He pretty much has been for most of the Fermi information within the last six months. Yes, he posts rumors, and yes, you have to take them at face value, but it's still information: not all of it's going be true, but it's substantiated somehow. The only people I've seen upset or going on tirades or temper tantrums about him or the nvidiots who are pissed that Fermi isn't that great. Wonderful, go cry about it by yourself and stop wasting forum space.Looks like charlie was pretty much spot on with the die size ... http://en.expreview.com/2010/03/15/geforce-gtx470480-die-shots-exposed/6863.html
I wonder if any of you actually ever met, or even saw Charlie ...
Look at the S1070. It's a 1U server rack with 4 full GT200 GPUs. And NVidia is planning 2 more models with Fermi GPUs, S2050 and S2070.
More deflection from keys. How unexpected.
And no it wouldn't be intentionally misleading. I specifically referred to "this version", suggesting it had been edited. Nice try though. Completely moving away from your anti-charlie vendetta (which has striking similarities to his anti-NV one)
I wish people would just stop posting Charlie articles. The fanboys could still go to his site and read up, you wouldn't get your panties in a twist because he insulted your "dear leader", and the rest of us would have less posts dripping with fanboy drivel from charlie, yourself, or whoever else
Anyone has a guestimate on how much power fermies ram/mem would take alone
I wonder if any of you actually ever met, or even saw Charlie ...
I'm excited as well. I still have a 4770 (still perfect for my 17" monitor). But how true is this piece of news? Does this mean 11 days just became 20+?I agree that we agree. Wheel spinning, burning rubber, etc. I can't wait for all this to go public. I'm not alone by a longshot. Soon enough. 11 days to go.
Deflection? I'm sorry if you feel that way. Please, ask me anything you wish about Charlie. You know, the subject I'm trying to deflect. I don't even know where you're going with this, but what the hell. Or we can take it to PM's if you wish, they relay it to anyone you wish.
Holy **** someone made sense.Instead of addressing the subject matter of my post (your irrational hatred towards charlie) you laughed it off and changed the subject to suggesting I was intentionally misleading others. That's the deflection I was referring to.
I suppose my question would be, don't you think yourself and others spewing the same anti-charlie rhetoric (which is similar to his anti-NV rhetoric) in -every- SA link thread is getting a little old? You're not helping anyone, you're exacerbating the problem. Maybe if people got less worked up over charlies nonsense people would stop posting links, and the whole world would be a better place.
I don't know, I just don't see you bashing charlie every time he bashes NV as being productive in any way, or any better than what he does
I've heard that he's very pretty. True?I wonder if any of you actually ever met, or even saw Charlie ...
I've heard that he's very pretty. True?
Winning for us definitely means who has the most performance per dollar at the most price levels.
Do you realize, Keys, that you could substitute the word "Charlie" for "Rollo" and swap the letters NV and AMD around and you would get a pretty damned accurate description of Rollo? Where was your hatred of extreme bias back before he got perma-banned? During the years he was allowed to post here, you never once publicly spoke ill of him or admonished him for his own "total lack of respect and a total presence of contempt", yet you obviously feel no reservation about saying so about Charlie.Understand something folks, whether Charlie is right or wrong isn't the problem I have with him, it's the way he comes across. He is 100% biased against NV and 100% pro AMD. If he ever has anything negative to say about AMD, he does it very mildly and throws in a comparison of Nvidia and how many levels of magnitude more evil they are.
He calls Jen Hsun Huang "Dear Leader". What's up with that? I'll tell you. It's a total lack of respect and a total presence of contempt.
I'm not sure what you computed there, but 40$ for running a device with 275W 24/7 (not that it has much to do with reality) means ~201kWh per month, which by middle european energy costs translates into around 38$.
That's one reason why those calculations are completely off. The other is that even if the card was run under full load it wouldn't need 295W or anything near it.Wouldn't all these numbers be dependant on the card running under full load 24/7 ?
Do you realize, Keys, that you could substitute the word "Charlie" for "Rollo" and swap the letters NV and AMD around and you would get a pretty damned accurate description of Rollo? Where was your hatred of extreme bias back before he got perma-banned? During the years he was allowed to post here, you never once publicly spoke ill of him or admonished him for his own "total lack of respect and a total presence of contempt", yet you obviously feel no reservation about saying so about Charlie.
Hey, it's your credibility.Good to see we are on the same page.
I'm curious, where did you get those numbers? I don't think the "savings" argument has ever been the strongest for chip efficiency. I mean, if you technically wanted to take it further, you could throw in the fact that you also pay double in the summer - once to power the card and then again via A/C to cool the room down again. Anyway, chip efficiency tells you of the quality of the part. Any chip that can give great performance with lower power usage shows a superior design. One can always overclock the heck out of an efficient chip to gain more performance, or one can run it cool and quiet. So an efficient design not only grants better performance/watt, but also the ability (generally) to overclock better as well as the flexibility to run a part as you want. I think it's one of the most important features of a chip for an enthusiast to look for.for the lulz:
480
idle: 65w
gaming: 180w
5870
idle: 20w
gaming: 110w
Let's assume
a) the computer is running 35h a week at idle
b) the computer is running 14h a week at peak 3d (gaming)
480
a)109.2kWh per year
b)120.96kWh per year
5870
a)33.6kWh per year
b)73.92kWh per year
*.2$£/kWh
You save staggering 24$£ or whatever per year.
Wattage wouldn't be a big issue if it wasn't for the extra noise/heat that comes with it.
The 480 is rumoured to consume slightly less power than the 295 at idle. Rest is concluded from the xbit review.I'm curious, where did you get those numbers?
Weird, I've seen lots of ppl being worried about that.I don't think anyone was concerned about the power bill itself.