Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Fermi pictured running DX11!!!!!!!

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
November 18, 2009 11:58:07 PM

No title can have too many exclamation marks.

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16470/1/

Fermi running Unigine Heaven DX11



...or is it? :D 
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 12:00:55 AM

Also notice there is another system above the one pictured. Put on your tinfoil hats people because this thread is going to get messy!
November 19, 2009 12:08:35 AM

2010 Q1.... Two and a half months to go!
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 12:11:49 AM

andy5174 said:
2010 Q1.... Two and a half months to go!

Q1 goes from Jan through till March ;) 
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 12:21:37 AM

Awesome, its about time we get anything at all approaching a real example. Looks pretty badass too.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 12:39:26 AM

Atleast it is black and shiney, and I like shiney...
November 19, 2009 12:55:34 AM

YA I also love the blocked SLI connector as pictured above im sure that helps it's scaling in SLI
November 19, 2009 1:35:51 AM



It's over, Nvidia is finished.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 1:40:08 AM

Um, the board has an onboard power switch...
November 19, 2009 1:40:37 AM

Darn you Randomizer
November 19, 2009 1:42:28 AM

turboflame said:
http://i47.tinypic.com/otkyfr.jpg

It's over, Nvidia is finished.


Once again Nvidia fails with their fakes, man you really think with their skill they could at least make some believable fakes
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 2:11:42 AM

I doubt they would make another blunder as bad as the wood screws. It looks nice, and hopefully it actually is running, but I see little proof from the picture. They should by now have working ones though, otherwise late Q1 will be overly optimistic. At the very least that appears to be a completed fake (unlike ole woodscrews) and perhaps even a working card. Time will tell.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 2:17:53 AM

Man, what a deal, where can I buy that picture?
November 19, 2009 2:19:24 AM

Ahhhh the wood screws those were great... and the PCB that looked like someone hacksawed it in 2 with the half sticker on it lol
November 19, 2009 2:55:18 AM

you do realize it has on power power....

Anyways We can now only wait and see for live video performance of the card (may expecting that in december??????), I definatley wont be buying any dx11 card till nvidia brings their card to the table.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 3:00:09 AM

It would be funny if we are just looking at a screenshot :lol: 
November 19, 2009 3:04:54 AM

randomizer said:
It would be funny if we are just looking at a screenshot :lol: 


what if it was a driver/ gpu-z screenshot :o ?
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 3:22:25 AM

Anyone can hack up one of those. We need a video.
November 19, 2009 3:29:31 AM

my responce asludifghior gbiuadhfiaufd :(  i wish it was black friday because that's the day i camp out at frys and this year i'm going to buy windows 7 on sale or not from there. Always buy full retail else how am i going to call india for tech support.

T_T followed the link for original size and guess what i got
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=2883759&id=840911...
FACEBOOK
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 3:34:42 AM

Yep, Fuddo is now pulling stuff from Facebook. But it is from NVIDIA's own page.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 4:19:21 AM

I hope this is legit...I really want a ATI HD5850 for $200 or ATI HD5870 for $300...
November 19, 2009 6:27:05 AM

So they took out the wood screws, didn't show the hacked up back side...and glued the power plugs on the right side, instead of front/side. Then, I assume they must have glued the DVI-D connectors down too. I need a video or this is another mock-up.
November 19, 2009 7:31:45 AM

The irony is if it is a mockup, maybe they used an ATI card to render the whole Unigine thing!
November 19, 2009 9:05:39 AM

Its fun to mock Nvidia for their fakes, but I doubt this one isnt real. From A1 silicon they had some working cards (few and hand marked, but still), from A2 they should have at the very least couple hundred working cards, some devs say they already playing around with Fermi. Whats the point for the engineer to take a picture of fake card when they have some real ones working on the next desk?
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 9:45:33 AM

Its sad that nVidia has reached the any news is good news era.
If they really cared, theyd have more, at least some specs, something, anything.
This cries of direspect for fans and desperation for product abvailability
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 9:56:30 AM

Well, that's what worries me. If they have working copies of the next great gaming GPU, why don't they show off more than its supersomputing abilities? But still, at this point there is no reason to panic (no good evidence to yet) but I'd be a bit worried if nothing surfaces by new year.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 10:03:58 AM

Something is wrong with Nvidia's 40nm designs, they are all missing targets. If you look at the 210 and 220, they are horribly underpowered. The 240 should have been as good as an 9800 not a 9600.

Now Fermi appears to be down 20% or so on clock speeds (best case), based on those new double precision figures. That is even worse transistor for transistor than Evergreen.

The double precision figure was the whole reason anyone was getting excited about Fermi even though it's got nothing to do with gaming. This series is in serious trouble - at best their top gaming card will be about equal to a 5850 unless something drastic changes.
November 19, 2009 10:04:17 AM

EXT64 said:
Well, that's what worries me. If they have working copies of the next great gaming GPU, why don't they show off more than its supersomputing abilities? But still, at this point there is no reason to panic (no good evidence to yet) but I'd be a bit worried if nothing surfaces by new year.

Come to think about it, why Nvidia havent posted even one benchmark to spoil 5970 launch? I know their drivers are in beta, but they have working silicon for a month+, drivers team should be working overtime to optimize at least for one major title (Crysis, etc), and then publish how kick ass Fermi is, even if its one game. This would certainly create huge attention, like they did with GTX295. They havent done even that, therefore maybe rumors are true that Fermi A2 silicon is barely if at all faster than 5870, what to speak of 5970.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 10:06:26 AM

If Nvidia had a faster card, they'd have posted benchmarks by now. We've been saying the same thing for a couple of months now.

They don't have a faster card, fermi is whacked.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 10:16:53 AM

Firstly, we have no idea how badly G200 scaled, but I guess we do now seeing the low end releases. It could be clocks, but possibly also a scaling issue.
I hope this changes for G300, or nVidia simply wont have a low end this gen.
I agree, we need real something marks, even a bungholio, 1 game, something from them.
To come out like a Phoenix isnt winning anyone on the fence currently until it happens, and alot of people have decided not to wait, and soon, the TSMC debacle will be over, and if they dont have things sorted by then, therell be no fence
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 10:34:09 AM

Ok look at this, going on the wiki numbers which I'm assuming are correct :-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_200_Series#GeForce...

Scroll down a bit to the 55nm gt 240 and you'll see it had a 675mhz core with 1620mhz shaders.

The 40mm version has significantly slower clocks and less shaders on top of that. This is not the OEM version (55nm), it's a slower 40nm version with almost the same amount of transistors. There is no reason whatsoever for Nvidia to deliberatly cripple this card remember - it has no other Nvidia competition and is basically a 9600gt priced at $100.

To me that points to Nvidia's 40nm designs being in serious trouble. It's nothing they cant fix, they just can't fix it fast enough for it to matter.

If Fermi is 20% down on clocks, it's game over.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 10:48:00 AM

Hmm.

I suppose the 240 could have been deliberatly held back in order to make the 75w TDP allowance for no pci-e connector.

That would make sense...almost. If Nvidia wanted that why didn't they just make it the 230, then make the 240 the same card as the old 8800gt?
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 10:50:35 AM

Agreed with the Fermi numbers
But heres another thought.
If everythings EOLd, even ATI, and the ONLY thing live is 40nm, they could be milking the channel, and have good price points to OEMs.
Thats my take on it.
As for Fermi, 20% below target clocks is worse case scenario for them, but again, they do have a A3 coming, and that should change the clocks.
Cant really compare a small chip from last gen to large from the new gen, but the common denominator is 40nm, but according to nVidia and Jensen, their 40nm parts are selling well, which points towards OEMs, as their channe, pricing is simply non competitive, and are taking huge advantage on their name
November 19, 2009 11:19:07 AM

Maybe it's because of the reflection off the shiny case, but it looks like the card is seated at an angle.

Things aren't looking good right now for fermi based video cards. I wouldn't call it a disaster though. NVidia is taking a big gamble with a completely new design and it wouldn't be a huge surprise if they lose money in this first iteration. I think long term, like maybe a generation or two after this, they'll have been proven smart to do what they did.

In video rendering, integers are used. Not floating points. But frequently the integers are calculated from floating point calcs done in the CPU. I think NVidia's plan is to do the floating point math normally done on the CPU in the GPU. In theory, you can get better performance that way, but I would guess it's not a simple thing to implement.

Since Intel and AMD are planning on having a GPU and CPU on a single chip and this theoretically provides advantages that would be difficult to overcome with discrete components, I think NVidia had little choice but to create fermi. AMD and Intel plan on adding a GPU to the CPU, NVidia has added a CPU to their GPU with fermi. This gives them a head start over AMD and Intel. What NVidia needs to focus on is making fermi smaller, cheaper, and less power hungry so it can be used in game systems and portable devices.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 2:10:34 PM

Well, like JDJ said, despite their terrible performance/price, the NVidia 40nm are selling well. That should be good news to them, as it means even if Fermi is a fail, their name still brings in the money. So in the end, since the money comes mostly from people who don't know the difference between a CPU and a GPU, Fermi may not have been as big of a gamble as it seemed at first. Even if it fails spectacularly, it will sell thanks to brand recognition and TWIMTBP. All they have to do is get something out and they'll do fine this gen.
November 19, 2009 2:14:12 PM

jennyh said:
Something is wrong with Nvidia's 40nm designs, they are all missing targets. If you look at the 210 and 220, they are horribly underpowered. The 240 should have been as good as an 9800 not a 9600.

Now Fermi appears to be down 20% or so on clock speeds (best case), based on those new double precision figures. That is even worse transistor for transistor than Evergreen.

The double precision figure was the whole reason anyone was getting excited about Fermi even though it's got nothing to do with gaming. This series is in serious trouble - at best their top gaming card will be about equal to a 5850 unless something drastic changes.


actually after i review their white paper q2 2009 i had got bad feeling that they are mistarget the stock. apparantly fermi was more a processor prototype than just a CPGPU and the counterpart is direct to intel's gulftown and arrandale that have larrabee intergraded. despite such many feature it is terrible which that it does nothing to do with gaming. but it doesn't seem as bad as other people said if nvidia refurbrished their g92(cheaper than g200) with 40nm +multicore solution they may had the chance to hold amd's everngreens until fermi release.

g240/220/210 may be "low" performance to some of modern gpu. however regardless of benchmarking they are still decent card for low power comsumption and value. that is something what amd were doing in the past few years ago when 2900 fail its launch compete to 8800(some source suggest that they were undergo everngreen project as early as 2006-2007). so give fermi some time it will bring us surprise. but before that nv will have to undergo die shrinking/refurb their g92 and push it to its maximum, just like amd did to their r400 before evergreen completed.

a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 2:24:01 PM

I still don't understand why we cannot see a single benchmark. If that is indeed Fermi, the least that user could have done is run an instance of 3dmark 06...... or a video instead of that screenshot :pfff: 
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 2:30:00 PM

Well, my guess would be they are hoping for A3 to clock better and for better drivers, so at this point Fermi probably looks fairly weak and they would not want to post a real benchmark atm. I am a little surprised we have not started to see the first round of good fake benches yet.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 2:33:21 PM

Yea but regardless of the clocks and drivers, someone on this planet should be able to show us something worth watching. Same thing happend when the 5870 was in developement, we at least got to see something.....

I guess I will wait till March, if we still have nothing then it will be time for a nice switch.....
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 2:34:32 PM

But if they believed it was going to give much better clocks then they wouldn't have posted that 520-630 gflops DP.

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=21162

Unless it's really bad and clocks are currently bringing 520 gflops and they are just hoping for 630 glfops out of A3.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 2:36:06 PM

Also, a running dx11 demo was what ATI showed at Computex in June - almost 5 months before the card was released.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 2:40:40 PM

Well, at their current rate that 5 month figure may not be too far off the mark.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 4:08:50 PM

Roumers are pointing to a January avaliability. We'll see.
November 19, 2009 4:29:42 PM

January seems a little optimistic if they still haven't nailed down the A3 silicon unless their yields are a ton better then ATI's it will be a very scarce launch similar to the 5870 and 5850 but probably worse.
a b U Graphics card
November 19, 2009 4:33:55 PM

What we saw back in June was a 57xx based card, and they most likely had them running with 4770s at TSMC. So, it took them 3 months for release. If A3 started awiles back, it still wont be til January late til we see cards, and not til end of dec maybe before we see any real perf leaks IMHO
!