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 RV770 Lesson (or The GT200 Story)
It took NVIDIA a while to give us an honest response to the RV770. At first it was all about CUDA and PhsyX. RV770 didn't have it, so we shouldn't be recommending it; that was NVIDIA's stance.
Today, it's much more humble.
Ujesh is wiling to take total blame for GT200. As manager of GeForce at the time, Ujesh admitted that he priced GT200 wrong. NVIDIA looked at RV670 (Radeon HD 3870) and extrapolated from that to predict what RV770's performance would be. Obviously, RV770 caught NVIDIA off guard and GT200 was priced much too high.
Ujesh doesn't believe NVIDIA will make the same mistake with Fermi.
Jonah, unwilling to let Ujesh take all of the blame, admitted that engineering was partially at fault as well. GT200 was the last chip NVIDIA ever built at 65nm - there's no excuse for that. The chip needed to be at 55nm from the get-go, but NVIDIA had been extremely conservative about moving to new manufacturing processes too early.
It all dates back to NV30, the GeForce FX. It was a brand new architecture on a bleeding edge manufacturing process, 130nm at the time, which ultimately lead to its delay. ATI pulled ahead with the 150nm Radeon 9700 Pro and NVIDIA vowed never to make that mistake again.
With NV30, NVIDIA was too eager to move to new processes. Jonah believes that GT200 was an example of NVIDIA swinging too far in the other direction; NVIDIA was too conservative.
The biggest lesson RV770 taught NVIDIA was to be quicker to migrate to new manufacturing processes. Not NV30 quick, but definitely not as slow as GT200. Internal policies are now in place to ensure this.
Architecturally, there aren't huge lessons to be learned from RV770. It was a good chip in NVIDIA's eyes, but NVIDIA isn't adjusting their architecture in response to it. NVIDIA will continue to build beefy GPUs and AMD appears committed to building more affordable ones. Both companies are focused on building more efficiently.
Of Die Sizes and Transitions
Fermi and Cypress are both built on the same 40nm TSMC process, yet they differ by nearly 1 billion transistors. Even the first generation Larrabee will be closer in size to Cypress than Fermi, and it's made at Intel's state of the art 45nm facilities.
What you're seeing is a significant divergence between the graphics companies, one that I expect will continue to grow in the near term.
NVIDIA's architecture is designed to address its primary deficiency: the company's lack of a general purpose microprocessor. As such, Fermi's enhancements over GT200 address that issue. While Fermi will play games, and NVIDIA claims it will do so better than the Radeon HD 5870, it is designed to be a general purpose compute machine.
ATI's approach is much more cautious. While Cypress can run DirectX Compute and OpenCL applications (the former faster than any NVIDIA GPU on the market today), ATI's use of transistors was specifically targeted to run the GPU's killer app today: 3D games.
Intel's take is the most unique. Both ATI and NVIDIA have to support their existing businesses, so they can't simply introduce a revolutionary product that sacrifices performance on existing applications for some lofty, longer term goal. Intel however has no discrete GPU business today, so it can.
Larrabee is in rough shape right now. The chip is buggy, the first time we met it it wasn't healthy enough to even run a 3D game. Intel has 6 - 9 months to get it ready for launch. By then, the Radeon HD 5870 will be priced between $299 - $349, and Larrabee will most likely slot in $100 - $150 cheaper. Fermi is going to be aiming for the top of the price brackets.
The motivation behind AMD's "sweet spot" strategy wasn't just die size, it was price. AMD believed that by building large, $600+ GPUs, it didn't service the needs of the majority of its customers quickly enough. It took far too long to make a $199 GPU from a $600 one - quickly approaching a year.
Clearly Fermi is going to be huge. NVIDIA isn't disclosing die sizes, but if we estimate that a 40% higher transistor count results in a 40% larger die area then we're looking at over 467mm^2 for Fermi. That's smaller than GT200 and about the size of G80; it's still big.
I asked Jonah if that meant Fermi would take a while to move down to more mainstream pricepoints. Ujesh stepped in and said that he thought I'd be pleasantly surprised once NVIDIA is ready to announce Fermi configurations and price points. If you were NVIDIA, would you say anything else?
Jonah did step in to clarify. He believes that AMD's strategy simply boils down to targeting a different price point. He believes that the correct answer isn't to target a lower price point first, but rather build big chips efficiently. And build them so that you can scale to different sizes/configurations without having to redo a bunch of stuff. Putting on his marketing hat for a bit, Jonah said that NVIDIA is actively making investments in that direction. Perhaps Fermi will be different and it'll scale down to $199 and $299 price points with little effort? It seems doubtful, but we'll find out next year.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
415 Comments
View All Comments
SiliconDoc - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Sweet ! Nice pick, looks like carbon fiber at the bracket end.Wowzie, a real honker based on THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS of tech and core per part.
I feel SO PRIVLEDGED to have a chance at the gaming segment version, all that massive power jammed into a gaming card !
Whoo! U P S C A L E !
justaviking - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Look at every bright area of high contrast. All the spotlight reflections have a red ring around them. So the thumb, in front of the highly reflective gold connectors, also has the same halo effect. I think that it's as much evidence of a digital camera as it is Photoshop manipulation.With that said, it could also be a non-functional mock-up. Holding a mock-up or prototype in your hand is not the same as benchmarking a production (ready for consumer release) product.
papapapapapapapababy - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
look at that irregular borders closely. ( above the watch) also, the shadows (finger) are off. thats a (terrible) shop.v1001 - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
All they did was blacken out the background more. Probably was more noise and distraction going on that they didn't want in there.justaviking - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
OK, so assuming it's a fake (and I'm not saying it isn't), I have three questions:1) Where did you get the photo?
2) Why do it? (And "Who did it?", but that's closely related to Q1.
3) Where did they get the photo of the hardware, which they then put into the person's hand?
Combining #2 and #3) If the card is from a real photo of real hardware, then what was the value of photoshopping it into someone's hand?
I'm not trying to argue, just trying to understand.
papapapapapapapababy - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
more fakes! source: bit-tech ( this one is even "better")http://i34.tinypic.com/34inz9j.jpg">http://i34.tinypic.com/34inz9j.jpg
also, not mine ( from xnews)
http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/2883/tesafilm.png">http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/2883/tesafilm.png
papapapapapapapababy - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
also below the card... whats that sloppy withe trim in the middle of a shadow? JAaAAAUNCjigga - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Seriously? I have a 1080p monitor and Radeon 4670 with UVD2, but my PS3 with 1080p output to the same monitor looks MUCH better at upscaling DVDs (night and day difference.) PowerDVD does have a better upscaling tech, but that's using software decoding. Can somebody port ffdshow/libmpeg2 for CUDA and ATI Stream (or DirectCompute?) kthxbyePastuch - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
I buy two videocards per year on average. I've owned an almost equal number of ATI/Nvidia cards. I loved my geforce 8800 GTX despite it costing a fortune but since then it's been ALL down hill. I've had driver issues with home theater PCs and Nvidia drivers. I've been totally disappointed with Nvidias performance with high def audio formats. The fact that the entire ATI 48xx line can do 7.1 audio pass-through while only a handful of Nvidia videocards can even do 5.1 audio passthrough is just sad. The world is moving to hometheater gaming PCs and Nvidia is dragging arse.The fact that 5850 can do bitstreaming audio for $250 RIGHT NOW and is the second fastest 1 GPU solution for gaming makes it one hell of a product in my eyes. You no longer nead an Asus Xonar or Auzentech soundcard saving me $200. Hell with the money I saved I could almost buy a SECOND 5850! Lets see if the new Nvidia cards can do bitstreaming... if they can't then Nvidia won't be getting any more of my money.
P.S. Thanks Anand for inspiring me to build the hometheater of my dreams. Gaming on a 110 Inch screen is the future!
SiliconDoc - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Well that's very nice, and since this has been declared the home of "only game fps and bang for that buck" matters, and therefore PhysX, ambient occlusion, CUDA, and other nvidia advantages, and your "outlier" htpc desires are WORTHLESS according to the home crowd, I guess they can't respond without contradiciting themselves, so I will considering I have always supported added value, and have been attacked for it.--
Yes, throw out your $200 sound cards, or sell them, and plop that heat monster into the tiny unit, good luck. Better spend some on after market cooling, or the raging videocard fan sound will probably drive you crazy. So another $100 there.
Now the $100 you got for the used soundcard is gone.
I also wonder what sound chip you're going to use then when you aren't playing a movie or whatever, I suppose you'll use your motherboard sound chip, which might be a lousy one, and definitely is lousier than the Auzentech you just sold or tossed.
So how exactly does "passthrough" save you a dime ?
If you're going to try to copy Anand's basement theatre projection, I have to wonder why you wouldn't use the digital or optical output of the high end soundcard... or your motherboards, if indeed it has a decent soundchip on it, which isn't exactly likely.
-
Maybe we'll all get luckier,and with TESLA like massive computing power, we'll get an NVIDIA blueray dvd movie player converter that runs on the holy grail of the PhysX haters, openCL and or direct compute, and you'll have to do with the better sound of your add on sound cards, anyway, instead of using a videocard as a transit device.
I can't imagine "cable mamnagement" as an excuse either, with a 110" curved screen home built threate room...
---
Feel free to educate me.