NV30 - 25 to 50% faster than R9700...

[jbirney]

Some folks seem to be forgetting the business model ATI and nVIDIA are using. Both companies only pay for the FINISHED product. They do not bear any ongoing manufacturing costs themselves, that's borne by the fab. That's the beauty of oursourcing.

Most vendors buy the wafers. Then its up to the fab company to build the parts with in the spec and SLA they have with the vendor. If parts fail at probe then its the vendors lost parts. If the vendor can prove that the parts failed due to a process issues then the fab has to cover the cost. Now of course there always could be other arrangements with the parties invloded but this is how we do it (and we are in the 10 fab production companies). The cost models also shows that the more you get a yeild the less the part cost you to make.

[xamfear]

Put down the crackpipe and step away from the computer...

Originally posted by gemini1313
r400 = 2nd half of 2003.

haha that makes me laugh. it will never get here that fast.

it probably wont make it until Q1 2004 if they try.

remember they still gotta get the r350 out that all the fanatics think is gonna be here next month or something stupid like that.

they gotta make their money on the r300 first and the r350 wont come out until atleast a few months after the nv30, and then the r400 wont come out until atleast 6 months after the r350.

plus the r350 is just gonna be a speed bumped r300 if they get it out sometime soon.

bottomline is the nv30 is gonna smack the r300 , so joy to all the nvidiots that held out for this beast.

oh yeah r400 has to be a beastily brand new design and didn't somebody say it was supposed to be dx10, when in fact dx9 hasn't been officially released. plus they have to migrate to .13u which will be tough for them.

anybody who thinks nvidia doens't know exactly what is happening in the market and in each others labs is crazy. they are the gawds of 3d right now and i dont think they are gonna follow in 3dfx's footsteps except for the gigapixel bandwidth the nv30 is gonna get due to its new memory controllers.

when comdex comes ur gonna see a new fsaa that is hitless if u know what im talking about so just wait another 20 days and **** ur pants then, not now over what ati isn't gonna do in time.

[Kev1]

I honestly don't know what my next video card will be, ATI or Nvidia. I have owned only Nvidia since my Creative Labs TNT card which I really liked (And still have too). Whichever one it is, I will not buy it till after NV30 has been out for some time. My GF3 Ti200 is great and gives me plenty of performance till DOOM 3 is released.

I think you have to give some kudos to ATI though for putting out what is probably one of the best products ever in their line up (R9700) at the right time. It looks like they will be very competitive with Nvidia for the foreseeable future, no matter what die shrink is being used.

Personally, I think thats a good thing and I would like to see even more competition in the high end video card market. If Nvidia had no serious competition, I hate to think what video card prices would be like. I remember the GF2 Ultra was around $500 dollars at the time of its release? Well, somewhere near there I think. Anyway, now high end cards with speed that makes the GF2 Ultra look like "a turtle in mud" are being released that are priced almost $200 dollars less than the GF2 Ultra was :) Add all the new eye candy that comes with the new video cards and I can only come to one conclusion: Competition is a good thing :)

[MikeC]

Originally posted by Bigus Dickus
More likely the analyst was simply alluding to the fact that NVIDIA is seen as sort of faultless by consumers, regardless of the truth, while such a blunder by ATI would have been much more damaging to their image than it has been for NVIDIA.

I think the analyst would be using the tools of his trade, which consist of analyzing publicly available financial reports (income statements, balance sheets, etc.) of ATI in comparison to NVIDIA.

[sancheuz]

I warned all you people who rushed out to get a radeon 9700, i recommended you guys wait for the nv30, which will be better. Now look, a card 50 percent faster then the 9700, at the same price as the 9700 when it came out. I Said so!!!!:)

[Mono]

Originally posted by sancheuz
I warned all you people who rushed out to get a radeon 9700, i recommended you guys wait for the nv30, which will be better. Now look, a card 50 percent faster then the 9700, at the same price as the 9700 when it came out. I Said so!!!!:)

right...
Hey, everone waiting to get NV30, you guys better wait to... R400 is gana come out a few mounths after it and be faster :eek:

[PreservedSwine]

Originally posted by sancheuz
I warned all you people who rushed out to get a radeon 9700, i recommended you guys wait for the nv30, which will be better. Now look, a card 50 percent faster then the 9700, at the same price as the 9700 when it came out. I Said so!!!!:)

You've got to be joking...

You want to wait over 4 months for a maximim possible 25-50% speed increase?

That's simply not worth the wait.

Now if you were talking about the 200%-300% gains the R300 crushed the Ti4600 (in certain situations), then I can see waiting 4-5 months.

But a meager 25%- No way........

Lets see, so my FPS might increase from 40 on the R300 to 50 on the NV30.(25%).... big deal, not worth 4 months of waiting.

Not to mention this guy is just speculating, and you are jumping in w/ "I told you so"?



:o

[Bigus Dickus]

Originally posted by SurfMonkey
If ATi couldn't sustain the material and image costs to develop the .13u process now then they aren't going to have much chance until the process has stabilised and yields are higher. It would seem to explain why they stuck with .15u, they knew they could get good yields and they couldn't afford to chance anything else. So maybe it wasn't a choice because they didn't have one.And what makes you think that ATi couldn't sustain the costs for a process change to .13u? Perhaps they were just a bit wiser, or looked at the pros/cons and decided that the timing wasn't right. I don't see how this was in any way related to their inability to financially make such a move.

And it does seem that ATi rushed the R300 out in order to beat nV to the markMore like the R300 is on time, and the NV30 is just plain late. No fault of ATi's there.

If the NV30 had appeared in the marketplace first then ATi probably would have been finished as a high end gfx maufacturer and would have been relegated to OEM and low end markets.Really? The GF2 came out before the Radeon, and it didn't finish them as a high end gfx manufacturer. The GF3 came out long before the 8500, and that didn't finish them either. In fact, despite all the driver complaints and somewhat underwhelming hardware, they actually gained a bit of recognition for that product. IMO, if the NV30 had actually came out first, and the 9700 followed as was the solid product with high performance and good drivers that we see today, it would still have been a huge success for ATi, especially if the delay between the NV30 and R300 wasn't that long (nowhere near as long as between GF3 and 8500). The fact that the R300 showed up several months earlier than the NV30 simply makes it a home run. Hell... a grand slam now that their whole lineup is one DX generation more advanced than nVidia's.

I think they were very lucky the NV30 was delayed, it's given them a second chance.I don't think it gave them a second chance, I think it put them firmly in the lead. ATi isn't lucky, they took care of their business by launching a great product on time. NV is simply unlucky.

Also if the NV30 is a deferred renderer or some form of hybrid, as looks more and more likely... Looking more and more likely? Really? I haven't seen any rumors anywhere that suggest it will be a deferred renderer... not even at the INQ. The only thing I have seen is speculation at B3D, which you seem to be a large part of sustaining, somewhat made credible by the discovery that the P9 is a sort of deferred renderer. Just because you are becoming more and more convinced of it doesn't mean it is becoming more and more likely.

[MikeC]

Originally posted by PreservedSwine
Lets see, so my FPS might increase from 40 on the R300 to 52 on the NV30.(25%)

This is a page I find helpful in computing percent change:

http://www.newsengin.com/neFreeTools.nsf/PercentChange/formPercentChange

[Kev1]

But I upgrade my video card when they can't play games as well as I'd like.

Until DOOM3 and Unreal2 come out, my GF3 Ti200 (OC beyond Ti500 speeds) plays everything great, including UT2003 with all settings maxed (111fps flyby, 49fps bot match). I know, not as fast as GF4 Ti or Radeon 9700, but still pretty good.

I am sure I will need an upgrade though when D3 and U2 come out, as I like playing at 1024 x 768, 32 bit color, all settings maxed :eek:

[MikeC]

Originally posted by Bigus Dickus
And what makes you think that ATi couldn't sustain the costs for a process change to .13u? Perhaps they were just a bit wiser, or looked at the pros/cons and decided that the timing wasn't right. I don't see how this was in any way related to their inability to financially make such a move.

Agreed. When a company is struggling to make a positive net income, the decision making process takes on more importance. It's unfortunate that the Radeon 9700 (and NV30) are being released when demand in the PC industry is low.

Some of us already know that these high-end products aren't going to add significant value to each company's bottom line. It's always been a contest for bragging rights, which fansite forum members love to discuss:)

[PreservedSwine]

Originally posted by MikeC
This is a page I find helpful in computing percent change:

http://www.newsengin.com/neFreeTools.nsf/PercentChange/formPercentChange
:D

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by Lezmaka
DISCLAIMER: The following paragraph is just something I remember, or a hallucination of something that I just think I remember, and either way, it may not have been true in the first place.

The release of DX9 and NV30 were supposedly aligned at one point. NV30 was supposed to be launched when DX9 was released. If DX9 was delayed, NV30 was gonna be delayed. But if NV30 was delayed, and DX9 wasn't, DX9 would still get released anyway.

-- End of Hallucination --

wasn't it the other way around? ie, the schedule has been November for awhile for NV30 and DX9, but if DX9 was delayed it should have no effect on NV30's launch?

anyway, it looks like DX9 will be delayed :p

[gemini1313]

i think alot of people are waiting for the nv30 cause they have respect for their company and products and know that its gonna be better.

im getting it cause i know it has more features and rendering power not the 20% increase in fps.

the fps have been fast enough for the last year on the 4600 and now the 9700 has put the fps high enough.

its about quality now and rest assured the nv30 is gonna be more efficient and powerful when it comes to pixel rendering. ima take a leap here and say the 9700 really isn't anything new except for adding a dx9 pipeline and ripping off lma3's memory controller and giving it a 256bit bus. the card was never impressive except for its quake 3 speed and high rez speed due to memory.

plus u haven't even seen it run anything worthwile yet, hell ut2k3 is still dx7 in my book and when the good stuff gets here u better bet the nv30 is gonna be faster and more effective.

nvidia for life.
men buy xbox's and boys play with gamecubes.

[Mono]

Originally posted by gemini1313

men buy xbox's and boys play with gamecubes.

No, men usually don't by either except for thier whinney kids. :p

[thcdru2k]

you forgot to mention its ability to run games at 1600x1200 with 8x af and aa gemini :)

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by thcdru2k
you forgot to mention its ability to run games at 1600x1200 with 8x af and aa gemini :)

if more people had 20+ inch monitors that would probably be more of a compulsive reason to upgrade :p

[tazdevl]

Originally posted by jbirney
Most vendors buy the wafers. Then its up to the fab company to build the parts with in the spec and SLA they have with the vendor. If parts fail at probe then its the vendors lost parts. If the vendor can prove that the parts failed due to a process issues then the fab has to cover the cost. Now of course there always could be other arrangements with the parties invloded but this is how we do it (and we are in the 10 fab production companies). The cost models also shows that the more you get a yeild the less the part cost you to make.

First part.... yup. I was generalizing and a lot of it falls on the agreement you make with the fab. When you're a top tier computer manuf, you're able to leverage things a bit more.

At my previous employer, we ended up setting up everything with the fab. They were able to get a better price on the wafers than us buying them direct from a supplier.

Your last point is simply economies of scale... which makes sense if you're supplying your own wafers.

[monkeydust]

Heh, I've got an XBox and a Gamecube and I find myself using my Gamecube alot more. I'm addicted to a game called Animal Crossing. Crappy graphics but the gameplay is extremely addictive.

[jbirney]

Originally posted by MikeC
Some of us already know that these high-end products aren't going to add significant value to each company's bottom line. It's always been a contest for bragging rights, which fansite forum members love to discuss:)


Actually this really helps to win OEM sales as some OEMs like to identify with the market leader. I know its not a directly adds to the bottom line but it does help to sway a few...