|
|
#133 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 3,111
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#134 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
|
Quote:
I meant an extra 20~30% faster than the current GTX480,by enabling the other 32 shaders and 4 texture units,clock the overall processor nearer to 800Mhz core and use the fastest GDDR 5 memory on the market,clocked at 1200Mhz. Just on the memory bandwith alone,it would go from 171GB/sec on the current GTX480 to about 205GB/sec,it would also get decent increases in raw shader math,more tesselation power,more raw fillrate and texturing speed would see a boost as well. The trick is pulling the above while staying within the same power consumption limits and thermals of the current version,with better yeilds,and that might only be doable once the 40nm process matures some more and the physical layout of the chip is improved further still(IE new masks). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#135 |
|
Registered User of Women
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,523
|
Not sure why everyone thinks they have to wait for 32/28nm to be able to do a 512 core part, a B1 revision on 40nm if done properly could do it with the same or even lower power draw. It's a big die, but that doesn't automatically mean it must run hot.
__________________
ASUS Radeon 5870 | 240GB OCZ Vertex 2 | 1TB WD Green Power | BenQ V2400W 24" LCD Corsair HX-1000w | LG GGW-H20L 6x DL Blu-Ray Burner/HD-DVD Reader | Coolermaster Cosmos S |
|
|
|
|
|
#136 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 3,111
|
Quote:
That would be very impressive if they could pull that one off. I would have thought only another revision would get that sort of performance increase though. That is if they do make a 485 and it is a new revision, rather than just a new model with more shaders and texture units unlocked. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#137 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
|
Quote:
I don't think it's a matter of if they do it and more of a matter of when they do,as ATI will no doubt have refresh parts out in the next couple of months,so it's easy to assume they'll aim to take back the single GPU speed crown from the GTX480,so a revised B1 stepping of fermi is the shortest and fastest way to counter that,and there's is more speed to be extracted from fermi once all 512 shaders are enabled,running at higher core speeds and packing the fastest GDDR 5 ram afterall,but they do need to keep the overall power consumption and heat output the same or lower as the current model with 480 shaders and lower core clocks. The 28nm process is no where near ready for mass production and is more likely something that will be a factor next year,and when using that process,both GPU makers can further increase the transistor budgets another 50% and keep the production costs the same as long as yeilds are good,as well as keeping thermal and power consumption within limits..... That's when i expect the next generation that can double the performance of current cards to really begin,so until that point,it's most likely relatively smaller enhancements to both the current Fermi and Cypress architectures,while still using the 40nm process,at least until the end of the year. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#138 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 3,111
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#139 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Utah
Posts: 2,263
|
Quote:
So basically, if you're waiting for a real NV refresh, you're looking at about a year. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#140 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
|
Quote:
Actually,there's a difference between the processes used for CPU's and the ones used for GPU's,in that the version for CPU production is a high performance variation that is partially responsable for allowing CPU's to hit the clocks they do while keeping the power and thermal issues under control,but it's also one of the reasons why CPU's cost more in retail...Anywhere from 100$ per chip to over a 1000$ for the very highest end versions. The fabrication processes used in GPU's are called "Bulk" variants,so they're not quite as good as the high performance variants for CPU's,but much cheaper and GPU's don't depend too much on the actual clock speeds to hit a certain performance,but mostly on the architecture itself and how it's set up in terms of parallism(more ROP's,more texture units,more shaders,wider busses,etc..),and as we've seen for a while now,clock speeds for GPU cores haven't gone up that much in the past 4~5 years,staying in that 600 to 800 Mhz range for quite a while now. Generally speaking,it's been ATI using higher clocks,but smaller transistor budgets,and Nvidia doing the reverse,with GPU's using a higher transistor budget,but lower clocks in general. The 32nm high performance fabrication processes are very much a go for CPU production even at Global foundries,just that it's not suited for GPU use,which is what both global foundries and TSMC cancelled....The "bulk" variation at those same 32nm sizes,supposedly from lack of interest from customers,so they're shifting to the half node,28nm "Bulk" variation instead. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#141 |
|
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: GREENVILLE,TX
Posts: 3,851
|
I not really disappointed in nvidia ,because I done seen it comeing,because of the lateness and the hush hush on the benchmarks.I knew it would be hot and draw a lot of power and I knew they would need a big heat sink to keep it cool,so I knew it would be loud and because of not so many made the price would be high.I keep hearing $79 more then a HD5870,I don't know where he is getting that from but because of lack of product the GTX 480 will go up in price to around $600 or more just like the HD5970 has went up. .It is a fast card,if you can get pass all the other things,but I am tired of a loud computer.My three BFG GTX 280 OCX was fast but it did get loud when the fans went past 50%.I know the refrence design of the HD5870 can get louder then I wanted ,that why I went with the Gigabytes heatpipe and dual fan solution because it is quite and hardly ever hits 50c when stressing the card,and the fan just went to 23%.But i would'nt call the GTX 480 a flop because it is faster in most all games compared to a HD5870.I would have been consider a nvidia fan,that all I have really owned since the 9800pro.even tho I have bought a few ATI products when building computers for friends and family.The 9500pro ,2900XT,1950XT,HD4850 .I just think ATI has the best part out as of right now price wise,because you can shop around and useally find the HD5850 for $280 and two of them would be $560 and they are fast and overclock great.To me the HD5970 is to high,when two HD5850 will do around the same performance.I just don't look for nvidia to make a lot of the GTX 480 unless they do a respin and get it more effecient.Even the GTX 285 is getting harder to find and price has went up.It is a good time to sell your GTX 280 or GTX 285 ,I sold two of my GTX 280's and only lost $15 from what I paid for them.
__________________
Intel i7-3820+Corsair H-100+ASROCK X79-Extreme4+16gigs G.Skill PC1600DDR3+2-ASUS DirectCU II GTX-670 in SLI+Crucial 256g-SSD+2- Samsung 1-TB+2-WesternDigtial 640g+LG-12x Blu-Ray Burner+1100w CoolerMaster+Antec-P280 case+50" Plasma PM6700+Logitech Mouse+Keyboard+Pioneer VSX-1020+Polk Audio Speakers |
|
|
|
|
|
#142 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
|
Here it is:
http://vr-zone.com/forums/606629/glo...k-process.html Quote:
The high performance 32nm SOI+HKMG process is still a go at global foundries.....It's the process that uses copper interconnects between transistors,hence the need for the SOI part(silicon on insulator),as copper isn't compatible with silicon without using an insulator in between. The bulk 32 nm version,and the same goes for the 28nm version,still uses aluminum interconnects between the transistors which is compatible with silicon and doesn't require an insulator at all,and something that both Intel and AMD stopped using in their CPU's years ago.....Intel uses it's own variation of SOI with copper interconnects,while the SOI version that AMD uses was actually developed by IBM originally. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|