Graphics Performance List - Page 14 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 11-19-2009, 07:07 PM   #131 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
S0ULphIRE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,668
Send a message via MSN to S0ULphIRE
Default Re: Graphics Performance List

I look at it this way. AMD/ATI releases the 5000 series to compete against nVidia's 300 series and vice versa.
Now the 5000's are out (barring a few more possible x2 cards or so I hear?) and so far they've only managed to put out ONE card that beats nVidia's previous gfx set.

Now I don't think nVidia's been working all this time to release something that's only 'just as good' as their previous cards. When the 300 series is finally released, my prediction is that the majority of the cards will blow the 5000's out of the water in terms of processing power.
__________________

__________________
"As a result of all this hardship, dirt, thirst, and wombats, you would expect Australians to be a sour lot. Instead, they are genial, jolly, cheerful, and always willing to share a kind word with a stranger, unless they are an American." -- Douglas Adams
S0ULphIRE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2009, 07:11 PM   #132 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
veg1992's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 19,993
Default Re: Graphics Performance List

Quote:
Originally Posted by S0ULphIRE View Post
I look at it this way. AMD/ATI releases the 5000 series to compete against nVidia's 300 series and vice versa.
Now the 5000's are out (barring a few more possible x2 cards or so I hear?) and so far they've only managed to put out ONE card that beats nVidia's previous gfx set.

Now I don't think nVidia's been working all this time to release something that's only 'just as good' as their previous cards. When the 300 series is finally released, my prediction is that the majority of the cards will blow the 5000's out of the water in terms of processing power.
Agreed!

What I'm waiting for is to see the prices, I'm not expecting good prices though.
__________________

__________________
I do not accept help requests and/or deleted threads/complaints by PM, Profile or IM/Email. Just ask on the forums! Also, I do have Lockerz invites if you want them, feel free to PM me your email if you want one :0

If I help you, or you just like what I said, rep me by clicking the
or under my avatar; it helps me know that my advice actually helped you.


.. But things don't go according to plan! My Actual Rig, 2009:
veg1992 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2009, 10:46 PM   #133 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: WI, USA
Posts: 1,556
Send a message via MSN to yzmxer608
Default Re: Graphics Performance List

I like Nvidia (all of my gpu's have been Nvidia, first was the mx 400 ) but their prices are just too high compared to ATI imo.
__________________
yzmxer608 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2009, 11:54 PM   #134 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default Re: Graphics Performance List

I read that Nvidia are having difficulty reaching their clock targets with G300 (now called GF100)
__________________
Apokalipse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2009, 10:59 AM   #135 (permalink)
Mod Emeritus
 
Puddle Jumper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,286
Default Re: Graphics Performance List

Quote:
Originally Posted by S0ULphIRE View Post
Now I don't think nVidia's been working all this time to release something that's only 'just as good' as their previous cards. When the 300 series is finally released, my prediction is that the majority of the cards will blow the 5000's out of the water in terms of processing power.
The GF100 based Tesla cards are supposed to have double precision floating point performance in the 520-630 GFlops range which is quite a bit lower than the 768FFlops some sites had estimated it would have. A HD 5870 gets 544GFlops in double precision so at least as far as floating point is concerned Nvidia is hardly blowing anyone away.
__________________

AMD Phenom II x4 955 Black Edition : Asus M4A89GTD PRO : Corsair 550VX
G.SKILL Ripjaws 4x2gb DDR3 1600 : MSI Geforce GTX 770 2gb : Antec 300
OCZ Agility 2 60gb SSD (OS) : SanDisk Ultra 120gb SSD (Apps) : Crucial M500 240gb (Steam) : Win 8.1 Pro 64bit
2x Samsung 2494LW & 1x Dell U2312HM Eyefinity

Lenovo ThinkPad X220 : Core i5 2410M : 12.5" 1366x768 IPS LED display : Intel 320 Series 120gb SSD

Samsung Galaxy Note 3 stock 4.3 : Nexus 7 2 stock 4.4

Puddle Jumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2009, 11:56 AM   #136 (permalink)
TF's First Dry Ice User!
 
Peter.Cort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,018
Default Re: Graphics Performance List

isn't part of it how the card is made though, not just straight power? I thought that was the big downfall of the 3k series from ATI, on paper it should have been more powerful, but in practice it wasn't.
__________________
A notice to EVERYONE who has posted here with a computer problem, I highly encourage you to keep current with the forums, even if it's browsing for 10-15 minutes during lunch, or before you go to bed at night. There are many things that you can learn and apply to future issues. My goal is to help people get to a point where they can use their own knowledge to help themselves, and others.

Also please use the search button. You've got a 50/50 chance that someone's asked your question and we've answered it.
Peter.Cort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2009, 11:46 PM   #137 (permalink)
Grandfather of Techist

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
Trotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The South
Posts: 31,307
Default Re: Graphics Performance List

The 3xxx line weren't much more powerful than the 2xxx line, but they used less power and ran MUCH cooler.
__________________


My Rig: SABLE
Antec 300 Illusion / Antec EarthWatts EA650 650W / ASUS GeForce GTX 960 GTX960-DC2OC-2GD5
AMD FX 8320 x8 Black Edition / Gelid Tranquillo / MSI 970A-G43
Sandisk Ultra Plus 128GB / Samsung 840 120GB / WD Black 750GB / WD Green 1TB
2x4GB DDR3 1600 - 2x2GB DDR3 1600
Win10 Ent 64-bit - Mionix Naos 7000 Mouse - CM Storm QuickFire Rapid Mech Keyboard


R.I.P. Danny L. Trotter ... 14 Nov 1945 - 4 Sept 2009
Trotter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2009, 03:02 AM   #138 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default Re: Graphics Performance List

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.Cort View Post
isn't part of it how the card is made though, not just straight power? I thought that was the big downfall of the 3k series from ATI, on paper it should have been more powerful, but in practice it wasn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trotter View Post
The 3xxx line weren't much more powerful than the 2xxx line, but they used less power and ran MUCH cooler.
The 3000 series was supposed to give about the same performance as the 2000 series - and it did.
The difference is a massive die shrink, making it way cheaper to make - and yes, a massive reduction in power consumption.
It was the first step in AMD's stragtegy of very cheap, but fast GPU's.

Given TSMC's issues with their 40nm process, the small die strategy is working in AMD's favour in another way. Smaller dies tend to get significantly better yields - and that would be partly why AMD have been able to sell their 5800 series cards, while Nvidia are still struggling.
__________________
Apokalipse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2009, 01:14 PM   #139 (permalink)
The Bulldog
 
zmatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: In an empty Ramen packet
Posts: 4,660
Default Re: Graphics Performance List

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apokalipse View Post
The 3000 series was supposed to give about the same performance as the 2000 series - and it did.
The difference is a massive die shrink, making it way cheaper to make - and yes, a massive reduction in power consumption.
It was the first step in AMD's stragtegy of very cheap, but fast GPU's.

Given TSMC's issues with their 40nm process, the small die strategy is working in AMD's favour in another way. Smaller dies tend to get significantly better yields - and that would be partly why AMD have been able to sell their 5800 series cards, while Nvidia are still struggling.
yeah, you think ATI is having yield issues, just wait until Nvidia starts producing their massive cards. They will be rarer and more valuable than diamonds. Considering that when they began producing GT200 they had single digit yields per wafer, and now they have a bigger and more complex die on an even faultier process. IMO even when GT300 is released we will have HD5000 as the only practical high end solution for some time. And to compound that I have heard, rumors only, that Nvidia is having some serious issues aside from TSMC. They are having scaling and heat issues which doesn't sound hard to believe given their strategy.
__________________


ポップ・タルトが大好きです。
<<<<<<<Rep is always welcome
Ultimate Guitar exercises/ Songs for technique
zmatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2009, 03:35 PM   #140 (permalink)
Mod Emeritus
 
Puddle Jumper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,286
Default Re: Graphics Performance List

I was reading a interesting thread on Anandtech where someone estimated the cost of a GF100 die based on it's size, the number of dies that could fit on a wafer, the cost per wafer, and TSMC's current yields. He estimated that you would get ~90 functional Cypress or ~38 functional GF100 dies per wafer with Cypress costing $78 per die and Fermi costing $184 per die.

When you factor in the profit margins ATI and Nvidia would like to make per chip Cypress would sell for $170 while Fermi would cost $370. This is just for the gpu and doesn't include the cost of any of the other components on the card or the OEM and Retailers profit margins.

Here is the source

AnandTech Forums - View Single Post - Fermi possibly delayed til March or April
__________________

__________________

AMD Phenom II x4 955 Black Edition : Asus M4A89GTD PRO : Corsair 550VX
G.SKILL Ripjaws 4x2gb DDR3 1600 : MSI Geforce GTX 770 2gb : Antec 300
OCZ Agility 2 60gb SSD (OS) : SanDisk Ultra 120gb SSD (Apps) : Crucial M500 240gb (Steam) : Win 8.1 Pro 64bit
2x Samsung 2494LW & 1x Dell U2312HM Eyefinity

Lenovo ThinkPad X220 : Core i5 2410M : 12.5" 1366x768 IPS LED display : Intel 320 Series 120gb SSD

Samsung Galaxy Note 3 stock 4.3 : Nexus 7 2 stock 4.4

Puddle Jumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GPU folding performance list. Luke Folding @ Home 38 03-28-2009 10:09 AM
Team Fortress 2 performance is horrible on my computer SamLee0519 New Systems | Building and Buying 8 03-09-2009 07:49 AM
ATI Unveils World’s First Graphics Processors Made Using 40nm Process Technology Trotter New Technology and Products 2 03-03-2009 10:07 PM
Graphics cards won't work ??? Inigo_Montoya Hardware Repairs and Troubleshooting 6 02-17-2008 10:54 PM
Dialup Speed, Tweaking slow performance SpenceQ Overclocking and Modding 8 12-01-2007 03:12 PM



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.