G92 taped out boys

[alcoholbob]

Originally posted by: Genx87
When was that, like 10 years ago? I remember the V2 running about 300-400 bucks when released in 1998. In 1998 350 bucks is probably worth 500 bucks now.

$350 1998 is closer to $420 today.

 

[chewietobbacca]

Originally posted by: Rusin

Chewietobbacca is correct here. So, whatever G92 turns out to be, no lies were told. If anything at all, the writers of the article assumed too much.

Michael Hara did tell just how powerfull G92 will be and he told that they would first release high end chip. So according to him what ever they launch (G92, G90, Santa Clause) it's high end.
[/quote]

Want to link your source to me?

Cause from this article, dated 5/23/2007 (http://www.beyond3d.com/content/news/230) - bold and italics added for reference

n recent analyst conferences that were publicly webcast on NVIDIA's website, Michael Hara (VP of Investor Relations) has claimed that their next-generation chip, also known as G92 in the rumour mill, will deliver close to one teraflop of performance. In a separate answer to an analyst's question, he also noted that they have no intention from diverging from the cycle they have adopted with the G80, which is to have the high-end part ready at the end of the year and release the lower-end derivatives in the spring.

Michael Hara never says that it's G92, in fact, the writer explicitly states that it is "also known as G92 in the rumour mill."

Also, this article was posted before the 5/24/2007 Inquirer article (who are probably responsible for half the FUD out there on news anyways) which doesn't explicitly state that the G92 = high end, but implies it throughout the article. In other words, they never even quote Michael Hara's web conference saying G92 = next chip = high end, but they imply it throughout. Unfortunately, that same article was the one that numerous other sources picked up, rather than the original one. Why they picked the Inquirer despite the fact that they've had a shoddy reputation? In fact, the Inq recently came out and said that G92 might be mainstream after all, after the fact that HKEPC and Digitimes and other more credible sources all corroborated that.

I think you'll be hard pressed to find any article that doesn't source itself to the Inq or states that Hara explicitly states G92 = high end. The fact is, he never did and nobody but real product managers working with Nvidia and those within nvidia themselves know about it. And any high end card has been VERY tight lipped, because news of the 8700GTS/G92 as a midrange card rumor HAS been floating around from product managers of many companies close to Nvidia.

Also, from this article, dated

 

[Rusin]

If that were correct, which we have no reason to believe, they would have coming some sort of high end chip at Q4/2007 which codename we don't know. Also they would be launching new upper midrange card at same time.

Still with anonymous rumours there's no reason to believe, it's the same which sites uses that kind of sources.

 

[chewietobbacca]

Originally posted by: Rusin
If that were correct, which we have no reason to believe, they would have coming some sort of high end chip at Q4/2007 which codename we don't know. Also they would be launching new upper midrange card at same time.

Still with anonymous rumours there's no reason to believe, it's the same which sites uses that kind of sources.

Yes but they were among the first to break this news and they're definitely more reliable than the Inq and Fud.

Anyways, from what people working in the retail channel have told me (and companies that sell their own re-labeled nvidia cards), the G92 = 8700GTS but there WILL be a high end. What remains to be seen is when Nvidia decides to launch it. A lot is being centered around Crysis right now, as we can see from the new beta drivers w/ support for Crysis coming out the same day the Crysis multiplayer beta is released on Fileplanet. But with no ATI competition, Nvidia isn't as pressured to release a new card. Keep in mind, they feared that ATI's R600 would prove a good competitor to the 8800GTX and that a refresh would be needed within a year to counter any possible refresh to ATI's R600. With no refresh in sight, they can focus more on the mainstream level, where ATI is moving in w/ the 2900Pro, and hold out to tweak and improve the high end.

 

[Rusin]

Originally posted by: chewietobbacca


Yes but they were among the first to break this news and they're definitely more reliable than the Inq and Fud.

Anyways, from what people working in the retail channel have told me (and companies that sell their own re-labeled nvidia cards), the G92 = 8700GTS but there WILL be a high end. What remains to be seen is when Nvidia decides to launch it. A lot is being centered around Crysis right now, as we can see from the new beta drivers w/ support for Crysis coming out the same day the Crysis multiplayer beta is released on Fileplanet. But with no ATI competition, Nvidia isn't as pressured to release a new card. Keep in mind, they feared that ATI's R600 would prove a good competitor to the 8800GTX and that a refresh would be needed within a year to counter any possible refresh to ATI's R600. With no refresh in sight, they can focus more on the mainstream level, where ATI is moving in w/ the 2900Pro, and hold out to tweak and improve the high end.

It's the same who is bringing the news: Anandtech, me, you or Inquirer if they are just anonymous rumours.

All depends on which cards are cheaper to make and what kind of performance difference we are looking at between G80 and that next gen chip (G90/G92). For example 8800GTX/Ultra's aren't that cheap to make so perhaps "next gen high end GTS" could be cheaper to make and little bit faster..and could replace those 88GTX/ultra cards. In that case they wouldn't have reason why not launch new cards.
----

Youngest rumours says that there would be RV635 and RV620 (Possibly HD2650 and HD2500), which will be made with 55nm process, supports displayport, PCI-E2, DX10.1 and SM4).

 

[chewietobbacca]

Well these are actually me talking to actual product managers through friends and family members working in those companies. So we know that at least part of those rumors are indeed true, since this information was before even the Fuds and Inqs and other places starting reporting it. However, Nvidia has always been very tight lipped about their high-end card so as I've said before, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

[Rusin]

And why we should trust you

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Rusin
And why we should trust you

What is this "we" stuff?? You are strictly speaking for yourself here bud.

 

[chiew]

so what're the chances this 8700GTS is going to be faster than a 8800GTS?

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Rusin
And why we should trust you

What is this "we" stuff?? You are strictly speaking for yourself here bud.

Why do you assume he doesn't speak for me?

 

[solofly]

I didn't see anybody post this yet. (I hope it's true, my 8800GTX doesn't feel that fast anymore, latest games bring it down to its knees)

http://www.fudzilla.com/index....=view&id=2939&Itemid=1

 

[solofly]

n recent analyst conferences that were publicly webcast on NVIDIA's website, Michael Hara (VP of Investor Relations) has claimed that their next-generation chip, also known as G92 in the rumour mill, will deliver close to one teraflop of performance. In a separate answer to an analyst's question, he also noted that they have no intention from diverging from the cycle they have adopted with the G80, which is to have the high-end part ready at the end of the year and release the lower-end derivatives in the spring.

I guess it was already known... sorry for a repost.

 

[Rusin]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Just getting a little frustrated that Rusin has misinterpreted that article and swears that Mark from Nvidia said G92 is high end. Word for Word.
And he believes that misinterpretation wholly over VRZones reports. They have 3 news items about this now, you know. So I'm guessing they are
in the loop. I'll just have to accept his opinion in the face of other data, and deal with it.

There's nothing to be misinterpreted. He said what kind of performer that card will be and that excludes this "8700" nonsense. If G92 ain't high end it will be released at spring and high end chip with other code name is to be released at November (It was clearly said that they'll launch high end first and at spring they will launch cheaper cards..also was said that Nvidia doesn't have any reason to break that cycle..and this was said after HD2900XT was released).

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Rusin
And why we should trust you

What is this "we" stuff?? You are strictly speaking for yourself here bud.

Why do you assume he doesn't speak for me?

Oh, I would never do a thing like that Stoney!

Just getting a little frustrated that Rusin has misinterpreted that article and swears that Mark from Nvidia said G92 is high end. Word for Word.
And he believes that misinterpretation wholly over VRZones reports. They have 3 news items about this now, you know. So I'm guessing they are
in the loop. I'll just have to accept his opinion in the face of other data, and deal with it.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Just getting a little frustrated that Rusin has misinterpreted that article and swears that Mark from Nvidia said G92 is high end. Word for Word.
And he believes that misinterpretation wholly over VRZones reports. They have 3 news items about this now, you know. So I'm guessing they are
in the loop. I'll just have to accept his opinion in the face of other data, and deal with it.

There's nothing to be misinterpreted. He said what kind of performer that card will be and that excludes this "8700" nonsense. If G92 ain't high end it will be released at spring and high end chip with other code name is to be released at November (It was clearly said that they'll launch high end first and at spring they will launch cheaper cards..also was said that Nvidia doesn't have any reason to break that cycle..and this was said after HD2900XT was released).

But they really do have a reason to break the cycle. 8600. Not good. Poor performer. Major gap in performance from 8600GTS and 8800GTS. The 8600GTS should have been an "equal" or slightly better than a 7900GTX. But it was hammered to hell with the crippling.

 

[Rusin]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003


What is this "we" stuff?? You are strictly speaking for yourself here bud.

And you are speaking for yourself only. Again: Why we should believe him? Just another anonymous rumours.

 

[Rusin]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003


But they really do have a reason to break the cycle. 8600. Not good. Poor performer. Major gap in performance from 8600GTS and 8800GTS. The 8600GTS should have been an "equal" or slightly better than a 7900GTX. But it was hammered to hell with the crippling.

Nvidia doesn't see it that way. They knew how good GF8600 was and still they clearly said they don't have reason to break their cycle.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Just getting a little frustrated that Rusin has misinterpreted that article and swears that Mark from Nvidia said G92 is high end. Word for Word.
And he believes that misinterpretation wholly over VRZones reports. They have 3 news items about this now, you know. So I'm guessing they are
in the loop. I'll just have to accept his opinion in the face of other data, and deal with it.

There's nothing to be misinterpreted. He said what kind of performer that card will be and that excludes this "8700" nonsense. If G92 ain't high end it will be released at spring and high end chip with other code name is to be released at November (It was clearly said that they'll launch high end first and at spring they will launch cheaper cards..also was said that Nvidia doesn't have any reason to break that cycle..and this was said after HD2900XT was released).

But they really do have a reason to break the cycle. 8600. Not good. Poor performer. Major gap in performance from 8600GTS and 8800GTS. The 8600GTS should have been an "equal" or slightly better than a 7900GTX. But it was hammered to hell with the crippling.

That's Nvidia's greed talking. They want you to fork over $300+ for the 8800.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Just getting a little frustrated that Rusin has misinterpreted that article and swears that Mark from Nvidia said G92 is high end. Word for Word.
And he believes that misinterpretation wholly over VRZones reports. They have 3 news items about this now, you know. So I'm guessing they are
in the loop. I'll just have to accept his opinion in the face of other data, and deal with it.

There's nothing to be misinterpreted. He said what kind of performer that card will be and that excludes this "8700" nonsense. If G92 ain't high end it will be released at spring and high end chip with other code name is to be released at November (It was clearly said that they'll launch high end first and at spring they will launch cheaper cards..also was said that Nvidia doesn't have any reason to break that cycle..and this was said after HD2900XT was released).

But they really do have a reason to break the cycle. 8600. Not good. Poor performer. Major gap in performance from 8600GTS and 8800GTS. The 8600GTS should have been an "equal" or slightly better than a 7900GTX. But it was hammered to hell with the crippling.

That's Nvidia's greed talking. They want you to fork over $300+ for the 8800.

You forget that Nvidia isn't your next door neighbor who lends you their hedgetrimmer on occasion. They are a corporation and exist to make the most money they possibly can, as any corporation does. If Nvidia was your company, you'd want customers to fork over that 300.00 bux just like the best of them. Anyway, Dredd, lets ease up on the evil Nvidia fortress of darkness for a while and just talk tech.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Just getting a little frustrated that Rusin has misinterpreted that article and swears that Mark from Nvidia said G92 is high end. Word for Word.
And he believes that misinterpretation wholly over VRZones reports. They have 3 news items about this now, you know. So I'm guessing they are
in the loop. I'll just have to accept his opinion in the face of other data, and deal with it.

There's nothing to be misinterpreted. He said what kind of performer that card will be and that excludes this "8700" nonsense. If G92 ain't high end it will be released at spring and high end chip with other code name is to be released at November (It was clearly said that they'll launch high end first and at spring they will launch cheaper cards..also was said that Nvidia doesn't have any reason to break that cycle..and this was said after HD2900XT was released).

But they really do have a reason to break the cycle. 8600. Not good. Poor performer. Major gap in performance from 8600GTS and 8800GTS. The 8600GTS should have been an "equal" or slightly better than a 7900GTX. But it was hammered to hell with the crippling.

That's Nvidia's greed talking. They want you to fork over $300+ for the 8800.

You forget that Nvidia isn't your next door neighbor who lends you their hedgetrimmer on occasion. They are a corporation and exist to make the most money they possibly can, as any corporation does. If Nvidia was your company, you'd want customers to fork over that 300.00 bux just like the best of them. Anyway, Dredd, lets ease up on the evil Nvidia fortress of darkness for a while and just talk tech.

I never said that at all. They wanted everyone to pay $300+ to have decent performance in games. They didnt make the 8600 to be a good performer at all for this task.

IMO the 8600 was made as it is just to fill the void for a DX10 compliant part in the lower cost segment and for HTPC. The days of getting good gaming performance for under $300 is gone it would seem.

 

[ronnn]

Ha, more personal attack ads. Nobody called nvidia an evil fortress of darkness. Nvidia (like ati) was willing to put out lacklustre midrange cards that get pawned by last gen. Maybe one day in the distant future dx10 games will make those cards have some value, but am not holding my breath. If the g92 is as advertised - this would make up for that deficit.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

I never said that at all. They wanted everyone to pay $300+ to have decent performance in games. They didnt make the 8600 to be a good performer at all for this task.

IMO the 8600 was made as it is just to fill the void for a DX10 compliant part in the lower cost segment and for HTPC. The days of getting good gaming performance for under $300 is gone it would seem.

If nV/ATi have their way, you're damn right it's gone.

I've said for years now that they both are working against the consumers, that i have no doubt of.

Manufacturing costs don't go up, they go down.

I find it funny when people start defending the rip off prices the GPU companies are charging these days, since it doesn't take a genius to see what the master plan is.

I just hope Intel can come in & smarten things up in the GPU market, since it's getting to be a big $$$ joke these days if you're a consumer.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

I never said that at all. They wanted everyone to pay $300+ to have decent performance in games. They didnt make the 8600 to be a good performer at all for this task.

IMO the 8600 was made as it is just to fill the void for a DX10 compliant part in the lower cost segment and for HTPC. The days of getting good gaming performance for under $300 is gone it would seem.

If nV/ATi have their way, you're damn right it's gone.

I've said for years now that they both are working against the consumers, that i have no doubt of.

Manufacturing costs don't go up, they go down.

I find it funny when people start defending the rip off prices the GPU companies are charging these days, since it doesn't take a genius to see what the master plan is.

I just hope Intel can come in & smarten things up in the GPU market, since it's getting to be a big $$$ joke these days if you're a consumer.

Not to mention as the average consumer's monitor size increases, the need for FASTER, not slower, cards arises. You'd think that a newer card that actually supports DX10 could handle a game like Doom3 at 1600x1200 but it's not happening with the HD2600 and 8600.

 

[supaxi]

Actually, the cost of making the GPU IS increasing. Here is a quote from http://techreport.com/articles.x/11211, "Nvidia estimates the G80 to be a mind-boggling 681 million transistors"

If you read that article, you will see that these new chips are HUGE. When they move from 90 to 60 or 45nm you will see cooler, lower power chips at a lower cost.

 

[speckedhoncho]

but the chip die size has always gone down every time a next-generation chip changed die size; does this mean that adjusted-for-inflation cost of production has down?