Nvidia claims 570 times faster gpu's in 6 years

[KainXS]

In just six years


Nvidia's CEO Jen-Hsun Huang has claimed that GPU computing will dramatically increase over the next six years.

He thinks that it will get 570 times faster while CPU performance will only increase a staggering 3x in the same timeframe. Speaking to the Hot Chips symposium in Stanford University, Huang said that the advancement would open the door to advanced forms of augmented reality and the development of real-time universal language translation devices.

Huang predicted that advancements in GPU computation would also boost a number of applications such as interactive ray tracing, CGI simulations, energy exploration, and other "real-world" applications. We don't know where he got all this stuff from or what was going create this huge burst in technology. However if Huang says it, it must be true.

\

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15242/1/

I say 570 times faster in 6 years= he was smoking pot

 

[Nailezs]

wow, say, just for the sake of arguement, that that were true though...can you imagine the games we would be able to have? even virtual reality would be available so much sooner then everyone though! frickin cool man...

 

[Kenshai]

There's a chance for this happening but I don't really see it increasing that much.

 

[btarunr]

Huang has a knack of speaking too soon.

 

[laszlo]

compared to what?

 

[Kenshai]

compared to what?

If you're talking about the quote, I assume he is talking about today's GPU's.

 

[AltecV1]

my ass they will! some body is drinking to much again

 

[Kenshai]

Granted he may be referring to the computational power of graphics processors, where software will catch up to the hardware and allow the GPU to perform the computations needed for say something like the real time translation device.

 

[a111087]

remember what they said about CPU's about 10 years ago? they said we will have 10Ghz CPU's and that was supposed to happen a year or two ago

 

[Kenshai]

remember what they said about CPU's about 10 years ago? they said we will have 10Ghz CPU's and that was supposed to happen a year or two ago

Well if you want to consider it like this, we have 3.4 ghz quad cores, I know it doesn't work like this but, comes to ~13 ghz

 

[El Fiendo]

Well, we technically do have 10GHz. I mean quad cores are probably just as fast as what they were expecting 10GHz computers to do. But yes, as mentioned it doesn't actually work like that.

I don't know about 570x as fast, but I'll remind everyone of the top of the line 6 years ago.

FX 5900 vs GTX 285? I don't think anyone could find a benchmark anywhere that uses the same program so they're pretty tough to compare. But I wouldn't doubt the GTX 285 at being a few hundred times faster.

You may now go 'but a game 6 years old doesn't have the FPS multiply by several hundred times when played on newer hardware'. And to you I say 'you're an idiot'. Actual computational power of the GTX 285 vs the FX5900? Might be interesting to see.

 

[KainXS]

I think he said it because nvidia now has a knack for busting on cpu makers like intel and amd, mainly intel though

usually actual game performance doubles at most in the same apps from series to series though

 

[El Fiendo]

Probably, this is a good way for them to rock the boat and get some publicity.

Oh, and I made a mistake. Seeming how the GTX series is ~ 1 year old, it'd be more comparable to match the GTX 285 against a GeForce 4 Ti 4600. This would give closer to 6 years of gap instead of the 5 from GeForce 5 to current cards.


So in actuality its compared to this:

 

[TheLaughingMan]

We can try.

]FX 5900 vs GTX 285? I don't think anyone could find a benchmark anywhere that uses the same program so they're pretty tough to compare. But I wouldn't doubt the GTX 285 at being a few hundred times faster.

While I can't get a benchmark, I can compare raw numbers. Besides a 285 is not the top dog, so here is the GTX 295 vs. PC FX 5900.

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=603&card2=160

The different in individual stats ranges anywhere from 20 times more power to 100+ times more power.

Oh, and I made a mistake. Seeming how the GTX series is ~ 1 year old, it'd be more comparable to match the GTX 285 against a GeForce 4 Ti 4600. This would give closer to 6 years of gap instead of the 5 from GeForce 5 to current cards.

GTX 295 vs. Ti 4600. Gap got bigger. Now we are looking at 30 to 200 times for gaps in power.
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=603&card2=135

 

[erocker]

With 50% performance increases with every generation of GPU becoming common, I agree with Huang and 6 years is an eternity in computer hardware terms.

 

[Nailezs]

Well, we technically do have 10GHz. I mean quad cores are probably just as fast as what they were expecting 10GHz computers to do. But yes, as mentioned it doesn't actually work like that.

I don't know about 570x as fast, but I'll remind everyone of the top of the line 6 years ago.

http://images.techtree.com/ttimages/story/prolink_fx5900.jpg

FX 5900 vs GTX 285? I don't think anyone could find a benchmark anywhere that uses the same program so they're pretty tough to compare. But I wouldn't doubt the GTX 285 at being a few hundred times faster.

You may now go 'but a game 6 years old doesn't have the FPS multiply by several hundred times when played on newer hardware'. And to you I say 'you're an idiot'. Actual computational power of the GTX 285 vs the FX5900? Might be interesting to see.

hey, i had a 5700 ultra...loved that card!

Probably, this is a good way for them to rock the boat and get some publicity.

Oh, and I made a mistake. Seeming how the GTX series is ~ 1 year old, it'd be more comparable to match the GTX 285 against a GeForce 4 Ti 4600. This would give closer to 6 years of gap instead of the 5 from GeForce 5 to current cards.


So in actuality its compared to this:
http://www.activewin.com/reviews/hardware/graphics/nvidia/gf4ti4600/images/gf4ti4600board.jpg

weren't the Geforce 3's(had one of them too) faster then for Geforce 4's due to a design flaw? or is that the "new" Geforce 4 that corrected that?

With 50% performance increases with every generation of GPU becoming common, I agree with Huang.

i disagree, im seeing more like 100% performance between generations, and the GT300 cores are supposed to be atleast 600% increase from the last press release i saw(i doubt thats the case though)

 

[DarthCyclonis]

With 50% performance increases with every generation of GPU becoming common, I agree with Huang and 6 years is an eternity in computer hardware terms.

He must be comparing the GTX295 part with the old Gforce2! lol

 

[erocker]

i disagree, im seeing more like 100% performance between generations, and the GT300 cores are supposed to be atleast 600% increase from the last press release i saw(i doubt thats the case though)

So you're thinking 1140 times faster. Definite possibility. I don't see the GT300 being a 600% increase in performance though, and if it is Nvidia will be charging a small house for one.

He must be comparing the GTX295 part with the old Gforce2! lol

Makes sense in a 6 year period.

 

[Disparia]

nVidia might start to push ray tracing in games -- very parallel operations. GPU's could start looking like AMD's new "node" chips in that they can add a few of them on die and the scaling would be excellent.

Just a thought, Jizzler is not a computer engineer

 

[Kovoet]

Also on top of this, I think the prices have almost stabilized just thinking three years back at the prices of say the GTX7950GX2.

Considering of the advances in GPU's I don't think the prices have jump as much as the technology.

 

[werez]

Nice one NVIDIA . May i ask how a GPU can provide 570 times more performance without the help of the CPU itself ? if you have a 570x more powerful GPU how can you get that performance if the CPU limmits you ? i don`t get this one . So , we won`t get that far because he said it himself :
CPU performance will only increase a staggering 3x .
I'm not good with numbers but something is not right here ...

It`s like me trying to play Crysis with a GTX285 and an AMD Duron ... powerful GPU but still shitty fps.

3dfx Voodoo5 5000 FTW ...

 

[Jeffredo]

I doubt it'll be that massive - things seemed to have slowed quite a lot since the release of the 8800 series. You don't get those massive increases in performance with each new release since then. I'm sure they will much much stronger and will probably support the near photo realism games will probably have by then. Just not that much faster.

 

[werez]

they still can make a 2x times faster card as we speak . Even AMD can do it , i think we all agree on this one . But it will be too power hungry .

 

[Kenshai]

Nice one NVIDIA . May i ask how a GPU can provide 570 times more performance without the help of the CPU itself ? if you have a 570x more powerful GPU how can you get that performance if the CPU limmits you ? i don`t get this one . So , we won`t get that far because he said it himself :
CPU performance will only increase a staggering 3x .
I'm not good with numbers but something is not right here ...

It`s like me trying to play Crysis with a GTX285 and an AMD Duron ... powerful GPU but still shitty fps.

3dfx Voodoo5 5000 FTW ...

Currently graphics card computational power far surpasses that of a CPU, notice how a simple dual core will play high end games on high resolution just fine with a high end card. CPU bottlenecking is just in gaming, I'm pretty sure he's referring to the power the GPU has and making it available outside of gaming. Like companies are starting to do, it's why folding is so much better on a graphics card instead of a CPU.

 

[El Fiendo]

While I can't get a benchmark, I can compare raw numbers. Besides a 285 is not the top dog, so here is the GTX 295 vs. PC FX 5900.
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=603&card2=160
The different in individual stats ranges anywhere from 20 times more power to 100+ times more power.
GTX 295 vs. Ti 4600. Gap got bigger. Now we are looking at 30 to 200 times for gaps in power.
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=603&card2=135

Yea, that's not too bad a performance jump on the high end for either card. I still think it would feel like a greater performance increase though due to all the extra things a GPU does nowadays compared to what was required of it in the past. But anyways I'd say 570 is probably well out of range, but at the very high end a few hundred is reasonable.

weren't the Geforce 3's(had one of them too) faster then for Geforce 4's due to a design flaw? or is that the "new" Geforce 4 that corrected that?

You're thinking the GeForce 4 MX series, which was slower than the Geforce 3s because they took GeForce 2 Ti series and relabeled it to Geforce 4. They brought out brand new chipsets though that became the GeForce 4 Ti series. Hence people saying you don't have a GeForce 4 unless it says 'Ti' on the card. This is also quite possibly the first instance of nVidia rebranding. Though I might be horribly wrong.