NVIDIA Roadmap Outline for 1H08

gojirasan said:
Many people seem to be thinking that the reason Nvidia is not releasing any faster performance level cards this year as per their typical 6 month tick tock development cycle that we have all grown so used to is a lack of competition from AMD. Maybe that is true. But there are other possibilities.

A couple of possibilities that I find interesting are:

1. The End of Moore's Law for GPUs.

It is possible that the reason both Nvidia and AMD/ATI are no longer able to stick to such aggressive 6 month tick tock cycles is that they can't. It may simply be that the engineering problems are becoming so difficult that a tick may now take 12 months and a tock may now take 18 months. This stuff aint exactly easy folks. Scientific advances are not actually automatic even if that is how they sometimes seem.

Of course if this is the case then I wonder why they cannot just admit to that and ask us all to be patient instead of releasing slightly tweaked cards with new generation numbers. I find this possibility disturbing but also a bit unlikely since they are already down to 65nm with the 8800 GTS 512 which has been intentionally crippled with it's 256 bit memory bus. They don't really need a new architecture. All they really need is to die shrink the 8800 ultra to 65nm and clock it higher and maybe even make it compatible with Tri-SLI. It would be real progress and would satisfy most of the enthusiast market and they could start selling it at $899 MSRP and drop it to $699 in a few months. Tick.

2. There is no enthusiast market aka money talks, bullshit walks.

Maybe both Nvidia and AMD/ATI have realized that their super expensive high end cards are only of interest to 0.0000000001% of the video card market and that the so called halo effect is of no real importance to the bottom line. If mainstream cards are 99.999% of the market then why even bother with an enthusiast level card at all? It is so much easier and so much less expensive to focus on what reallly matters to the average buyer: price. So perhaps both companies are spending their engineering dollars on figuring out ways to cut costs rather than push graphics/rendering technology forward. We are all so worried about AMD. Maybe we shouldn't be. Maybe it is Nvidia that is playing catch-up with AMD and not vice versa. This kind of dismissive attitude towards the uber-GPU card might also explain today's AMD. To many of us it seems like they are bumblers. Shouldn't we at least entertain the idea that both companies are just giving all of us 'enthusiast' gamers the one finger salute?

There are two kinds of companies in this world. There is the company that wants to accomplish real things in the world, to change the world for its own sake. To move technology forward. To create new and amazing products. Any profits that are made from those products are merely secondary. Certainly very nice, but not what is driving the company. It is just a way to make a living while creating new tech.

And then there are the companies that we are all so familiar with who *only* care about the bottom line. Only care about profits. Maybe when they started out there was a founder who actually had a vision about what he wanted the company to accomplish, but perhaps he is long gone and the company is only kept in motion to keep the paychecks and stock options coming in. Such companies would only innovate when they were forced to by outside circumstances. They only do what is most profitable because they have no vision or passion. They are motivated only by greed and nothing else.

So what kind of companies are Nvidia and AMD/ATI? I think we are finally seeing that now.
Click to expand...



Interesting ideas,but all are very likely wrong.

We will see GPU's with 1+ billion transistors in the no so distant future.The enthusiast video card market is big enough to continue to invest in,and return a healthy profit,year after year,for many years to come.There is no 'dismissive attitude' towards the high end.The high end is only changing somewhat.I think ATI somewhat started this by throwing the 2900XT out on the market for 399.'Moore's Law' for the GPU is far from dead.

I dont think the days of 650+ dollars high end cards are over,but I think the average selling price on the high end will continue to stay lower then it has in the past few years.Ram is cheap,smaller manufacturing node capability will help as well (it already is in a HUGE way,just a look at what a GT costs or a 3870.Its costing Nvidia very little for each G92 GTS,and it will cost a lot less as time goes on,not more.Even as transistor counts continue to skyrocket.Sure they wont continue to jump by huge increments on a 6 month curve,but they are years,and years away from slowing down to a crawl.We were all spoiled by the G80 and its abilites,and now expect Nvidia to just easily trump it,and take another quantum leap ahead.And I do think the 9800GX2 (hate the name,should be 8900GX2 IF ANYTHING...) will have an MSRP of 449$ USD.I think we will see it sell for a hair less then that even,not long after launch.

Slightly ot...: And PC gaming is far,far from dead or dying.
 
While I don't think Moore's Law is dead, and 1 billion + transistor single die GPU's will be out there sooner rather than later, I can see both companies taking a pause from it. First of all, the process must get smaller to 45nm and below to justify those transistor counts for a single die without making it a huge power hog + heater. Next, development cycles will increase in length as GPU's are essentially multi-cored already, a 256 SP GPU is essentially 256 cored... add in the huge transistor counts and multiple uses of the GPU now (for physics processing even), and they get extremely complex. Thus I can see monolithic GPU's taking a lot longer to crank out.

I can see why ATI and Nvidia are both exploring the multi-GPU concepts - having multiple non-homogenous GPU's strung together can make sense both technologically (since they're already inherently very parallel, adding more parallel components can work) as well as financially (yields on tons of smaller less complex chips is greater than very large complex ones). The 3800's really showed that the smaller process + die size means that ATI can be very profitable on them.
 
Manny Calavera said:
II think ATI somewhat started this by throwing the 2900XT out on the market for 399.'Moore's Law' for the GPU is far from dead.
Click to expand...

And they only did that, because they could only compete with the 8800 GTS 640, which was near that price, at the time of the R600 launch.
If the HD 2900 XT could compete with the GTX, you would see a HD 2900 XT costing $500 or more, for sure.
 
I'm interested in the 9800GTX when it comes out. How much performance over the 8800GTX it has will remain to be seen. I'm building a new system this year and usually buy a card and keep it for a while as you can see from my sig. I was going to try SLI this time, but maybe not. I also was hoping a 1GB graphics card would be available in March/April, but it seems I may have to wait for that. All I want to do is play and see UT3 in all its glory! I don't plan on buying Crysis or Bioshock, but possibly Gears of War........after that I'll wait and see what comes out but I usually don't buy more than one or two new games a year.:)
 
I am just hoping that the 9800GTX cuts power consumption enough that I can put two 9800GTXs in SLI this summer without having to buy a 5.25" bay PSU.
 
Silus said:
And they only did that, because they could only compete with the 8800 GTS 640, which was near that price, at the time of the R600 launch.
If the HD 2900 XT could compete with the GTX, you would see a HD 2900 XT costing $500 or more, for sure.
Click to expand...



Agreed.
 
Guys.. this is just the way technology has always gone.

Look back years ago when we finally hit 1ghz on the CPU.. There were tons of people going on about that milestone being the end-all-be-all and the few products that were released shortly there after were mediocre at best… A lot of re-hashes with minimal gains… Just a Lull..

Now look what we have less than a decade after that lull.. Take even a budget Quad Core or Dual Core processor and bench it against an old P3 1ghz.. Almost comical..

The 8 Series was a MAJOR milestone for GPUs.. We are in that Lull right now.. that’s all.. Give it a little time.
 
Well if the 9800GTX is gonna be a G92 based card, which it sounds like. Then really the only thing they can do outside of increasing clock speeds, to differentiate this from the G92 8800GTS is to increase the memory interface and memory size.

So I would guess, where the G92 GTS went back to 8 physical memory chips and a 256bit memory interface, this G92 GTX will still stick with probably 12 physical memory chips and keep that 384 bit memory interface and 768MB of RAM.

Sounds like it would be a great card, if it wasn't for the fact it'll probably have a short life span if Nvidia really does still have a G100 coming out mid or late 2008. Well at least short in comparison to the 8800GTX.
 
Sorry to disappoint you all, but with these specs it would blast GX2 out of space.. And since GTX should be slower, there is no way :p This COULD be G100 we're speaking of, but that won't be 9800GTX than, more like nVidia's own X-series :p
 
E.R said:
This is what i expecting a 9800GTX to be like, not a respined G92-chip, aka 8850-model: http://64.233.179.104/translate_c?h...hardware-aktuell.com/viewnews.php?article=707
Click to expand...

Hopefully those nice specs are what the G100 will be (or whatever the next gen chip name really is). But I think I'm siding with those that think the 9800GTX won't be the next gen card we had been thinking it would be.

And it kinda makes since that if Nvidia really is going to name the dual G92 based card a 9800GX2, then it seems more logical the 9800GTX is gonna just be another G92 refreshed product as well and maybe the they are gonna start a new name series for the G100 (or whatever), maybe something wacky like Geforce 10800GTX, which would be fitting for a G100 chip.
 
Hmm.. If they only Called it a 9600GX2, I think everyone here would be Elated.

People are just pissed that this is the "high bar" for the 9x Series.
 
AMD and Nvidia in dual GPU graphics card war


Printer friendly


Related stories


Comments


Email to a friend


Latest news
Monica Chen, Taipei; Joseph Tsai, DIGITIMES [Monday 7 January 2008]

With AMD to launch its Radeon HD 3870 X2 graphics card featuring dual RV670 GPUs on the 23 of this month, and Nvidia is also planning to launch the GeForce 9800 GX2 on February 14 which will be include two G92 GPUs, it looks as though 2008 will become the year of dual GPU cards, at least for the high-end market.

In the past, GPU makers would normally design for the highest-end GPU first and then reduce chip speeds and functions to create a product range targeting the different market segments. However, with high-end chip design taking longer, while at the same time graphics card product-cycles have got shorter, AMD and Nvidia will both change their strategy, and now use their respective CrossFireX and SLI technologies to help prolong the life of their chips, detailed the sources.

GeForce 9800 GX2 cards will have a total of 256 stream processors and adopt a double PCB design. The two GPUs will share the same PCI Express port by using Nvidia's BR05 chip; a similar design solution to that employed in AMD's Radeon HD 3870 X2. The performance will be 1.3-1.5 times faster than that of a single GeForce 8800 Ultra card, noted the sources.

The GeForce 9800 GX2 will keep SLI support for quad GPU configurations. Pricing will be set at US$449.

However, due to the low market acceptance of dual GPU graphics cards, the makers are currently still conservative over the two upcoming dual GPU products. Most makers will only order in small volumes and will not order any more after they have sold out, according to the sources.
 
he told me there will be 2 9800gtx`s 1 will launch near the shity to be 9800gx2 and the other will launch soon after q2-08. the later one will have 55nm
 
We expect that the GeForce 9800 GTX we’re talking about is planned for the second half 2008. Maybe it will change its name and the “real” GeForce 9800 GTX will come out in march. We’re talking about a new generation – our sources said it will be named GeForce 9800 GTX but we’re not sure.



Regards,

Christian
 
I'm confused.

If the 9800GX2 is basically going to be two g92 8800gts chips and the 9800GTX is the g92 update to the 8800GTX, what is the 9800GT going to be? Is THIS the first G100? There was some talk before about G100 surfacing as a midrange chip first with later high-end parts following in the subsequent months, but I doubt nVidia would name the first G100-bearing product in the same numerical series as the g92 products.

This subject is of interest to me, because I currently use an x1900xt with a 3007wfp (yes, I know I have woefully underpowered graphics), and I am very anxious to upgrade. I'm thinking of going the 8800GT(S) route and then stepping up in March to whatever is available, but I'd hate to spend a lot of money during 1Q 08 only to have R700/G100 come out in the summer or fall and possibly decimate everything currently available.
 
Ohji said:
I'm confused.

If the 9800GX2 is basically going to be two g92 8800gts chips and the 9800GTX is the g92 update to the 8800GTX, what is the 9800GT going to be? Is THIS the first G100? There was some talk before about G100 surfacing as a midrange chip first with later high-end parts following in the subsequent months, but I doubt nVidia would name the first G100-bearing product in the same numerical series as the g92 products.

This subject is of interest to me, because I currently use an x1900xt with a 3007wfp (yes, I know I have woefully underpowered graphics), and I am very anxious to upgrade. I'm thinking of going the 8800GT(S) route and then stepping up in March to whatever is available, but I'd hate to spend a lot of money during 1Q 08 only to have R700/G100 come out in the summer or fall and possibly decimate everything currently available.
Click to expand...

Seems like practically nothing on the 9800GT. But I'd have trouble believing Nvidia would be missing G92 and G100 cards within the same model numbers. It was bad enough when they did this with the G80 and G92 within the 8800 series. But the G92 was just a refresh of the G80. The G100, supposedly being a completely new architecture, this being called a 9800 while Nvidia has G92 chips with the 9800 series, would be infinitely worse.

So Nvidia is probably just going to make some tiny change to the 8800GT and call it a 9800GT is my guess. Or maybe the 9800GT could be a refresh of the G80 GTS using 320 bit memory interface and 640MB of memory and Nvidia is getting rid of the GTS name in the 9800 series?

*shrug*

Seems like Nvidia doesn't feel too threatened by the R700 and are willing to hold back the G100 until after the R700 launches.

And PS... yeah, I'm confused too. Haha. :)
 
brian666 said:
AMD and Nvidia in dual GPU graphics card war


Printer friendly


Related stories


Comments


Email to a friend


Latest news
Monica Chen, Taipei; Joseph Tsai, DIGITIMES [Monday 7 January 2008]

With AMD to launch its Radeon HD 3870 X2 graphics card featuring dual RV670 GPUs on the 23 of this month, and Nvidia is also planning to launch the GeForce 9800 GX2 on February 14 which will be include two G92 GPUs, it looks as though 2008 will become the year of dual GPU cards, at least for the high-end market.

In the past, GPU makers would normally design for the highest-end GPU first and then reduce chip speeds and functions to create a product range targeting the different market segments. However, with high-end chip design taking longer, while at the same time graphics card product-cycles have got shorter, AMD and Nvidia will both change their strategy, and now use their respective CrossFireX and SLI technologies to help prolong the life of their chips, detailed the sources.

GeForce 9800 GX2 cards will have a total of 256 stream processors and adopt a double PCB design. The two GPUs will share the same PCI Express port by using Nvidia's BR05 chip; a similar design solution to that employed in AMD's Radeon HD 3870 X2. The performance will be 1.3-1.5 times faster than that of a single GeForce 8800 Ultra card, noted the sources.

The GeForce 9800 GX2 will keep SLI support for quad GPU configurations. Pricing will be set at US$449.

However, due to the low market acceptance of dual GPU graphics cards, the makers are currently still conservative over the two upcoming dual GPU products. Most makers will only order in small volumes and will not order any more after they have sold out, according to the sources.
Click to expand...

That brings up a GOOD point..

This could be nothing more than a knee-jerk to the 3870x2 using bin-parts that are readily available.

I am VERY interested in th performance of the new AMD Part..
 
TheBluePill said:
That brings up a GOOD point..

This could be nothing more than a knee-jerk to the 3870x2 using bin-parts that are readily available.

I am VERY interested in th performance of the new AMD Part..
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm sure it is.

The 7950GX2 only happened because the 1950XTX was beating the 7900GTX, so Nvidia needed a gimmick to catch up.

Now it's reversed and ATI can't beat the 8800 one on one, so they are resorting to a dual GPU card. And Nvidia is like, "Ah Ha! We know that trick already", so were quick to match it.
 
Ravynmagi said:
Oh, I'm sure it is.

The 7950GX2 only happened because the 1950XTX was beating the 7900GTX, so Nvidia needed a gimmick to catch up.

Now it's reversed and ATI can't beat the 8800 one on one, so they are resorting to a dual GPU card. And Nvidia is like, "Ah Ha! We know that trick already", so were quick to match it.
Click to expand...


Yup, makes sense. It seems like nVidia is using this to keep a leg up on AMD/ATI if the past, like you pointed out, is any indication.
 
With all of this brouhaha has Nvidia set an actual date/card that will support 10.1?
10.1 while not in any games right now, does have some nice additions that games even near completion might be able to tap into right now.
 
Ravynmagi said:
Oh, I'm sure it is.

The 7950GX2 only happened because the 1950XTX was beating the 7900GTX, so Nvidia needed a gimmick to catch up.

Now it's reversed and ATI can't beat the 8800 one on one, so they are resorting to a dual GPU card. And Nvidia is like, "Ah Ha! We know that trick already", so were quick to match it.
Click to expand...

You should get your facts straight. The 7950 GX2 was released BEFORE the X1950 XTX.
 
Let's face it if an 8800GTX gives you 30fps in Crysis maxed, a 9800GTX cannot only give 45fps, if so few will adopt. If the 9800GTX can give you 60fps then they will have everyone jumping! It has to be damn near double the performance.

Time will tell... Good thing is I am basing my next system purchase on the timing of this card and the price drops on the 45nm Quad Cores.

Currently playing Vanguard my Dual Core 3.4ghz is solid at 60%usage across both cores. A bit high for my tastes.
 
Sunin said:
Let's face it if an 8800GTX gives you 30fps in Crysis maxed, a 9800GTX cannot only give 45fps, if so few will adopt. If the 9800GTX can give you 60fps then they will have everyone jumping! It has to be damn near double the performance.

Time will tell... Good thing is I am basing my next system purchase on the timing of this card and the price drops on the 45nm Quad Cores.

Currently playing Vanguard my Dual Core 3.4ghz is solid at 60%usage across both cores. A bit high for my tastes.
Click to expand...

exactly. this card has to be DOUBLE the performance of the current 8800gtx. like you i am waiting on these cards to come out before i build
 
Silus said:
You should get your facts straight. The 7950 GX2 was released BEFORE the X1950 XTX.
Click to expand...

Sorry, must of been the 1900XTX... :rolleyes: I'm older and the memory was the first to go. But Nvidia was struggling a bit with ATI's high end card at the time and needed that dual PCB monster to look better, that much I think I do remember right. :)
 
Sunin said:
Let's face it if an 8800GTX gives you 30fps in Crysis maxed, a 9800GTX cannot only give 45fps, if so few will adopt. If the 9800GTX can give you 60fps then they will have everyone jumping! It has to be damn near double the performance.

Time will tell... Good thing is I am basing my next system purchase on the timing of this card and the price drops on the 45nm Quad Cores.

Currently playing Vanguard my Dual Core 3.4ghz is solid at 60%usage across both cores. A bit high for my tastes.
Click to expand...

I don't know what your 8800GTX is clocked at, but if we're talking about standard clocks, the 9800GX2 is supposed to be 30-50% faster than the 8800 Ultra- thus I believe that translates to another 10-20% over the GTX. It's not 2x the performance, but it is a little closer to it.
 
TerranUp16 said:
I don't know what your 8800GTX is clocked at, but if we're talking about standard clocks, the 9800GX2 is supposed to be 30-50% faster than the 8800 Ultra- thus I believe that translates to another 10-20% over the GTX. It's not 2x the performance, but it is a little closer to it.
Click to expand...

I have not seen anything that said 50% for the GX2, I've only seen 30% faster than an Ultra. Ultra's are what at max 10% higher then a GTX soooo

30fps x 10% = 33fps x 50% 16.5, new fps 49.5fps max Sorry doesn't cut it... the GTX has to be a 60fps in crysis monster or more for people to jump!
 
Some of the non-[H] articles were saying 30-50%- just take a look around the thread and thew 9800GX2 thread and you'll find them.

Besides, 60fps in Crysis isn't really necessary- Crysis is a game that can run relatively well even at the abysmal speeds of 25fps- 40fps would be more than sufficient for a very slick and smooth Crysis experience.
 
I have been reading this forum very closely the past few months and back in October when the 8800GT was first announced everyone was saying the true next high end card would be pushed off to the beginning of the year like Jan/Feb. Well that is almost here now, so where is my next 8800Ultra killer in single card form ??
 
GeForce 8800 Ultra will be replaced by the GeForce 9800 GX2 in February / March timeframe.
The GeForce 8800 GTX will be replaced by the GeForce 9800 GTX in February / March timeframe.



I am confused, the 9800GX2 comes out first and will be the top dog of the bunch until a 9800Ultra in Summer ?? And the 9800GTX comes out later and will be second place like a 8800GTS was to the 8800GTX ??

So will this 9800GX2 work on a IP35 Pro motherboard, and actually work in games like WoW that don't even reconize a second card in SLI. I hope this 9800GX2 will just work out fo the box with no special drivers or anything, just plug her in, and twice the perofrmance 100% in every game, I hope it will operate like a single card to the OS ??
 
Zorachus said:
GeForce 8800 Ultra will be replaced by the GeForce 9800 GX2 in February / March timeframe.
The GeForce 8800 GTX will be replaced by the GeForce 9800 GTX in February / March timeframe.



I am confused, the 9800GX2 comes out first and will be the top dog of the bunch until a 9800Ultra in Summer ?? And the 9800GTX comes out later and will be second place like a 8800GTS was to the 8800GTX ??

So will this 9800GX2 work on a IP35 Pro motherboard, and actually work in games like WoW that don't even reconize a second card in SLI. I hope this 9800GX2 will just work out fo the box with no special drivers or anything, just plug her in, and twice the perofrmance 100% in every game, I hope it will operate like a single card to the OS ??
Click to expand...

yeah u wish. its sli, just a bit more compact.
 
Fuck the 9800GX2... first off Kyle says it will only be 30% faster than the 8800Ultra :rolleyes: so almost one year later and only 1/3rd faster for a Dual GPU next generation card vs a single old GPU the Ultra had, are they fucking joking.

So pay what $599 for a card that will give me 58fps instead of 45fps in gaming 2560x1600rez for example if I had the 8800Ultra already and wanted to upgrade to a 9800GX2, and then I have to worry about SLI drivers working for each game. I would stick with an 8800Ultra if I had one over a 9800GX2 for such an exspensive upgrade for little improvement, what a sad joke this is nVidia.

I was expecting one 9800GTX to be twice the speed of a 8800GTX, but if this 1/3rd sh!t faster is all they can do, then blow me.
 
Zorachus said:
Fuck the 9800GX2... first off Kyle says it will only be 30% faster than the 8800Ultra :rolleyes: so almost one year later and only 1/3rd faster for a Dual GPU next generation card vs a single old GPU the Ultra had, are they fucking joking.

So pay what $599 for a card that will give me 58fps instead of 45fps in gaming 2560x1600rez for example if I had the 8800Ultra already and wanted to upgrade to a 9800GX2, and then I have to worry about SLI drivers working for each game. I would stick with an 8800Ultra if I had one over a 9800GX2 for such an exspensive upgrade for little improvement, what a sad joke this is nVidia.

I was expecting one 9800GTX to be twice the speed of a 8800GTX, but if this 1/3rd sh!t faster is all they can do, then blow me.
Click to expand...

Card is quoted to be 449 MSRP, so I would think we will see $399 for this GX2 realitively soon after release. The 9800GTX has to be a beast for me to jump. I have SLI'd 8800GTX's and I would say I want something near 30k 3dmark06 with a single 9800GTX and a Quad core 45nm.
 
Well I paid $630 for my eVGA 8800Ultra on November 13, 2007, hoping to Step-Up to the next gen sometime within three months. And lmfao, the 9800GX2 is supposed to be out on February 14th (3 months and 1 day after...), but no worries I could still have eVGA step me up even if I wanted to.

But this is what got my attention:

an 8800Ultra is $630
a 9800GX2 will be $449

Something isn't right here. I guess I'll be better off selling my Ultra in summer for the GT200 or whatever the hell the "true" next gen is called these days.
 
TheBluePill said:
That brings up a GOOD point..

This could be nothing more than a knee-jerk to the 3870x2 using bin-parts that are readily available.

I am VERY interested in th performance of the new AMD Part..
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Actually it's not a knee jerk reaction, considering it was well in the works and taped out prior to R680 being revealed as a dual GPU board..
 
Would the 9800GX2 really be a PITA to work in a IP35 Board ? (Intel, P35 chipset based)
 
smaller chip = cheaper and faster to produce. also no new architecture so less money on production.
 
brian666 said:
smaller chip = cheaper and faster to produce. also no new architecture so less money on production.
Click to expand...

QFT. Also, I think the success of the 8800GT has influenced what range of prices nVidia now feels acceptable. I also think they feel they are going to have a hard enough time selling this thing without slapping an 8800GTX-like (or worse, 8800 Ultra) price tag on it. But besides from all of that, they simply can- the 9800GX2 probably did not cost them a great deal in R+D (which is really why you're paying a crapload for the higher-end cards usually) and likely is much cheaper to produce atm than the 8800GTX or 8800 Ultra were at their launches.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top