Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Fermi 'slips into January'

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 10:04:29 AM

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16342/1/

Nobody except John_ is really suprised.

Note this will not be ready in January, try April now.

More about : fermi slips january

a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 10:32:23 AM

To me, this isnt the problem. Its actually having DX11 chips out in the market, and having the mids out, which is most important.
nVidia needs to step it up, for all our sakes, just to move progress forwards
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 10:49:32 AM

Fuad is slow off the mark? Never!
a c 271 U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 10:50:36 AM

And he wasn't the only one this time. :lol: 
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 10:57:59 AM

Didnt fit til it was official from nV PR?
November 9, 2009 10:58:55 AM

i think john will have nervous breakdown
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:00:20 AM

Well technically Xbit did get it from NVIDIA. They got it right from Jensen. He has spoken!
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:01:06 AM

You know most Nvidiots don't take it seriously until Fuad agrees. :D 
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:05:12 AM

This is true.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:11:02 AM

Realistically, it could be June before we see fermi, if at all. That's just incredible - that will be 2 years since the 260 and 280 gtx's were launched.

It's not all their fault ofc but with the yield issues at TSMC I cannot see how a chip so large can be viable unless TSMC are footing the bill for the failures.

As for me, I can't get a replacement for my 5850 and there is not ETA on them coming back into stock so this is a real problem for the whole graphics sector tbh.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:12:22 AM

I should add, there are hardly any 4-series and 200-series cards left either. Now is a bad time to be looking for graphics cards. :p 
a c 271 U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:14:50 AM

But not an unforeseen one really, considering TSMC had issues back in April/May with the HD4770.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:15:40 AM

Interesting times ahead. All we need now is VIA.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:15:46 AM

Well we always have the "Jensen goes to see his old buddy at TSMC" theory heheh
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:21:14 AM

So, even when fermi arrives, itll most likely face ATI refrsh parts, narrowing any gap, and ATIs process and drivers and devrel will be in full swing OUCH
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:31:17 AM

Tbh both companies have found themselves in a hole of TSMC's making. AMD are clearly getting it worse - OEM's are trying to build whole 'Windows 7' systems but they are missing one very important ingredient. That isn't just affecting gpu sales, but cpu and chipset too.

TSMC really need to get their act together soon, but how likely is that? As mousemonkey says they've been having issues with their 40nm for months now - is there any reason to believe they will get it sorted at all? If they don't, we will not see Fermi at all, at least not the high end part.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:33:08 AM

I wonder what's so screwed up over at TSMC. All they've said is they're having chamber matching problems.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:36:34 AM

They maybe had to finish what theyd started, finish that, start over, go from there.
Means slow, then nothing, then hopefully fixed, if so
a c 271 U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:38:14 AM

jennyh said:
Tbh both companies have found themselves in a hole of TSMC's making. AMD are clearly getting it worse - OEM's are trying to build whole 'Windows 7' systems but they are missing one very important ingredient. That isn't just affecting gpu sales, but cpu and chipset too.

TSMC really need to get their act together soon, but how likely is that? As mousemonkey says they've been having issues with their 40nm for months now - is there any reason to believe they will get it sorted at all? If they don't, we will not see Fermi at all, at least not the high end part.

Hence why I haven't been getting excited, or frustrated, about this round of new cards.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:42:27 AM

Problem is, by the time Fermi comes out, therell be new releases from both comapies again, thus limiting anu Fermi exclusibity, and lowering it perf ratio
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:47:08 AM

Like my typos? heheh
a c 271 U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:49:15 AM

Reduce the OC on your keyboard. :lol: 
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:49:52 AM

Anyways, a refrsh could mean a 20% boost in perf by then, counting drivers and clocks and tweaks.
nVidia has to step it up, I personally want to see fermis perf, and not only for games.
Im more excited for it for its gpgpu usage
a c 271 U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 11:55:34 AM

It should be able to fold like a mad thing, at least I hope it will, whether I get one of not though depends on price still.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 12:01:05 PM

Once they offer the better folding client, itll be great to see ATIs perf jump, maybe save a few lives down the road.
Im more interested in Fermis other usage in imaging etc. Love that stuff
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 12:04:54 PM

Also, would love to see Fermi take a huge bight in HPC as well.
As we know,m the cpu markets been maligned, so itd be great to see gpus pick up the slack, and no, REAL gpus, extend their life/usefullness
November 9, 2009 12:07:26 PM

jennyh said:
Tbh both companies have found themselves in a hole of TSMC's making.



In a couple of years, TSMC will find itself in a hole of TSMC's making.


Nvidia and ATi are now champing at the bit to get manufacturing done at globalfoundaries... if only to mitigate against the risk of this farce happening again.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 12:16:35 PM

^^ Not so sure about both companies, and may end up a huge mistake for nVidia after seeing this:
"Globalfoundries is an AMD fab, right?" he said. "Globalfoundries is AMD's fab. Our strategy is TSMC."
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10393045-64.html

Its also no wonder why Intels been so chummy with TSMC eh? 2 birds with 1 stone?
Meaning, yes for their SoC, but also giving TSMC a leg up against GF
a c 144 U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 12:47:43 PM

honestly i'm tired already with nvidia delay. be it january, april or june, don't really care about it anymore. :pt1cable: 
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 1:14:49 PM

[msgquoted="Globalfoundries is an AMD fab, right?" he said. "Globalfoundries is AMD's fab. Our strategy is TSMC." ]"Globalfoundries is an AMD fab, right?" he said. "Globalfoundries is AMD's fab. Our strategy is TSMC." [/msgquoted]

or it was an AMD fab. i thought its suppose to operate independently after AMD asexually reproduced giving birth to globalfoundries.

and considering a big chunk of globalF's stock is owned by adu dhabi sheiks, its still plausible as far as neutrality is concerned.



a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 1:21:22 PM

Maybe Jensen needed to say that, to reaffirm the Morris deal, and the shortages? LOL
Im betting thingsll change once GF gets on track, as well as a possible 86 license if available down the road
November 9, 2009 1:53:54 PM

I don't understand the relationship between AMD and global foundaries. If someone could explain it to me. I would appreciate it.

From what I know, AMD sold off their chip making business to some rich arab and that business became Global Foundaries. GF is kind of like TSMC as far as AMD is concerned. They're paid to make chips for AMD.

At the same time, I hear AMD is investing in Global Foundaries, so this would lead me to believe they have an ownership stake.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 1:59:36 PM

They own 34% of GF
They have 50% voting rights, for decisions etc
The "investments" are for R&D and upgrading, which AMD is 34% responsible for, meaning, if AMD puts as much monies into it as they always have, GF actually has 3x as much monies as before for upgrades and R&D
November 9, 2009 2:06:24 PM

It seems that Nvidia has been to busy with refreshes. I would've though that they were refreshing so much to buy them time for a really good GPU but it seems they were just greedy.

Too busy with Intel bashing as well.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 2:10:11 PM

2 yrs from 1 to another may happen, and thats just too long.
Given that much time, it should be 3x 280
November 9, 2009 2:22:13 PM

Everyone seems to be blaming TSMC here a lot. I'm a huge fan of nVidia, I'll be the first to say it, but seriously, nVidia screwed up huge here, a lot of it is their own fault. TSMC was given some brutal expectations by nVidia....

As for when they are coming out. I'm betting March, there's no way it'll be June if nVidia wants to actually save face here. If it IS June, well, they might as well drop the GT300, get out of the market for a year and go balls to the wall on their next card and beat AMD to the punch :p 

Poor, poor nVidia stock holders...
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 2:30:56 PM

Well, even at 3 x a 280, it wont be much faster than a 5870 refresh.
Now, itll come down to costs as well.
I dont like this much.
I was on the R600 wait train, and ended up with a 8800, and I know how it feels.
If the perf isnt there, the difference is, alot of nBidia buyers buy into that halo killer effect, which has been diffused on the ATI side for ATI buyers, and Im not so sure itll play well with nVidia customers if its late and doesnt come out a killer card
November 9, 2009 2:45:55 PM

actually jaydee, don't oversell the 5000s on that 1, you can't talk about a refresh like. I mean look at the 4890 refresh. what lik 10-15 % faster? And the 5870 is anywhere from 15%-50% faster than the 285 GTX depending on the game?

even with another 50 faster refresh on the 5870, and it matches 2 285s. So technically ur 3 280s would still be faster.

Although I know your speaking in estimations and theories, come on your a respected user of the community don't over sell something that can sell on its own.

don't be 1 of those users that compare the 4870 X2 and the 295 GTX and say OMG the 295 is WAY STRONGER or 4870 X2 is WAY WEAKER.

Use sensible words:p 


EDIT:

Off my phone hope it all made sense, and don't take it as a flame or any insult or anything just an opinion.
November 9, 2009 2:55:11 PM

Way

Anyways i don't see a refresh from ATI or Nvidia coming out so soon as that depending on the performance gain either pushes the price of the refresh up or pushes the prices of the other cards down, and considered nvidia has sold no cards and ATI has sold only a small margin, due to shortages, i don't see either company pushing for a quick refresh.

ATI might do it for the release of the w.e we are calling the consumer end chip of fermi now if fermi performance is a bit higher then the 5870, but short of adding more stuff or finding a way to make a 25% performance gain while keeping costs down i don't see ATI doing a refresh soon.
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 2:59:00 PM

@ L1qu1d

I think JDJ is factoring in all aspects here as well, 3 X 280 wold not scale nearly as well as a single 5870. Just a thought...

My personal opinion in regards to Fermi: Simply that Nvidia couldn't produce the beast they thought they were going to. It's like they're still trying to work out the kinks. They planned to get the whole GPGPU thing going, but apparently didn't anticipate the consequences that it cause on the GPU preformance. Just my 2 cents...
November 9, 2009 3:12:49 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
They own 34% of GF
They have 50% voting rights, for decisions etc
The "investments" are for R&D and upgrading, which AMD is 34% responsible for, meaning, if AMD puts as much monies into it as they always have, GF actually has 3x as much monies as before for upgrades and R&D


Thanks for the explanation.

But, on the downside they would only get 1/3rd of the profits and they could theoretically invest in R&D that competitors would benefit from.
November 9, 2009 3:18:20 PM

jonpaul37 said:
@ L1qu1d

I think JDJ is factoring in all aspects here as well, 3 X 280 wold not scale nearly as well as a single 5870. Just a thought...

My personal opinion in regards to Fermi: Simply that Nvidia couldn't produce the beast they thought they were going to. It's like they're still trying to work out the kinks. They planned to get the whole GPGPU thing going, but apparently didn't anticipate the consequences that it cause on the GPU preformance. Just my 2 cents...


He's not literally talking about 3 280s, he's talkinga bout the power of 3 280s so scaling isn't an issue.:p 
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 3:25:53 PM

Why, yes I can.Take the changes for instance.
The usage of the new shaders stands to make driver perf better, as ATI tunes them more.
Who knows what the clocks will end up being?
So far, it shows good scaling with clocks like the 4870 and 4890 did.
Add the 2 together.
Say a conservative 5% increase by then for drivers, add a conservative 10% for clocks with scaling, thats 15%.
That right there puts it around 60% faster than a 280.
Now, we all know that Fermi wont be 3x as fast, and itll most likely be 2x at best, not x2 but 2x, no sli figures here.
Shaders and clocks will limit going much beyond 2x, best case,
So, thats at best 30%, and Im cutting ATI low, and going best for nVidia.
We know thats not very likely, so well most likely see what we had before with the 4890 vs the 285, and being as late as it is, by that time, it wont be enough, not impressive enough, taking so long.
If we turn all these numbers, itll lose a few games to a 5870 refresh, and that doesnt bode well at all for nvidia, again, because it took so long.
The leap we were waiting for has become a small jump if its this late, and thats my point.
If you look at the original 4870 numbers and the original 4890 numbers, youll see a greater than 10% to 15%, just due to drivers.
And again, theres larger changes with this arch than the 4890 change which wasnt much at all, or even coming from the 3 to the 4 series, which ATI said was a bigger change with the 5 series, but not as large as the 1xxx series to the 2xxx series.
This allows for better ending perf thru driver opts.
So, look for 20% here, with refresh, if clocks are 15% or so. And thats still being conservative,
Also, I did say the 280, not the 285. which of course was nvidias refresh, and had those highwer clocks, which we wont see on the first Fermi card.
Im being very realistic here.
Not a good scenario, but doubling 4xxx to 5xxx didnt show 100%, going 2.13 wont show 106.5% either. And most importantly, the clocks will be nowheres near higher , and will most likely be lower in gains than what we saw with 4 to 5 series
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 3:27:57 PM

KidHorn said:
Thanks for the explanation.

But, on the downside they would only get 1/3rd of the profits and they could theoretically invest in R&D that competitors would benefit from.

On the upside tho, is that all the profits just wont go to TSMC, 1/3 will go back to ATI/AND for their cards from here on out
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 3:30:57 PM

I said itll have to be that fast, never said it would be
November 9, 2009 3:35:11 PM

Atleast we can count on Nvidia to bring back the 649$ tag back and a 699$ tag back for the ultras on these 3 billion pocket emptier cards:) 
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 3:42:48 PM

Hey, is it too late to use an old lame nvidia argument?
Fermis a loser, its bus will be smaller than last gen heheh
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 3:53:56 PM

pushed back 'til January '10, oh no, i don't get to see new GPU benchmarks and flame wars with actual hardware uintil then

though really, i do want to see what the G300 arch can do, i won't get one (as i have a 4870 and thats fine for now), though i don't mind having competition in the GPU sector to lower prices
!