***News*** Nvidia's 40nm generation should be a killer !!

Nvidia's 40nm generation should be a killer

Cebit 2009: High hopes

Nvidia's 40nm chip should be a great performer. This is what we got from the Cebit show, but we didn't actually get anything specific to back this bold claim up.

Nvidia learns from its mistakes, and it wants to win this round to make ATI look bad, that is the general goal. The claim comes from sources close to Nvidia, and naturally after quite a lot of messy rebranding, there might be some really new stuff coming in the next few months.

The one we really want to see out is GT218, a 40nm performance card, but from all we know this card shouldn't be out before Q3 2009 time, just in time to compete with ATI's RV8x0 architecture. We still don't know who might end up faster this round, as the stakes are really high for both players. Both sides already claim victory, but no one really knows the answer to this question today.

Fudzilla

I can see hope after the long road of too much renaming! :o

Nvidia's 40nm generation should be a killer

Cebit 2009: High hopes

Nvidia's 40nm chip should be a great performer. This is what we got from the Cebit show, but we didn't actually get anything specific to back this bold claim up.

Nvidia learns from its mistakes, and it wants to win this round to make ATI look bad, that is the general goal. The claim comes from sources close to Nvidia, and naturally after quite a lot of messy rebranding, there might be some really new stuff coming in the next few months.

The one we really want to see out is GT218, a 40nm performance card, but from all we know this card shouldn't be out before Q3 2009 time, just in time to compete with ATI's RV8x0 architecture. We still don't know who might end up faster this round, as the stakes are really high for both players. Both sides already claim victory, but no one really knows the answer to this question today.

Fudzilla

I can see hope after the long road of too much renaming! :o

wklzip

[QUOTE="wklzip"]

Nvidia's 40nm generation should be a killer

Cebit 2009: High hopes

Nvidia's 40nm chip should be a great performer. This is what we got from the Cebit show, but we didn't actually get anything specific to back this bold claim up.

Nvidia learns from its mistakes, and it wants to win this round to make ATI look bad, that is the general goal. The claim comes from sources close to Nvidia, and naturally after quite a lot of messy rebranding, there might be some really new stuff coming in the next few months.

The one we really want to see out is GT218, a 40nm performance card, but from all we know this card shouldn't be out before Q3 2009 time, just in time to compete with ATI's RV8x0 architecture. We still don't know who might end up faster this round, as the stakes are really high for both players. Both sides already claim victory, but no one really knows the answer to this question today.

Fudzilla

I can see hope after the long road of too much renaming! :o

hofuldig

[QUOTE="wklzip"]

Nvidia's 40nm generation should be a killer

Cebit 2009: High hopes

Nvidia's 40nm chip should be a great performer. This is what we got from the Cebit show, but we didn't actually get anything specific to back this bold claim up.

Nvidia learns from its mistakes, and it wants to win this round to make ATI look bad, that is the general goal. The claim comes from sources close to Nvidia, and naturally after quite a lot of messy rebranding, there might be some really new stuff coming in the next few months.

The one we really want to see out is GT218, a 40nm performance card, but from all we know this card shouldn't be out before Q3 2009 time, just in time to compete with ATI's RV8x0 architecture. We still don't know who might end up faster this round, as the stakes are really high for both players. Both sides already claim victory, but no one really knows the answer to this question today.

Fudzilla

I can see hope after the long road of too much renaming! :o

hofuldig

clock for clock, yes but in terms of value for money ATI are currently thrashing them.

Iam not going to upgrade until i can get a card that offer a 100% performance boost over my 8800GT for a not too unreasonable price...£250 is ok i guess.

[QUOTE="wklzip"]

Nvidia's 40nm generation should be a killer

Cebit 2009: High hopes

Nvidia's 40nm chip should be a great performer. This is what we got from the Cebit show, but we didn't actually get anything specific to back this bold claim up.

Nvidia learns from its mistakes, and it wants to win this round to make ATI look bad, that is the general goal. The claim comes from sources close to Nvidia, and naturally after quite a lot of messy rebranding, there might be some really new stuff coming in the next few months.

The one we really want to see out is GT218, a 40nm performance card, but from all we know this card shouldn't be out before Q3 2009 time, just in time to compete with ATI's RV8x0 architecture. We still don't know who might end up faster this round, as the stakes are really high for both players. Both sides already claim victory, but no one really knows the answer to this question today.

Fudzilla

I can see hope after the long road of too much renaming! :o

hofuldig

didn't i hear the current line of nvidia cards limit the intel i7's?? there was a big debate between the new phenom II processors vs the new I7's and the nvidia cards and ATI got wrapped up in the debate. what ended up happening is they through the ATI cards onto the I7 boards and then the I7's beat the phenoms in gaming....but when the I7's had nvidia cards the phenoms won.

I am not going to upgrade until i can get a card that offer a 100% performance boost over my 8800GT for a not too unreasonable price...£250 is ok i guess.

Daytona_178

I'm with you. I usually wait until I can see a signifcant performance increase worth to upgrade.

didn't i hear the current line of nvidia cards limit the intel i7's?? there was a big debate between the new phenom II processors vs the new I7's and the nvidia cards and ATI got wrapped up in the debate. what ended up happening is they through the ATI cards onto the I7 boards and then the I7's beat the phenoms in gaming....but when the I7's had nvidia cards the phenoms won.

machiavell8x8

I would think i7 would thrash Phenom with either. My stockQ6600 @ 2.4Ghz is beating Phenom II 940 in GTAIV and I'm using higher settings.

Statistics
Average FPS: 38.54
Duration: 37.38 sec
CPU Usage: 59%
System memory usage: 50%
Video memory usage: 63%

Graphics Settings
Video Mode: 1600 x 1200 (60 Hz)
Texture Quality: Medium
Render Quality: High
Reflection Resolution: High
Water Quality: Very High
Shadow Quality: High
View Distance: 25
Detail Distance: 37
Definition: On
VSync: Off

Hardware
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
Service Pack 3
Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX
Video Driver version: 181.22
Audio Adapter: Sound Blaster Audigy
AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 940 Processor

File ID: benchmark.cli

MSI K9N2 Sli Platinum MB Win XP Pro Service Pack 3 32 bit
AMD Phenom II X4 940 3Ghz Corsair 4gig Dominator pc8500
eVGA 8800 GTX KO ACS³ 768MB

Statistics
Average FPS: 46.78
Duration: 37.07 sec
CPU Usage: 75%
System memory usage: 76%
Video memory usage: 100%

Graphics Settings
Video Mode: 1600 x 1200 (75 Hz)
Texture Quality: Medium
Render Quality: Very High
Reflection Resolution: Very High
Water Quality: Very High
Shadow Quality: High
View Distance: 30
Detail Distance: 60
Definition: On
VSync: Off

Hardware
Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate
Service Pack 1
Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
Video Driver version: 180.84
Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz

File ID: Benchmark.cli

i read the story off tomshardware, pretty sure teh PII was ahead in gaming until the I7 got an ATI card in her.

i read the story off tomshardware, pretty sure teh PII was ahead in gaming until the I7 got an ATI card in her.

machiavell8x8

Even the Q9550 is faster than the Phenom II 940 and the i7 920 is faster than the Q9550.

you sure about that? im only talking about "gaming" scores here.

you sure about that? im only talking about "gaming" scores here.

machiavell8x8

Yes, I'm talking about gaming. But performance depends on the overall configuration, not just the processor...

[QUOTE="machiavell8x8"]

i read the story off tomshardware, pretty sure teh PII was ahead in gaming until the I7 got an ATI card in her.

Sordidus

Even the Q9550 is faster than the Phenom II 940 and the i7 920 is faster than the Q9550.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-280,2156-2.html

false

"AMD's Phenom IIs are indeed running faster than the i7 920 in a number of our gaming tests where Nvidia's GeForce GTX 280 handles graphics."

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-280,2156-2.html

false

"AMD's Phenom IIs are indeed running faster than the i7 920 in a number of our gaming tests where Nvidia's GeForce GTX 280 handles graphics."

machiavell8x8

yah i had a hunch i was

[QUOTE="machiavell8x8"]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-280,2156-2.html

false

"AMD's Phenom IIs are indeed running faster than the i7 920 in a number of our gaming tests where Nvidia's GeForce GTX 280 handles graphics."

Auraknight1

I don't trust Tomshardware reviews for certain reasons and from what I've seen on other sites even the Q9550 performs better than i7 920 on Far Cry 2 and I don't think it makes it worse than the Q9550...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-280,2156-2.html

false

"AMD's Phenom IIs are indeed running faster than the i7 920 in a number of our gaming tests where Nvidia's GeForce GTX 280 handles graphics."

machiavell8x8

That doesn't look like a comprehensive test. Just two pages.

[QUOTE="machiavell8x8"]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-280,2156-2.html

false

"AMD's Phenom IIs are indeed running faster than the i7 920 in a number of our gaming tests where Nvidia's GeForce GTX 280 handles graphics."

teddyrob

That doesn't look like a comprehensive test. Just two pages.

[QUOTE="teddyrob"]

[QUOTE="machiavell8x8"]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-280,2156-2.html

false

"AMD's Phenom IIs are indeed running faster than the i7 920 in a number of our gaming tests where Nvidia's GeForce GTX 280 handles graphics."

machiavell8x8

That doesn't look like a comprehensive test. Just two pages.

OK I have a question I have an 750 Watt PSU and by the looks of the design of the graphic card using smaller and smaller dies is it safe to say that my current power supply should be efficent to power future high ends cards for a long time?

OK I have a question I have an 750 Watt PSU and by the looks of the design of the graphic card using smaller and smaller dies is it safe to say that my current power supply should be efficent to power future high ends cards for a long time?

brettakins

Iam not going to upgrade until i can get a card that offer a 100% performance boost over my 8800GT for a not too unreasonable price...£250 is ok i guess.

Daytona_178

OK I have a question I have an 750 Watt PSU and by the looks of the design of the graphic card using smaller and smaller dies is it safe to say that my current power supply should be efficent to power future high ends cards for a long time?

brettakins

OK I have a question I have an 750 Watt PSU and by the looks of the design of the graphic card using smaller and smaller dies is it safe to say that my current power supply should be efficent to power future high ends cards for a long time?

brettakins

For a single card, your power supply it's more than enough, even mine.

[QUOTE="Daytona_178"]

Iam not going to upgrade until i can get a card that offer a 100% performance boost over my 8800GT for a not too unreasonable price...£250 is ok i guess.

matte3560

Same here. I've got an 8800GTS 512 MB and it plays all my games fine at 1680X1050. I'm not upgrading until I can get a 100% performance boost for $150 or less.