We'll never see a consumer die that large. When Nvidia needs to move to TSMC's High NA node (N2P) then that reticle limit drops by half (IIRC). That, and yield requirements will make tiles a must even on high end consumer GPUs.Reticle limit is 858 mm^2 so there's room to grow. We've seen this in the past where NVidia has two generations on the same node. Smaller designs in the first generation mean better yields and room to grow. By the time the second generation goes into production the process should be mature enough to support the bigger dies.
Assuming SM here means streaming multiprocessors, RGT is not the one who broke that news. I heard that rumor almost 2 years ago about blackwell. I don't know much about video cards other than this is a very big deal for Nvidia.According to RedGaminTech Nvidia is 'breaking tradition' with its SM design
A leak and confirmation came out a while back that there won't be any high end cards for RDNA4 that compete with nvidia high end.That doesn't explain why RDNA5 is being compared here because that would in theory come out a year after Blackwell in 2026. I'm equally confused as you.Can someone tell me why this is compared to RDNA5 despite AMD's 2 year cadence?
Leakers Kopite7kimi and AGF are now disputing the 2025 rumor, potentially the slide was fabricated or misunderstood.A leak and confirmation came out a while back that there won't be any high end cards for RDNA4 that compete with nvidia high end.That doesn't explain why RDNA5 is being compared here because that would in theory come out a year after Blackwell in 2026. I'm equally confused as you.
Leakers Kopite7kimi and AGF are now disputing the 2025 rumor, potentially the slide waz fabricatedbor misunderstood.
+78% cache equal to 128MB L2 cache; pretty large area of cache even though N3E process won't scale much. With 512-bit memory controllers, that's mean each controller is connected to 16MB of L2 cache.
Could I interest you in buying a bridge?!The bandwidth improvement will be even bigger than GB202, thus I am expecting upcoming 5070Ti and 5080Ti will have at least +50% performance with much lower price points.
I do wonder if NV is going to use a chiplet/tile architecture to get the % of KGD they need to keep costs under control (even though packaging will be more expensive).That's the part that's sketchy. With no scaling at all, that's a lot of very expensive real estate taken up by the L2. If this is even remotely accurate, it almost means that GB202 is near rectacle size. Again it seems like that's $3k+ Titan territory and not a 5090.
I do wonder if NV is going to use a chiplet/tile architecture to get the % of KGD they need to keep costs under control (even though packaging will be more expensive).
RTX 4090 vs RTX 3090TI
- +50% scale most likely refer to CUDA cores which equal to 24,576 CUDA cores. XDA mentioned 192 SM total which might not be correct number cause nVidia going to change the structure of SM. Nonetheless the increase in CUDA cores align with memory bandwidth improvement.
- +15% frequency increase: not much cause most advancement is on the amount of CUDA cores
- 1.7X improvement: 70% improvement most likely refer to rasterization performance. RTX4090 has average of 45% relative performance improvement. If nVidia manages to pull it through, yeah Blackwell's performance upgrade will be bigger than Ada Lovelace.
Looks to be about 30-40% from architecture and the rest from frequency, if that is accurate.RTX 4090 vs RTX 3090TI
SM: +52% (128SM vs 84SM)
Base frequency: +43%(boost: +35.5%)
Raster performance 4K: +47%
RT performance 4K: +51%
Yet from Blackwell we should expect 70% higher performance from 72.5% more TFLOPs?
Well, we knew that for compute. If not, then the next gen gaming GPUs, at least for x80 and x90 GPUs. Massive dice just aren’t going to be economical, and scaling running out of gas till more vertical xtors with different materials come online - beyond GAA devices. AMD is on the right track, maybe just a bit early given the challenges at hand.Appears they aren't with Blackwell Gaming. It sounds like the compute product uses MCM.
That's the part that's sketchy. With no scaling at all, that's a lot of very expensive real estate taken up by the L2. If this is even remotely accurate, it almost means that GB202 is near rectacle size. Again it seems like that's $3k+ Titan territory and not a 5090.
That's a fair point. Both companies are upping SRAM (on chip and package) to eek out more performance over screaming high amounts DRAM of bandwidth (which has terrible latency by comparison).I mean, at least other than that it sounds like Nvidia and way more real than "512bit".
GDDR7, way too big and too much power just like the 4090 so they have to cut it down just to get in a 450w tdp. So I'll not discount it completely, but I'd think they'd want more bandwidth for the L2 instead of making it bigger, and save the sram for bigger L1 and register.
Yes, but the 5090 may not use all 512b. Could be that 512b is used for an enterprise product. Might be that 5090 is cut down a bit from the MAX SMs and only have a 384b bus. Of course, at mention just above, the upcoming changes in the SMs could change the performance quite a bit and make the comparison unequal.NVIDIA GeForce RTX 50 "GB202" GPU rumored to feature 192 SMs and 512-bit memory bus, according to "kopite7kimi" - VideoCardz.com
GB202 to feature 192 Streaming Multiprocessors The most trusted NVIDIA leaker, Kopite7kimi is ready to talk details on Blackwell flagship gaming GPU. According to Kopite, the GB100 Blackwell data-center GPU is set to utilize 10 TPCs (Texture Processing Clusters) within each of its 8 GPCs...videocardz.com
kopkite7kimi seems to think GB202 only has 192 SMs, or about a third more than AD102. They could increase the number of cores per SM. Still thinks it's 512-bit too.
Is Blackwell named after Alan F. Blackwell? Anyone know?
Yes, but the 5090 may not use all 512b. Could be that 512b is used for an enterprise product. Might be that 5090 is cut down a bit from the MAX SMs and only have a 384b bus. Of course, at mention just above, the upcoming changes in the SMs could change the performance quite a bit and make the comparison unequal.