backtop


Print 20 comment(s) - last by DEVGRU.. on Jun 2 at 1:57 PM


  (Source: Johnny B)
Lots of binned chips mean lower prices

There are usually a certain percentage of parts during any manufacturing process that don't perform up to specifications. In the semiconductor industry, many of those parts will end up being speed-binned and set aside for use in less stringent applications.

NVIDIA started mass production of its GF100 GPU using their new Fermi architecture on TSMC's 40nm process in January. Yields weren't great, but they were good enough for NVIDIA to ship their GeForce GTX 480 and 470 graphics cards in April. Their primary competitor, ATI, had been shipping their own DirectX 11 5870 cards for over six months.

Faced with a surplus of chips and a lack of a mainstream performance product, NVIDIA is now launching the GeForce GTX 465 for $279. The primary difference on the graphics card is the use of a 256-bit interface and 1024MB of GDDR5.

However, the card itself uses the same cooling fan and PCB as the rest of the GTX 400 series, which means that NVIDIA's cost still remains very high. The die size of the GF100 chip is massive, measuring 23mm x 23mm for a total of 529 square millimeters. By comparison, theCypress chips used in the Radeon 5800 and 5900 series cards come in at a more moderate 334mm², making the GF100 almost 60% larger.

This is set to be a very strong launch for NVIDIA, with over 100,000 units expected to be ready for retail from add-in-board partners such as ASUS, EVGA, Galaxy, MSI, Palit, PNY, Zotac and others.

The GF100 chip on the GTX 465 has the same core and shader clock speeds as on the GTX 470, but a reduction in CUDA cores similar to the GTX480M means that it has a much lower number of stream processors, texture units, and ROPs. One of the four Graphics Processing Clusters has been disabled, which means that rasterization also takes a 25% hit.

Even though a large part of the GF100 is disabled, power consumption and heat generation aren't affected proportionately. The GTX 465 is rated for a Thermal Design Power of 200 watts, just 15 watts less than the GTX 470.

The specifications for the GTX 465 are similar to the GTX 480M mobile GPU announced last weekwhich will first appear in the middle of June. NVIDIA is trying to launch as many GF100 parts as possible before ATI can ready its second generation DirectX 11 GPUs, codenamed 
Southern Islands.

ATI had been planning a 32nm 
Northern Islands series of GPUs for launch this summer, but that is currently being redesigned for the 28nm process node due to problems at TSMC.



GeForce GTX 465


GeForce GTX 470


 GeForce GTX 480

Graphics Processing Clusters

3

4

4

Streaming Multiprocessors

11

14

15

CUDA Cores

352

448

480

Texture Units

44

56

60

ROP Units

32

40

48

Graphics Clock
(Fixed Function Units)

607 MHz

607 MHz

700 MHz

Processor Clock (CUDA Cores)

1215 MHz

1215 MHz

1401 MHz

Memory Clock
(Clock rate / Data rate)

802 MHz / 3208 MHz

837 MHz / 3348 MHz

924 MHz / 3696 MHz

Total Video Memory

1024 MB

1280 MB

1536 MB

Memory Interface

256-bit

320-bit

384-bit

Total Memory Bandwidth

102.6 GB/s

133.9 GB/s

177.4 GB/s

Texture Filtering Rate (Bilinear)

26.7 GigaTexels/sec

34.0 GigaTexels/sec

42.0 GigaTexels/sec

Fabrication Process

40 nm

40 nm

40 nm

Connectors

2 x Dual-Link DVI-I
1 x Mini HDMI

2 x Dual-Link DVI-I
1 x Mini HDMI

2 x Dual-Link DVI-I
1 x Mini HDMI

Form Factor

Dual Slot

Dual Slot

Dual Slot

Power Connectors

2 x 6-pin

2 x 6-pin

1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin

Max Board Power (TDP)

200 Watts

215 Watts

250 Watts

Recommended PSU

550 Watts

550 Watts

600 Watts

GPU Thermal Threshold

105° C

105° C

105° C

MSRP

$279 USD

$349 USD

$499 USD



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

This thing is too
By Etern205 on 5/31/2010 11:52:28 AM , Rating: 5
expensive!




RE: This thing is too
By inv on 5/31/2010 2:49:02 PM , Rating: 5
This thing is, basically, a directx 11 GTX285. The HD5850 beats it in every game except cod:mw2 which is a heavily NVIDIA game now. Plus its 20-40£ more than the 5850...


RE: This thing is too
By just4U on 5/31/2010 3:19:19 PM , Rating: 2
Odd, it should be a little cheaper then the 5850 overall.. supposedly around 8% or there about according to Anand.

Supply and demand I guess. :(


RE: This thing is too
By inv on 5/31/2010 3:30:10 PM , Rating: 2
It should definitely be cheaper! I'm not sure excatly who this product targets. People with GTX260/275's who now fancy buying a Lo-High-End DirectX 11 card? Maybe they exist...

Fair enough I only checked 3 sites (scan/ebuyer/overclockers), but it seems more expensive.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/productlist.php?grou...
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/productlist.php?grou...


RE: This thing is too
By zebrax2 on 5/31/2010 9:44:50 PM , Rating: 2
IIRC price of nvdia cards on Europe is usually inflated.


RE: This thing is too
By themaster08 on 6/1/2010 3:38:29 AM , Rating: 3
Overclockers are monkeys. Customer service is abysmal and borderline illegal. Never had a problem with Scan or Ebuyer though :).

On another note, give me a 5850 any day. Too expensive, and too late. Thank you NVIDIA for making my purchasing decisions easier.


RE: This thing is too
By bug77 on 5/31/2010 3:56:03 PM , Rating: 2
They're just trying to recoup some cash, since nvidia can't make any money off of 4 series. My only hope is they can pull another stunt like the 6000-series after the huge flop that was FX5000-series.


RE: This thing is too
By B3an on 5/31/2010 4:13:21 PM , Rating: 1
The 4xx series might not exactly be NV's best cards ever, but you cant compare them to the FX series.


Problems@32nm = "Go smaller?"
By CZroe on 5/31/2010 12:03:40 PM , Rating: 3
It's cool and all if true but when you are having problems at one process, since when has going smaller been the right thing to do? Is that an error in the article?




RE: Problems@32nm = "Go smaller?"
By Jansen (blog) on 5/31/2010 12:24:26 PM , Rating: 1
32nm process development at TSMC has effectively been cancelled, and they are focusing all of their resources on 28nm.

They couldn't do both, and chose to focus on 32nm.


By Jansen (blog) on 5/31/2010 12:24:59 PM , Rating: 2
28nm rather, not 32nm.


By geddarkstorm on 5/31/2010 1:47:46 PM , Rating: 1
Yes, actually, smaller can solve problems. You reduce energy requirements and heat. You increase yields.

But there are problems and difficulties too, such as increased energy leakage, higher probabilities of defects, and so on.

Something got screwed up at the 40nm processing level, so now they hope the totally new process for 28nm won't have the same issues.


RE: Problems@32nm = "Go smaller?"
By dark matter on 5/31/2010 1:47:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Since when is going smaller been the right thing to do


Look at the 80's cellphone compared to the iPhone. Look at the 90's widescreen TV's compared to the LED LCDs of today.

Look at the national debt. :P


By Chocobollz on 6/1/2010 10:20:29 AM , Rating: 1
Look at your junk :p


Nothing to see here move along!
By Mitch101 on 5/31/2010 3:52:42 PM , Rating: 2
Correct me if I am wrong but not long ago wasnt Nvidia or TSMC saying they no longer had yield problems and they were resolved?

Me thinks someone was lying through thier teeth.




RE: Nothing to see here move along!
By mindless1 on 5/31/2010 4:38:25 PM , Rating: 2
What if back when they had yield problems, they didn't throw away those chips, instead waiting till they had enough to produce a new GPU tier. Even with "good" yields you're still going to have a few duds.


By Divide Overflow on 5/31/2010 7:32:02 PM , Rating: 2
Put some lipstick on that pig and hope somebody asks it to the dance.


By aldo12345 on 6/1/2010 4:35:10 PM , Rating: 2
It probably was TSMC, after all AMD is using it process and isn't suffering like Nvidia. The size of the Nvidia die is so large that it has a higher likelihood of a wasted die due to an error.


I still would take Nvidia
By Setsunayaki on 6/2/2010 4:41:56 AM , Rating: 2
Even though ATI has Nvidia beat so far in Windows 7, Its Linux Drivers are horrible.

ATI = Amazing in Windows, Crappy in Linux
Nvidia = Good in Windows, Good in Linux

If Crappy = 1, Good = 2 and Amazing = 3, then both would tie at 4 points....

However, those who dual-boot machines or anyone who can visualize will truly know just how bad things are....when going to linux a lot of games fail outright ran through Wine when using ATI drivers...

The thing is also that I am able to lower settings and get better ping on Linux than on Windows most of the time and still break 60 FPS on Nvidia in the games I play...so that "amazing" status is broken on ATI simply because the overhead in framerate is useless to me and accomplish the same on a low overhead...

Finally, I've ramdisked games on Windows and Linux where depending on the game and how its launch, its a mixed bag...

Some games fail ramdisked on Windows....and some of these cache writes go to HDD rather than System Memory itself...or to Paging File....

Some games fail ramdisked on Linux, but I can get the writes to memory and only memory...not into any hard drive....and when my games succeed...

When eliminating framerate and assuming its always above 60 in two games.....ramdisked it feels a lot smoother and performance is higher on Linux each time.

The games I like work on the Linux System, while the games I hardly play anymore really win on the Windows System, Like I said...its really a mixed bag of sorts...

As long as I can get 60 FPS or higher in a game I am competing in, I am happy on Linux. ^_^




RE: I still would take Nvidia
By DEVGRU on 6/2/2010 1:57:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Even though ATI has Nvidia beat so far in Windows 7, Its Linux Drivers are horrible.


Who cares?

Modern video cards are for gaming, and there is only one OS for gamers. One. And that's Windows.


"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki