Release in January... availability in March. Sounds reasonable?
If this is true, kiss any early release advantages for ATI's Radeon 5xxx series goodbye. The Radeon 5xxx series best hope for a head start was always a very late Fermi launch due to the extremely limited number of GPU cores that TSMC is able to manufacture.
What are you talking about? All the 58XX series ATi made, were sold like hot donuts. ATi already had the head start and there is still December on the way, when we know that GPUs sell like crazy and since competition is still lacking, guess who will sell most of the gpus!?
It would be great if this rumor comes out true, since I like to see price dropping so I can finally afford a DX11 card.
It's not how well they sold, it's how much in this case. ATI could have sold a lot more video cards but is being limited by TSMC's manufacturing issues. Thus the lead is not as great as one would think.
While ATI still has a lead in sales (cause nVidia hasn't sold a single Fermi yet) the fact that nVidia has the more popular name brand and how well nVidia cards have sold means that when Fermi does get released it is going to sell at a fast pace. ATI's early release advantage was always to satisfy the pent up enthusiast demand before Fermi could get released.
This is probably ATI's best hope at regaining some of the market share they lost during the blunders of the previous years. At least their best chance in the foreseeable future. If it evaporates because Fermi is not going to be as late as rumored, then ATI needs to hit a home run on their next architectural update.
We know that the 5xxx series is due for a tweak as is usually the case after a major overhaul or change. The 6xxx series needs to even out the performance playing field and not just from a bang for the buck standpoint. nVidia got caught off guard by the 5xxx series but don't expect them not to be ready to fight back.
Fud was reporting a late November launch before, even when those reports regarding the yield issues cropped up. I wouldn't put much faith in what they say.
When did 'A0' taped out? Maybe you meant A1?He's just reporting a "best case scenario, it will be here no earlier than this date" situation.
When he was reporting it would be here in Nov that was based on the possibility/expectation that A2 silicon stepping would turn out to be production worthy and TSMC's yields would not limit the gross margin prospects of a chip that size.
If A3 stepping works out to be production worthy AND yields improve at TSMC enough to make the economics of selling Fermi become viable THEN we have every reason to expect a January release.
It is the difference between having a justified opinion versus merely having an opinion. I could say "Fermi won't be here till June" but you might be inclined to ask me "based on what?"...it is the basis of my opinion that would determine whether my opinion is a justified one or merely an unjustified one.
Fuad is just airing his justified opinion, which you would expect to change over time to reflect the fact that the facts on the ground are changing over time. Nvidia assumed A2 stepping was good, that is why they went to the expense of taping it out and running it thru the fab. Until Nvidia knew A2 was not ready for production there is no way any one could have or would have known A2 was not production worthy.
The concern I have is with the folks who claim they knew since last summer that Fermi would not be here until Q1 2010...as those are just unjustified opinions masquerading as prognosticators by chance.
Had A0 silicon been production worthy and had TSMC not had yield issues crop back up then the timeline was setup for an October launch of Fermi.
It was clear at the end of August that Q1 was the best case scenario based on A2.
I'm confused. As far as I was aware we don't know the prices or performance or availability volumes of Fermi at this stage, do we?
If we don't then you're rather jumping the gun in nailing shut the coffin on the 5XXX cards based on the latest in a series of rumours surrounding Fermi's launch dates, are you not?
For all we know, Fermi will have a horrible price/performance ratio (and IDC has said some interesting stuff in that regard on here)...
I suspect it was a mixture of both. A2 wasn't clocking high as high as nvidia would like, and even if it had been TSMC couldn't produce it economically, hence it made sense to keep tweaking and produce an A3.
Based on A1 results.And this opinion is based on what exactly?
Based on A1 results.
Bad A1 -> A2 required, so:What about the A1 results precluded shipping product prior to Q1 2010?
Bad A1 -> A2 required, so:
- how long from A1 results to A2 tape out?
- how long from A2 tape out to getting A2 back
- how long from A2 evaluation to product launch?
Yeah and it sounds like they knew ATI would have problems as well.
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16547/1/
I'm confused. As far as I was aware we don't know the prices or performance or availability volumes of Fermi at this stage, do we?
If we don't then you're rather jumping the gun in nailing shut the coffin on the 5XXX cards based on the latest in a series of rumours surrounding Fermi's launch dates, are you not?
For all we know, Fermi will have a horrible price/performance ratio (and IDC has said some interesting stuff in that regard on here)...
Fud was reporting a late November launch before, even when those reports regarding the yield issues cropped up. I wouldn't put much faith in what they say.
Well, it's actually 4 months and try to assign dates to that and you'll see it is not realistic.And your conclusion is that the above sequence of events can't possibly be done in less than 5 months?
At least Charlie's anti-NV/pro-ATI FUD is usually right on the spot.