GeForce GTX 400 Series Clock Speeds and Other Details Surface

[Flyordie]

Now he tells me!

And of course you shared this ingenious fix with the rest of the world?

No need. 10.3 should have it.

 

[jamsbong]

Fermi does not look all that impressive considering they are 6+months late. At a ridiculous 295watt TDP, it is highly doubtful that it can be overclocked. I won't be surprise if it is pre-overclock to the fullest just to overtake ATI by 10%.

If I want DX11, I would go for a decent ATI card. If I want CUDA or Physx, I would rather buy some mid-end nvidia card.

Tessellation is largely unseen at the moment. by the time it is available in every PC game, the price of these DX11 card would be so much cheaper than they are now.

One thing FERMI do not have is Eyefinity. ATI multi-monitor tech is hardware based. That is why you can pump 6 monitors with 1 card. NV's tech is software based which allows 2 or 3 monitors per card. if you want more output you need 2+ cards.

Another note, AMD has launch their "gaming evolved" initiative. For a long time Nvidia always have great relationship with developers. Now AMD is finally doing something like it. This is great news for ATI users.

 

[Super XP]

Fermi does not look all that impressive considering they are 6+months late. At a ridiculous 295watt TDP, it is highly doubtful that it can be overclocked. I won't be surprise if it is pre-overclock to the fullest just to overtake ATI by 10%.

If I want DX11, I would go for a decent ATI card. If I want CUDA or Physx, I would rather buy some mid-end nvidia card.

Tessellation is largely unseen at the moment. by the time it is available in every PC game, the price of these DX11 card would be so much cheaper than they are now.

One thing FERMI do not have is Eyefinity. ATI multi-monitor tech is hardware based. That is why you can pump 6 monitors with 1 card. NV's tech is software based which allows 2 or 3 monitors per card. if you want more output you need 2+ cards.

Another note, AMD has launch their "gaming evolved" initiative. For a long time Nvidia always have great relationship with developers. Now AMD is finally doing something like it. This is great news for ATI users.

Rumours have it Fermi was late because of design defects. I love this title, its funny like hell
Nvidia's Fermi GTX480 is broken and unfixable
Hot, slow, late and unmanufacturable
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/02/17/nvidias-fermigtx480-broken-and-unfixable/

Obviously NVIDIA cannot admit that something went wrong with Fermi or NVIDIA's stock price would go way down into the dirt. All NVIDIA wants to do IMO right now is release what they have, try to get away with the heat issues, then work hard in getting Fermi 2 up and running IMO
In the mean time, I'll enjoy my ATI Radeons thank U

 

[Grings]

What i dont get is why the ram is so slow?

I know they are using a higher bit interface and all, but considering even ATI's semi-budget cards have modules rated for 5000mhz effective, it seem odd to see a number as low as 3700mhz bandied around.

Saving it for the 485 maybe?, the cooler inadvertently heats the ram too much to clock it any higher? very odd either way...

 

[Wile E]

Fermi does not look all that impressive considering they are 6+months late. At a ridiculous 295watt TDP, it is highly doubtful that it can be overclocked. I won't be surprise if it is pre-overclock to the fullest just to overtake ATI by 10%.

If I want DX11, I would go for a decent ATI card. If I want CUDA or Physx, I would rather buy some mid-end nvidia card.

Tessellation is largely unseen at the moment. by the time it is available in every PC game, the price of these DX11 card would be so much cheaper than they are now.

One thing FERMI do not have is Eyefinity. ATI multi-monitor tech is hardware based. That is why you can pump 6 monitors with 1 card. NV's tech is software based which allows 2 or 3 monitors per card. if you want more output you need 2+ cards.

Another note, AMD has launch their "gaming evolved" initiative. For a long time Nvidia always have great relationship with developers. Now AMD is finally doing something like it. This is great news for ATI users.

If it's anything like TWIMTBP, it is great news. ATI should've had a similar program in place years ago. Now maybe we'll see better ATI support out of the box on new titles, instead of having to wait for ATI to patch things up in drivers.

As for the 400 series specs, what can I say that hasn't been said already. Power consumption is far too high for the hinted at performance level, and this is way too late to the party.

That said, I'm dying to know the real numbers. nVidia has walked all over ATI in terms of GPGPU performance. My 8800GT is faster than my 4870X2 in Folding, for example. I want to see what Fermi can do in folding and encoding.

 

[Hayder_Master]

why memory size not like normal 1024,2048, is there is a point to pick this numbers

 

[btarunr]

why memory size not like normal 1024,2048, is there is a point to pick this numbers

1536 is 1.5 x 1024, so 1.5 GB. 1280 is 1.25 x 1024, so 1.25 GB. Since each memory chip has a 32-bit wide path, and the GPU has 384-bit / 320-bit memory interfaces (for GTX 480 / GTX 470, respectively), there are 12 or 10 memory chips. Each chip is 1 Gbit (128 MB), so 1536 MB for 12 chips, or 1280 MB for 10 chips. AMD HD 5800 use 256-bit memory interfaces, so 8 chips, 1024 MB. To get 2048 MB, they make two chips share a 32-bit path.

 

[Hayder_Master]

1536 is 1.5 x 1024, so 1.5 GB. 1280 is 1.25 x 1024, so 1.25 GB. Since each memory chip has a 32-bit wide path, and the GPU has 384-bit / 320-bit memory interfaces (for GTX 480 / GTX 470, respectively), there are 12 or 10 memory chips. Each chip is 1 Gbit (128 MB), so 1536 MB for 12 chips, or 1280 MB for 10 chips. AMD HD 5800 use 256-bit memory interfaces, so 8 chips, 1024 MB. To get 2048 MB, they make two chips share a 32-bit path.

thanx bro that's very useful info form me