View Single Post
Old 02-20-10, 11:25 AM   #34
ShiningArcanine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 106
Default Re: Nvidia may be in trouble according to this article

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow001 View Post
Given that Charlie said several months ago that for the november date to be even possible at all,they'd have to get all the features,clocks and yeilds for Fermi working the way they wanted to from the very first revision of the Chip,which is something that pretty much never happends on the first revision of anything,never mind one with 3 billion transistors on a brand new 40nm fabrication process.


Then there was the little fact that when he made that statement in late september,as some of the GP-GPU related features of fermi were officially revealed one week after ATI unveiled the HD5870 cards,they didn't even have the first revision of Fermi back from TSMC yet,so how can one make availability predictions on something they don't even have working silicon of as of late september?.


Remember the hastily made card that Nvidia's CEO was proudly holding and showing to the crowd,stating that it was a fermi based,when it clearly wasn't by the sawed off PCB and wood screws holding the heatsink in place ....Nvidia's CEO lied about that plain and simple too....He's basically a top flight bull****ter of the worst degree to be a willing part of a stunt like that.
I refuse to believe that Cypress is a superior product to Fermi. Fermi is a true general purpose GPU with C++ support and a IEEE754 compliant floating point implementation, which Cypress is not.

I think this situation parallels Betamax versus VHS, where Fermi is Betamax and Cypress is VHS, which is sad. I really wanted to get my hands on a Fermi processor to program it. If this is true and I am lucky, Nvidia will have Fermi II out before I graduate next spring.
ShiningArcanine is offline   Reply With Quote