PDA

View Full Version : MSI GeForce FX pictures


T-Spoon
01-10-03, 05:24 AM
Don't know if it was already posted here... If it was you can close this thread.

Here's the first pic of the MSI GeForceFX:

http://www.msi.com.tw/images/e-service/techexpress/tech_column/geforcefx/8904.gif

http://www.msi.com.tw/images/e-service/techexpress/tech_column/geforcefx/layout.gif

http://cweb.msi.com.tw/images/e-service/techexpress/tech_column/geforcefx/memory.jpg

Source: http://www.msi.com.tw/html/e_service/epaper/2003/01/01.htm

Lezmaka
01-10-03, 05:35 AM
Well, looks like MSI has found a way around the need for the vaccum cleaner on the chip. No sign of a two story bracket in the first pic. And its gotta be a pic of the Ultra unless they're gonna have a non ultra version with the 500MHz RAM on it. And the part number corresponds to RAM that is 4Mx32 and assuming there's 8 chips, means its a 128meg version.

http://www.samsungelectronics.com/semiconductors/Graphics_Memory/GDDR-II_SDRAM/128M_bit/K4N26323AE/k4n26323ae.htm

Grechie
01-10-03, 06:06 AM
geforcefx rocks!!

Gator
01-10-03, 08:17 AM
Actually, that picture simply doesnt have any HSF attached so you can see the board. It won't look like that when you buy it. But I gurantee you, some companies will not use the reference design. Just like many R9700 and TI4x00's don't use the standard heatsinks. MSI, Gigabyte, and even my Gainward card arent reference design.

So don't worry, I don't think we'll be doomed to use the huge 2-slot vacume design. ;)

Originally posted by Lezmaka
Well, looks like MSI has found a way around the need for the vaccum cleaner on the chip. No sign of a two story bracket in the first pic. And its gotta be a pic of the Ultra unless they're gonna have a non ultra version with the 500MHz RAM on it. And the part number corresponds to RAM that is 4Mx32 and assuming there's 8 chips, means its a 128meg version.

http://www.samsungelectronics.com/semiconductors/Graphics_Memory/GDDR-II_SDRAM/128M_bit/K4N26323AE/k4n26323ae.htm

zakelwe
01-10-03, 09:35 AM
The interesting bit is :-

> 500MHz Core Clock (Will probably vary depending on model)

greater than 500Mhz then. Does this mean that the lower spec one will be 500 and the Ultra 550 or 600 ?

Regards

Andy

Philibob
01-10-03, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by zakelwe
The interesting bit is :-

> 500MHz Core Clock (Will probably vary depending on model)

greater than 500Mhz then. Does this mean that the lower spec one will be 500 and the Ultra 550 or 600 ?

Regards

Andy I noticed that too, also the memory says >1Ghz Data rate

BladeRunner
01-10-03, 11:24 AM
I think Lezmaka was commenting on the fact the image shows the card to have a retainer plate that covers only one hole rather than the two it would need to for the FX Flow cooling solution.

This however doesn't mean a lot because I've seen plenty of pre-release, coolerless nvidia FX versions that also only have the one hole plate.

I will be making a full water-cooler for the card when I get one, but will attempt to make it a one slot solution, (just for the hell of it really). It does need to be asked however do you really need to use PCI slot 1? if not, why worry about it? if the cooling solution works well, (as intended), then does it really matter if it looks like someone's parked a "Dyson" on the card. :p

volt
01-10-03, 11:31 AM
I especially wouldn't worry if you have nforce 2 motherboard :)

Uttar
01-10-03, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by volt
I especially wouldn't worry if you have nforce 2 motherboard :)

It also fits fine with a nForce 1. I guarantee :D
Only problem is you don't have AGP 8X. Not like that's so important :rolleyes:


Uttar

Gator
01-10-03, 12:37 PM
Well this is true, if you know anything about computer you know it's never a good idea to use the first PCI slot because it not only tries to use the same resources as the AGP card, but it makes cooling more difficult as well. I will say though that for those of us with case windows (and the number is growing) that huge cooling solution is a BIG eyesore.

Originally posted by BladeRunner
...It does need to be asked however do you really need to use PCI slot 1? if not, why worry about it? if the cooling solution works well, (as intended), then does it really matter if it looks like someone's parked a "Dyson" on the card. :p

gokickrocks
01-10-03, 03:38 PM
i noticed in the ram pic, that the board says "VER: 0A"...

wasnt the 0A revision, the first revision that had all the bugs?

BladeRunner
01-10-03, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by Gator
Well this is true, if you know anything about computer you know it's never a good idea to use the first PCI slot because it not only tries to use the same resources as the AGP card, but it makes cooling more difficult as well. I will say though that for those of us with case windows (and the number is growing) that huge cooling solution is a BIG eyesore.

In theory if the manufactures of the PCI cards have followed the specifications for a PCI card design correctly and you use an operating system able to work properly with IRQ sharing (XP) then it should not be an issue.

My point is mainly that most full size ATX motherboards now have at least 5 PCI slots and as there is now so much standard onboard stuff like decent sound and raid etc, I can't see the majority of people really having the need to use PCI slot 1.

The other point you make is correct that for a fan cooled AGP card leaving PCI slot 1 clear is common sense anyway. It has to be said Nvida's FX flow design is really quite a bit less than attractive but if the card makers like Gainward, Asus etc do their job well enough it could be a great feature. Imagine the translucent reference FX Flow cooler in a transparent red tint Perspex, with hidden red LEDs making it glow on a red PCB card for instance. If done tastefully maybe it would make you long for a case window if you didn't already have one.

Part of me however still feels it's poor design implementation to make a product that requires twice the space in the PC it should. Maybe those 3DFX engineers that worked on the still born V5 6000 are getting the last laugh after all :cool:

Nephilim
01-11-03, 04:47 PM
All these complaints about the cooling solution...all I have to say is, wow.

Okay, let me put it this way. Would you run your PIII 500Mhz (if you still had one) with a crappy little video card HSF on it, much less, OC it? No? I didn't think so.

Then why would you want to run a 500Mhz GPU with a crappy little video card HSF on it, and perhaps OC it?

Form follows function people.

gravioli
01-11-03, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by Nephilim
Form follows function people.

Yes, and the leaf blower attachment on the GeforceFX is to keep it from having a meltdown at stock speeds. Do you think Nvidia put this contraption on the GeforceFX to cater to the OC crowd? I don't think so. Nvidia is using the most cost effective solution that will allow the GeforceFX to run at stock speeds. If a "crappy little video card HSF" would have adequately cooled the GeforceFX, Nvidia would have used it.

fastguy94416
01-11-03, 06:55 PM
I would rather have an FX now with a hair dryer than wait 6 more months

Lezmaka
01-11-03, 07:28 PM
Does the design actually help keep the chip cooler than typical heatsink/fans? Does the OTES design that Abit uses actually help people get better overclocking results? Has anyone ever tried the OTES system and a standard heatsink on the same chip to see if it actually helps?

Although GDDR-II runs on 1.8V VDDQ but VDD is still at 2.5V and data rate is at 1GB/s therefore the heat generated from memory chips might be too hot. As such NVIDIA has designed the reference cooler in the way that the memory chips are covered with copper heat spreader not for nice look but GDDR-II really need them to dissipate heat well.

Phyre
01-11-03, 08:33 PM
Looking at the chip, does it seem like there is a square recess there or are my eyes just fooling me? If so, I hope those OTES contraptions are made to conform to the depression. That would suck if they didn't.

Phyre

volt
01-11-03, 08:53 PM
You know, speculating is one thing but fighting over something that you have no idea of is another. Wait until the first sample is reviewed and than we can debate if it actually helps or not, or why is it there in the first place.

Megatron
01-12-03, 12:52 AM
Originally posted by gravioli
Yes, and the leaf blower attachment on the GeforceFX is to keep it from having a meltdown at stock speeds. Do you think Nvidia put this contraption on the GeforceFX to cater to the OC crowd? I don't think so. Nvidia is using the most cost effective solution that will allow the GeforceFX to run at stock speeds. If a "crappy little video card HSF" would have adequately cooled the GeforceFX, Nvidia would have used it.

agree 100% with that post.

Anyone who thinks they put the DustBuster on that card as a gift to Ocers everywhere, is delusional.
Its there because it has to be.

Gator
01-13-03, 05:52 AM
You know you make a good point, I never though about that. The R9700Pro starts only around 325mhz and OCes not much more than 350mhz with stock cooling. Since the GFFX runs at 500mhz, then somewhere between 350 and 500mhz a big fan is simply necessary. That being the case, I guess overclockers are kidding themselves than this huge cooling system will help them. With the speed these cards are reaching, to overclock you might have to do 1 of 2 things:

1) mod with a huge copper heatsink and 80x80 fan like some people do for CPU's (including myself :D ), and some Artic Silver 3

2) water cool

Welcome to the new era of video cards I guess... HEAVY cooling required. bleh :p

Originally posted by Nephilim
All these complaints about the cooling solution...all I have to say is, wow.

Okay, let me put it this way. Would you run your PIII 500Mhz (if you still had one) with a crappy little video card HSF on it, much less, OC it? No? I didn't think so.

Then why would you want to run a 500Mhz GPU with a crappy little video card HSF on it, and perhaps OC it?

Form follows function people.

BladeRunner
01-13-03, 06:24 AM
I think what you are seeing as a recess is in fact a bump the main area is higher than the edge, It is after all a heat spreader like P4.

In theory the FX flow cooler should be good if you can get over it's odd looks. The idea is so the card can run at lower speeds when you are doing basic windows stuff, with a much reduced fan speed so it will be near silent. The card is supposed to manage this it's self but how well it will translate into real life performance, like said we will have to work. If Radeon 9700 is anything to go with the card will run hot, (especially the ram)