Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > Benchmarking And Overclocking

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-09-03, 04:19 PM   #37
ChrisW
"I was wrong", said Chris
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: standing in the corner!
Posts: 620
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Uttar
Two things:

1. Even if the NV35 is not on time, it'll still be slightly before the R400
2. The 256-bit memory interface is one the most reliable piece of information we got on the NV35, another one which we can also be sure of is it's with Low K. The NV35 *will* be on a 256-bit memory interface: it's a fact

BTW, the less certain piece of information I said about the NV35 is the 625Mhz core. It could be easily less ( even significantly less, who knows... ) , but not more.

Uttar
How are they going to add a 256bit bus to the NV35 without redesigning the entire chip? I'm not saying it can't happen but it would be highly unlikely.

My guess would be a NV30 chip with low-k tech clocked at 650/600. 256bit bus...not without a total new chip.
ChrisW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-03, 08:36 PM   #38
lagadu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Portugal
Posts: 120
Default

remember that the FX having a 256bit bus and a 8x2 scheme was also a fact...

but i agree that it'll have a 256bit bus, but maybe using DDRI @ maybe 400 or 500...
__________________
i promise i'll put something here someday
lagadu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-03, 09:19 PM   #39
Chalnoth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,293
Default

I seriously doubt the NV35 will sport a 256-bit bus.
__________________
"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - Richard P. Feynman
Chalnoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-03, 09:49 PM   #40
mavis
Radeon X800 Pro
 
mavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Uttar
Two things:

1. Even if the NV35 is not on time, it'll still be slightly before the R400
Funny, I remember people were SWEARING the NV30 would be "in stores" by the end of November.

lol
__________________
my rig
mavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-03, 10:05 PM   #41
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by mavis
Funny, I remember people were SWEARING the NV30 would be "in stores" by the end of November.

lol
omg... you spammer... you logged in here as well

lol...

btw back on topic... I think it will be interesting to see if nvidia WILL have a a 256bit bus... there are limitations because of the specs on ddr2 memory (it is 128 @ the mo)

however... who knows.... samsung may have something coming out in a month or two with a 256bit bus...
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-03, 10:26 PM   #42
Kruno
TypeDef's assistant
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,641
Send a message via ICQ to Kruno Send a message via AIM to Kruno
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Sazar
omg... you spammer... you logged in here as well

lol...

btw back on topic... I think it will be interesting to see if nvidia WILL have a a 256bit bus... there are limitations because of the specs on ddr2 memory (it is 128 @ the mo)

however... who knows.... samsung may have something coming out in a month or two with a 256bit bus...
Either that or 3dmark 2003 (not 2k3 as 2k3 is 2300) will.
__________________
"Never before has any voice dared to utter the words of that tongue in Imladris, Mr. Anderson" - Elrond LOTR
Kruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-03, 07:22 AM   #43
jbirney
Registered User
 
jbirney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,430
Default

Dont forgot at 256 bit bus clocked at 500+ Mhz is going to be a nightmare to route on a PCB. If the FX ultra requires a 12 layer board (even thought 10 is what they thought they could get)... then I am wondering what the complexity of a 256 bit bus clocked over 500+ mhz will be llike
jbirney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-03, 03:33 AM   #44
MikeC
Administrator
 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Virginia
Posts: 5,364
Default Re: 3dmark2k3 damage control for GFFX

Quote:
Originally posted by creedamd
Who wants to bet that the GFFX will kick the 9700 in the new 3dmark! This will be unbelievable if it does! Discuss!!!
I would be surprised if we see 3DMark03 benchmark results from a GeForce FX being published today. In fact, some will be questioning 3DMark03 as being representative of "The Gamers Benchmark."
MikeC is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 02-11-03, 04:40 AM   #45
ChrisW
"I was wrong", said Chris
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: standing in the corner!
Posts: 620
Default Re: Re: 3dmark2k3 damage control for GFFX

Quote:
Originally posted by MikeC
I would be surprised if we see 3DMark03 benchmark results from a GeForce FX being published today. In fact, some will be questioning 3DMark03 as being representative of "The Gamers Benchmark."
LOL! I bet everybody that works at nVidia already has cards cooled with liquid nitrogen ready to push the submit button. Imagine how many cards they will sell after people read those astronomical scores! Nevermind the fact it should obviously be nVidia employees doing it as there are no GFFX cards shipped to customers.
ChrisW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-03, 05:06 AM   #46
Chalnoth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,293
Default

Um, sure ChrisW, whatever.

Anyway, there are really only two good things about 3DMark:

1. Online Result Browser.
2. The synthetic tests.

I think that if 3DMark could get some agreements with various game developers to have snippets of their game engines in 3DMark for benchmarking purposes, then it would be an excellent tool. But as it stands, no. It's fun to compare other systems against your own, but 3DMark has always just been a crappy judge of performance in real-world gaming situations.
__________________
"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - Richard P. Feynman
Chalnoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-03, 07:33 AM   #47
jbirney
Registered User
 
jbirney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,430
Default

I whole heartly agree with Chalnoth on that. I would also like to add 3dmark is/was good at ensuring your system is up to specs. You can take a look at other scores and if you find that other scores are much higher given the same hardware that you have then you know you have a issue. Its always been good for tweaking your system.
jbirney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-03, 08:38 AM   #48
Nemesis77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 114
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Chalnoth I think that if 3DMark could get some agreements with various game developers to have snippets of their game engines in 3DMark for benchmarking purposes, then it would be an excellent tool.
You are late, they already did that. 3DMark2002 used MAX-FX, the Max Payne engine. I have no knowledge what 3DMark2003 uses though.
Nemesis77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What You Can Expect From GeForce GRID News Archived News Items 0 06-04-12 04:20 PM
Nvidia GeForce 301.42 WHQL drivers DSC NVIDIA Windows Graphics Drivers 5 05-29-12 10:12 PM
Enhance Max Payne 3, Diablo III with GeForce R300 Drivers News Archived News Items 0 05-22-12 06:30 PM
New GPU from Nvidia Announced Today, the GeForce GTX 670 News Archived News Items 0 05-10-12 01:50 PM
Gainward Unleashes the Sexy GeForce GTX 670 Phantom Graphics Card, Also launches the News Archived News Items 0 05-10-12 09:28 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.