NVIDIA's Fermi: Architected for Tesla, 3 Billion Transistors in 2010
by Anand Lal Shimpi on September 30, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
The graph below is one of transistor count, not die size. Inevitably, on the same manufacturing process, a significantly higher transistor count translates into a larger die size. But for the purposes of this article, all I need to show you is a representation of transistor count.
See that big circle on the right? That's Fermi. NVIDIA's next-generation architecture.
NVIDIA astonished us with GT200 tipping the scales at 1.4 billion transistors. Fermi is more than twice that at 3 billion. And literally, that's what Fermi is - more than twice a GT200.
At the high level the specs are simple. Fermi has a 384-bit GDDR5 memory interface and 512 cores. That's more than twice the processing power of GT200 but, just like RV870 (Cypress), it's not twice the memory bandwidth.
The architecture goes much further than that, but NVIDIA believes that AMD has shown its cards (literally) and is very confident that Fermi will be faster. The questions are at what price and when.
The price is a valid concern. Fermi is a 40nm GPU just like RV870 but it has a 40% higher transistor count. Both are built at TSMC, so you can expect that Fermi will cost NVIDIA more to make than ATI's Radeon HD 5870.
Then timing is just as valid, because while Fermi currently exists on paper, it's not a product yet. Fermi is late. Clock speeds, configurations and price points have yet to be finalized. NVIDIA just recently got working chips back and it's going to be at least two months before I see the first samples. Widespread availability won't be until at least Q1 2010.
I asked two people at NVIDIA why Fermi is late; NVIDIA's VP of Product Marketing, Ujesh Desai and NVIDIA's VP of GPU Engineering, Jonah Alben. Ujesh responded: because designing GPUs this big is "fucking hard".
Jonah elaborated, as I will attempt to do here today.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
415 Comments
View All Comments
Zingam - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Perhaps next gen consoles would be C++ based and not API based (what a great terminology). So in that sense DirectX won't matter like it won't matter on Larrabee because it will be emulated in software. Larrabee would not have any silicon dedicated to OpenGL or DirectX I think.Once GPUs get fast enough I guess they won;t be called Graphics processors anymore and will support APIs as software implementations.
marc1000 - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
well, perhaps... I was searching the web yesterday for info on the new consoles, it was kinda sad. if we do not get a new minimun-standard (a powerful console), then the PC games will not be that hard to run on PCs... then my old Radeon 3850 is still capable of running almost ALL games with "good enough" permformance (read: average 30-50fps on most of the console ports to PC).and so: no reason to upgrade! :-(
Dobs - Wednesday, September 30, 2009 - link
Personally I think Eyefinity will be remembered as the master stroke as well as first to implement DirectX 11. Nvidia may get 10 fps more in DirectX 11 in Q2 2010 but will still struggle until it has it's own version of Eyefinity.Current uber-cool for the cashed-up is Eyefinity and once you have 3 or 6 monitors you will only buy hardware that will support it. These 'cashed-up' PC gamers are usually Nvidia's favorite customers.
Nvidia needs flexible wrap-around OLED mega resolution monitors to come out yesterday, but I'm pretty sure that didn't happen... 5850 which supports 3 monitors came out yesterday. :P
SiliconDoc - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Nvidia has supported FOUR monitors on say for instance, the 570i sli, for like YEARS dude.Just put in 2 nv cards, plug em up - and off you go, it's right in the motherboard manuals...
Heck you can plug in two ati cards for that matter.
---
Anyway on the triple monitor with this 5870/50, the drivers are a mess, some having found the patch won't be for a month, then the extra $100 cable is needed, too, as some have mentioned, that ati has not included.
They're pissed.
Dobs - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
I'll be avoiding the extra $100 cable by getting DisplayPort monitors from the start. Also want to get ips monitor (i think) so that it will support the portrait mode.If I already had 3 non-DisplayPort monitors, I wouldn't mind shelling out for the DisplayPort adapter if that was my only expense. But if the adapter was flakey I'd be upset as well. I know multi-monitors have been around for years, but they've never been this easy to set-up... Even I could do it :P And the drivers will get better in time, and no doubt future games will look to include Eyefinity as well.
SiliconDoc - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Well I do hope you have good luck and that you and your son enjoy it ( no doubt will if you manage get it), and it would be nice if you can eventually link a pic (likely in some future article text area) just because.I think eyefinity has an inherent advantage, cheaper motherboard possible, 3 on one card, and with 3 from the same card, you can have the concave wrap view going with easy setup.
I agree however with the comment that it won't be a widely used feature, and realize most don't even use both monitor hookups on their videocards that are already available as standard, since long ago, say the 9600se and before.
(I use two though, and I have to say it is a huge difference, and much, much better than one)
yacoub - Wednesday, September 30, 2009 - link
Wake up: 99% of people don't give a crap about Eyefinity. Not only do the VAST, VAST majority of customers have just one display, but those who do have multiple ones (like myself) often have completely different displays, not multiple of the same model and size. And then, even when you find that 0.1% of the customer base that has two or more identical monitors side-by-side, you have to find the ones who game on them. Then of those people, find the ones who actually WANT to have their game screen split across two monitors with a thick line of two display borders right in the middle of their image.Eyefinity is relevant to such an infinitesimally small number of people it is laughable every time someone mentions it like it's some sort of "killer app" feature.
Jamahl - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
thats why eyefinity has millions of youtube views already right.yacoub - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
because purchases are measured in YouTube views. wow, just... wow.ClownPuncher - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
It clearly means people are interested enough to look. Wow, just...wow.You don't like it, other people do. Get over it.