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 - Friday, October 2, 2009 - link
Gee, you certaibnly are not a computer technician.That you even POSIT that games aren't played on INTEL GPU's is an astounding whack.
Nvidia and ati have laptop graphics, as does intel, and although I don't have the numbers for you on slot cards vs integrated, your whole idea is another absolute FUD and hogwash.
INTEL slotted graphics are still around playing games, bubbba.
You sure don't know much, and your point is 100% invalid, and contains the problem of YOUR TINY MIND.
Let me remind you Tamalero, you shrieked and wailed against nvidia for INTEGRATED GRAPHICS of theirs on a laptop !
Wow, you're a BOZO, again.
sandwiches - Friday, October 2, 2009 - link
You're a sad, pathetic troll, Silicondoc. I honestly do feel contempt for you. Your life is obviously devoid of any real substance.shotage - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
The performance and awesomeness of a company campared to another is biaised. Sure Nvidia probably has historically done better than ATI.I hope that ATI as a company does much better this year and next, so that the there is greater competition. Competition which will consequently mean smaller profit margins, but better deals for us consumers!
At the end of the day, who cares who's winning? Shouldn't we all be hoping that each does well? Shouldn't we all hope that there will always be several major graphics providers? Do we really want a monopoly on GPU's? How would this effect the price on a performance card?
I think you should be banned SiliconDoc. You're adding no real value here. Leave.
I have a GTX260 btw. So i'm not speaking from bias. Wander what kind of card you have? lol...
SiliconDoc - Friday, October 2, 2009 - link
What card you have or don't have doesn't matter one whit, but what you claim DOES. What you SPEW does !and when you lie expect any card to save you.
If liars were banned, you'd all be gone, and I'd be left. ( that does not include of course those who aren't trolling jerkbots running around to my every post wailing and whining and saying ABSOLUTELY NOTHING )
-
" Sure Nvidia probably has historically done better than ATI."
since you 1. obviously haven't got a clue wether what you said is true or not 2. Why would you even say it, with your stupidty retaining, lack of knowledge, or lying caveat "probably" ?
If you're so ignorant, please shut it on the matter! Do you prefer to open your big fat yap and prove how knowledgeless you are ? I guess you do.
If you don't know, why are you even opening your piehole about it ?
It certainly doesn't do anything for me if you aren't correct and you don't know it ! I don't WANT YOUR LIES, nor your pie open when you haven't a clue. I don't want your wishy washy CRAP.
Ok ?
Got it ?
If you open the flapper, make sure it gets it right.
-
If you actually are an enthusiast, why is it that the result is, you blather on in bland generalities, get large facts tossed in a fudging, sloppy, half baked inconclusive manner, and in the end, wind up being nothing less than the very red rooster you demand I believe you are not.
What a crappy outcome, really.---
--
Frankly, you cannot accept me even telling the facts as they actually are, that is too much for your mushy, weak, flakey head, and when I do, you attribute some far out motive to it !
There's no motive other than GET IT RIGHT, YOU IDIOTS !
--
What do you claim, though ?
Why is it, you have such an aversion to FACTS ? WHY IS THAT ?
If I point out ati is not in fact on top, but last, and NVIDIA is almost double ati, (to use the "authors" comparison techniques but not separate companies for "internal comparisons" and make CERTAIN I exagerrate) - why are you so GD bent out of shape ?
I'll tell you why...
YOU FORBID IT.
I certainly don't understand your mindset, you'd much prefer some puss filled bag of slop you can quack out so "we can come to some generalization on our desires and feelings" about "the industry".
Go suck down your estrogen pills with your girlfriends.
---
I don't care what your feelings are, what flakey desire you have for continuing competition, because, you prefer LIES over the truth.
Instead of course, after you whining in some sissy crybaby pathetic wail for the PC cleche of continuing competition, you'll turn around and screech the competition I provide to your censored mindset is the worst kind you could possibly imagine to encounter ! Then you wail aloud "destroy it! get rid of it ! ban it ! "
LOL
You're one piece of filthy work, that's for sure.
---
So, you want me to squeal like an idiot like you did, that you want lower prices and competition, and the way to get that is to LIE about ati in the good, and DISS nvidia to the bad with even bigger lies ?
I see.. I see exactly !
So when I point out the big fat lying fibs for ati and against nvidia - you percieve it as a great threat to "your bottom line" pocketbook.
LOL
Well you know what - TOO BAD ! If the card cannot survive on FACTS AND THE TRUTH, then it deserves to die.
Or is honesty banned so you can fan up ati numbers with your lies, and therefore get your cheaper nvidia card ?
--
This is WHAT YOU PEOPLE WANT - enough lies for ati and against nvidia to keep the piece of red crappin ?
LOL yeah man, just like you jerks...
---
" At the end of the day, who cares who's winning? "
Take a look at that you flaked out JERKOFF, and apply it to this site for the YEARS you didn't have your INSANE GOURD focused on me.
Come on you piece of filth, take a look in the mirror !
It's ALL ABOUT WHOSE WINNING HERE.
THE WHOLE SITE IS BASED UPON YOU LITTLE PIECE OF CRAP !
---
And of course worse than that, after claiming you don't care whose winning, you go on to spread your hope that ati market share climbs, so you can suck down a cheapo card with continuing competition.
So what that says, is all YOU care about is your money. MONEY, your money.
"Quick ban the truth! jerkoffs pocketbook is threatened by posts on anandtech because this poster won't claim he wants equal market share !"
--
Dude, you are disgusting. You take fear and personal greed to a whole new level.
sandwiches - Friday, October 2, 2009 - link
For some laughs at this poor excuse for a 29-year-old man, check out these links:Here, he was banned from driverheaven.com for his rants against ATI. He really is a truly rabid ATI hater with horribly sycophantic traits:
http://www.driverheaven.net/members/silicondoc.htm...">http://www.driverheaven.net/members/silicondoc.htm...
More rants by him about ATI and how great NVIDIA is:
http://www.maximumpc.com/user/silicondoc">http://www.maximumpc.com/user/silicondoc
http://forums.bit-tech.net/search.php?searchid=853...">http://forums.bit-tech.net/search.php?searchid=853...
Here's some political rant by Silicondoc. Is anyone surprised to learn he's also a rabid wingnut?
http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/118289">http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/118289
SiliconDoc - Friday, October 2, 2009 - link
Why that's great, let's see what you have for any rebuttal to this clone you claim is me:" Even the gtx260 uses less power than the 4870.
Pretty simple math - 295 WINS.
Cuda, PhysX, large cool die size, better power management, game profiles out of the box, forced SLI, better overclocking, 65% of GPU-Z scores and marketshare, TWIMTBP, no CCC bloat, secondary PhysX card capable, SLI monitor control "
---
Anything there you can refute ? Even just one thing ?
I'm not sure what your complaint is if you can't.
That's the text that was there, so why didn't you read it or try to claim anything in it was wrong ?
Are you just a little sourpussed spasm boy red, or do you actually have a reason ANY of that text is incorrect ?
Anything at all there ? Are you an empty shell who copies the truth then whines like a punk idiot ? Come on, prove you're not that pathetic.
wifiwolf - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
less margins indeed. At a business point of view though that's good anyway, not because less margins is good for business (of course not) but for what it implies. It means factories can keep on maximum production - and that's very important. There's less profit for each sale but number of consumers is bigger in an exponential way. So not bad indeed... even for them - good for all.Zingam - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Fermi he hassilverblue - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Doesn't matter mate, he'll still just accuse you of bias and brown-nosing ATI.Jamahl - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Silicondoc, go see a REAL doc please.