PDA

View Full Version : What is happening to NVIDIA?


Pages : [1] 2

rclenhardt
12-17-02, 04:39 PM
Is it me, or do others notice that Nvidia seems to be loosing ground? No new drivers. Cards coming out slowly. No big improvement with the GeforceFX over the Radeon 9700 pro. ATI coming out with the R350 already.
It sure seems that Nvidia has fallen asleep at the wheel.........

netviper13
12-17-02, 04:43 PM
They got a little overstretched I think. With the XBox and GeForce4 projects going at the same time, they just didn't have the resources to give 110% to both projects.

But hey, the hard part (the move to .13) is over for them and, hopefully, it should just be smooth sailing after the GFFX.

saturnotaku
12-17-02, 04:45 PM
Xbox, GeForce4, nForce, nForce2 - yeah I'd say NV was stretched a bit thin. But I'm going to reserve judgement as to just how far behind NVIDIA is until I see some numbers showing how well (or not) the GFFX performs.

rclenhardt
12-17-02, 05:02 PM
It sure was nice when they were spending most of their resources on Video cards and drivers. This diversification is a necessary to business but...I guess we were all getting a bit spoiled with the attention:)

Chalnoth
12-17-02, 09:59 PM
Originally posted by netviper13
They got a little overstretched I think. With the XBox and GeForce4 projects going at the same time, they just didn't have the resources to give 110% to both projects.

I don't think it has anything to do with that. TSMC just wasn't ready with the .13 micron process that nVidia was banking on.

SavagePaladin
12-17-02, 10:06 PM
I agree with Chalnoth. The nForce team has nothing to do with the video teams, from what I gather.
Imagine that.
Mebbe the IGP stuff, but given those have always been MX products, I doubt it was all THAT difficult a redesign.

The .13 thing, on the other hand, they assumed it'd be easier. They were wrong.

At any rate, I'm all for a GFFX. I've come to the conclusion that at least 2/3 of the information on the internet is BS. I'm waiting for final benches before I judge anything. Plus the fact that I still trust NV...not ATI.

Chalnoth
12-17-02, 10:16 PM
Oh, and one execution problem will not break nVidia. Something like this was bound to happen sooner or later. ATI has just been lucky that it happened when it did. Currently, though, nVidia is still far too big, and still doing well enough in the marketplace for this mistake not to break the company.

StealthHawk
12-17-02, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by rclenhardt
Is it me, or do others notice that Nvidia seems to be loosing ground? No new drivers. Cards coming out slowly. No big improvement with the GeforceFX over the Radeon 9700 pro. ATI coming out with the R350 already.
It sure seems that Nvidia has fallen asleep at the wheel.........

huh? there were new drivers just last week, or the week before that.

netviper13
12-17-02, 10:30 PM
I think nVidia WAS overstretched, here's why: it wasn't too long ago I read an announcement I believe from nVidia where they said they had more software engineers employed than hardware engineers.

Now that's not to say they don't have enough hardware engineers, but at the point where they were working on two GPUs, and a couple motherboard chipsets/designs, I'd say they were fairly stretched. Sure TSMC had issues with .13, but I'd say that was on par with the other factors.

ATI, on the other hand, didn't invest any resources into the Flipper chip (the ArtX team they acquired had already done that), and were focused solely on creating the next-gen GPU.

rclenhardt
12-18-02, 12:15 AM
Ultimately, I think it will depend on the actual benchmarks and quality of the GeforceFX card. IF, it is not significantly better AND IF the R350 from Radeon beats the GeforceFX, you would have to say that the advantage would lean towards ATI. It seems to me that Nvidia took the risk and developed the .13 technology and made it work but, ATI and others, will benefit by having the bugs already worked out and the .13 now ready to go.
The other concern is the quality of the GeforceFX on the new .13 . If, because it is untested technology, it does prove to have some flaws with actual usage in the average Joes machine, what effect that will have on Nvidia in general.

Bigus Dickus
12-18-02, 12:23 AM
Originally posted by netviper13
ATI, on the other hand, didn't invest any resources into the Flipper chip (the ArtX team they acquired had already done that), and were focused solely on creating the next-gen GPU.

The ArtX team that designed the Flipper also designed the R300 for the most part. They did that after the Flipper was finished. Why couldn't nVidia get the NV30 done after the XBox was done as well?

People keep making excuses. nVidia just ran into problems with the expected process, probably had to switch to the lesser of the two .13u processes, costing time, and perhaps delayed a bit longer becaues of the above plus the need to ramp clockspeeds to outperform the R300.

ATi has released as many products in the same timeframe as nVidia has since the xBox, and they didn't let any schedules slip like that.

No need to make excuses for them, everyone slips up from time to time, sometimes due to bad luck, sometimes due to bad decisions, and often a combination of both. I'm sure ATi has theirs coming as well.

AGP64
12-18-02, 01:15 AM
Originally posted by Chalnoth
I don't think it has anything to do with that. TSMC just wasn't ready with the .13 micron process that nVidia was banking on.

What I do not understand is why has Ati been able to tape our the RV350 on .13 micron with the same partner (even the same production line) :confused:

-=DVS=-
12-18-02, 04:09 AM
Originally posted by AGP64
What I do not understand is why has Ati been able to tape our the RV350 on .13 micron with the same partner (even the same production line) :confused:

Maybe its just a half story and in truth Nvidia had a card ready not long after R300 went retail , but it was to weak to compete and they redesigned it for better competition :rolleyes:

Or they just got lazy and forgot about they 3D card departament :p

SurfMonkey
12-18-02, 05:45 AM
I think ATi have been able to tape out the R350 on the .13u process now because most of the bugs have been ironed out. Doesn't mean that they have a working sample though.

nVidia were just unlucky, but there was always a chance that was going to happen. If you walk the edge then there is always a chance you'll fall off. There have been alot of guesses as to how the FX will perform but until you have one in front of you then guess is all you can do. NV40 still looks to be on schedule (parallel development) for 2003 and will probably be on low-k dialectics.

Having no true high end product and no presence in the low-end 8.1 arena is certainly going to have an adverse affect on nV, they may lose some market share. But at the end of the day, they are still the market leaders with a vast OEM presence and over twice the revenue of ATi. Six months of success for ATi is like a drop of piss in a swimming pool, you know it's there and you don't like it, but you'd never notice the difference.


I just remembered, I asked this question a while ago and it became a war zone (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=291). Sure got alot of hits and replies though :D

StealthHawk
12-18-02, 06:34 AM
Originally posted by AGP64
What I do not understand is why has Ati been able to tape our the RV350 on .13 micron with the same partner (even the same production line) :confused:

well, if you have been keeping up with the news, it seems that TSMC has gone from 30% yields of .13 to 70%.

now you can imagine that back in September it was even lower possibly.

rclenhardt
12-18-02, 11:59 AM
Apparently, there are still problems in the Land of Nvidia. Possibly more delays? According to Digitimes.com:
"The cause for this may still lie within silicon production problems at TSMC using the new 0.13micron process. "

Chalnoth
12-18-02, 01:20 PM
Originally posted by AGP64
What I do not understand is why has Ati been able to tape our the RV350 on .13 micron with the same partner (even the same production line) :confused:

Why does that mean anything? nVidia taped out on the NV30 back in September, I believe. Tape out doesn't mean that they have chips. It means that production of some chips has begun. It doesn't mean that they'll work, nor does it mean that mass production has started.

cvearl
12-18-02, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by rclenhardt
Is it me, or do others notice that Nvidia seems to be loosing ground? No new drivers. Cards coming out slowly. No big improvement with the GeforceFX over the Radeon 9700 pro. ATI coming out with the R350 already.
It sure seems that Nvidia has fallen asleep at the wheel.........

How do you know that there is no big inprovement over the 9700 pro. You have a sample running in your PC right now??? You can't go by leaked schematics and sketchy previews. Well all know the truth good or bad in February. I personally think it will trounce the 9700 pro moreso than the 9700 did the G4Ti4600. And I was not all that impressed when that happened as the G4 was a year old and was really only an enhanced G3 archetecture from a year before that. ATI has really gained no ground in my eyes. But I am an ATI fan and hope they keep comming on strong.

Charles.

Bigus Dickus
12-18-02, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by cvearl
I personally think it will trounce the 9700 pro moreso than the 9700 did the G4Ti4600. And I was not all that impressed when that happened as the G4 was a year old and was really only an enhanced G3 archetecture from a year before that. ATI has really gained no ground in my eyes. But I am an ATI fan and hope they keep comming on strong.

Charles.

WTF are you smoking? The R300 was the biggest single improvement in performance from one generation to the next in the past five years of computer graphics hardware.

And you expect the NV30 to be even more of an improvement than that over the R300? Yes, I too am confident that the 30% figure nVidia themselves released in AA/AF will bloom to 300%+ by the time the NV30 is released. LOL.

Don't be stingy... pass it along. We want some of that stuff too! :)

saturnotaku
12-18-02, 05:36 PM
Jesus, Bigus, for once I agree with you. The 9700 was a huge leap forward compared to the Ti4600, especially in aniso and FSAA. I personally wouldn't go so far as to say the biggest leap in 5 years, but it was a giant step nonetheless.

The GF FX better be superior to the 9700 in every way. Or else a whole lot more folks will jump over to ATI, if for no other reason that the 9700 will/should be cheaper.

netviper13
12-18-02, 05:51 PM
I totally agree that the 9700 is freaking amazing in what it allowed for AA and Aniso, and at a good price too. I think the GFFX will not be THAT revolutionary with its AA and Aniso performance when compared to the 9700 (IE: it won't beat the 9700 by 40%), but it will be able to do much much more dealing with vertex and pixel shaders. Notice how well the GeForce3 and 4 series cards did in the PS tests in 3dMark when compared to the Radeon 8500, I think that's how the GFFX should compare.

I think it should be interesting, because now both companies are so close to each other than they're each going to have to give 110% in each card they release. Who benefits? We do!

cvearl
12-18-02, 07:32 PM
Originally posted by Bigus Dickus
WTF are you smoking? The R300 was the biggest single improvement in performance from one generation to the next in the past five years of computer graphics hardware.

And you expect the NV30 to be even more of an improvement than that over the R300? Yes, I too am confident that the 30% figure nVidia themselves released in AA/AF will bloom to 300%+ by the time the NV30 is released. LOL.

Don't be stingy... pass it along. We want some of that stuff too! :)

Your a moron. Are you saying that the 9700 pro beat the G4Ti4600 by more than say a Geforce 2Ti beat a TNT2 or a G3 vs. a G2? Going from a TNT2 to a G2 to a G3 almost all of my benchmarks jumped by 50-100% in each upgrade ( I have to be honest here though... comparisons were difficult as I went from running and benching in 800x600 to 1024x768 somewhere in there). I have not seen one shred of documentation that a 9700 pro did that. I am glad you like your 9700 pro but get real. If the 9700 pro had done that I would have bought one by now.

Yes... I forgot. When you go to 4XAA 64TAP ANSIO, the Radeon 9700 Pro is 50-100% faster than a G4Ti4600. So I guess if you count that, the 9700 Pro is revolutionary. But in that respect, you cannot fairly pit an 18 month old part (G3/G4 archetecture)against it. For the sake of argument, lets say that the 9700 pro and Geforce FX are of the same Generation. In the same breath we then have to wait until February to compare them. Yes that means that ATI beat them to the market by 4 months (if FX does release by Feb). Well all just have to wait and see. The FX will kill the 9700 pro quite soundly in my opinion.

Respectfully,
Charles.

thcdru2k
12-18-02, 08:24 PM
no bigus is right. first of all the tnt2 to geforce2ti is a jump of two generations. and the geforce 3 was no way a 100% jump over the geforce 2 ultra.

the r9700 on the other hand is an over 100% jump with AA and AF.

Bigus Dickus
12-18-02, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by cvearl
Your a moron.My moron what? :rolleyes:

Are you saying that the 9700 pro beat the G4Ti4600 by more than say a Geforce 2Ti beat a TNT2 or a G3 vs. a G2?Perhaps my definition of "generation" was a bit broad there. More specifically, I mean from any one product release to the next, whether that's a new generation or a refresh, and you can decide if that's from the same company or the competition as well, doesn't matter.

Going from a TNT2 to a G2And what of the GF1?

G2 to a G3And the GF2 Ultra? You're leaving out an entire year's worth of product launches. Maybe we should just say the Rage to Radeon 9700 was a generation jump?

almost all of my benchmarks jumped by 50-100% in each... I have not seen one shred of documentation that a 9700 pro did that.OK, so you can't read reviews then. I'll summarize: in non CPU limited situations, the Radeon 9700 is 50% to 400% faster than any other gaming card on the planet. Don't take my word for it though, go look for yourself.

I am glad you like your 9700 pro but get real.I don't have a 9700 - it's not my "scheduled" time to upgrade (I like to stretch graphics cards to 18 months). Fortunately, I'll get to see how the GFFX stacks up and what price it has before I make any decisions.

Yes... I forgot. When you go to 4XAA 64TAP ANSIO, the Radeon 9700 Pro is 50-100% faster than a G4Ti4600.See above. Your numbers are just a "bit" off.

But in that respect, you cannot fairly pit an 18 month old part (G3/G4 archetecture)against it.The GF4 was barely 7 months old when the 9700 debuted, which makes it all the more impressive. It's not ATi's fault the NV2x core is aging. Remember, it trounces the less than one year older 8500 even worse.

For the sake of argument, lets say that the 9700 pro and Geforce FX are of the same Generation. In the same breath we then have to wait until February to compare them.Yeah, I'm sure you were one of the ones saying that 8500 vs. GF4 comparisons weren't fair either, right? :rolleyes: You compare the best available cards on the market. Right now that's a GF4 and 9700. In a couple of months that will be a GFFX-Ultra and 9700. A couple after that will be a NV30 and R350.

Yes that means that ATI beat them to the market by 4 months (if FX does release by Feb).Five?

The FX will kill the 9700 pro quite soundly in my opinion.I'll take your word for it then. The GFFX-Ultra will be 50% to 400% faster in AA/AF than the 9700 Pro...

SavagePaladin
12-18-02, 11:44 PM
The funny thing is, I don't think current games have anything close to being able to put down a dx9 card (of the 9700 and GFFX calibre) and yet here we are comparing them with them. Why bother? When its all said and done, the next gen games are what will matter...not these.