum or even recommended requirements,i know it'll run extremely well for a good long while,as the rendering power is there.

[Yaboze]

There still isn't enough DX10 games, never mind DX11. Look at the hot games this year. Dragon Age, MW2, Batman AA, Left for Dead 2, Borderlands...these are all DX9 games. I think they are all 32 bit as well.

It's almost as if developers initially put out some DX10 patches for some games but newer releases have completely ignored it. We still
live in a DX9 dominated world.

[Muppet]

There still isn't enough DX10 We still
live in a DX9 dominated world.

And probably will do until consoles get updated. :thumbdwn:

[Atomizer]

And probably will do until consoles get updated. :thumbdwn:

And consolers wonder why all the hate.