Printable View
It seems the GTX480 needs one 8 pin PCI-E power connector and one 6 pin PCI-E power connector:
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/03/...cret-location/
The GTX470 needs a pair of PCI-E 6 pin power connectors:
http://www.tcmagazine.com/comments.p...=32988&catid=2
Both will require too much power, and cost too much anyway, so I think I'll avoid them.
The die looks stupidly huge.
it is stupidly huge http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/j...n_confused.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Infinite
Where's the "Haart" for sale sign?
Looks a heck of a lot like my 280GTX tbh - so no big surprise. Yes the die is huge but then so's the transistor count. I wonder how this will compare in power draw and performance to my current card? Heat isn't an issue for me i'd waterblock the sod right away anyhow.
Looks large, but then again the 8800GTX in my system isn't exactly small either.
Still, so long as they continue with their PhysX lockout I'm going with ATI next.
PK
hm...i really like it lol
:surprised:
Huge!! Although, this was always expected given Nvidia design strategy.
8 pin connector? ==> more power, more heat.
Would just like to see some performance numbers now.
I have 8+6 pins on my 280 - it's nothing new there :(Quote:
Originally Posted by mikemikemi
That's what I was thinking - they've used the 40mn shrink to cram in more rather than go for efficiency savings. From the Anand articles it looks like ATI very nearly went the same way.Quote:
Originally Posted by dangel
As long as they include a warning about using a half-decent PSU with the hardware I'll be happy.
I can see some people adjusting their budgets when building a PC and spending loads on a graphics card, only to spend 1/10 of the price of the graphics card on a 'el-cheapo' PSU just because it says it's 700-800W and then wondering why its never going to work.
575mm^2 Nvidia G200Quote:
Originally Posted by Infinite
567mm^2 IBM Power 7 CPU
550mm^2 Fermi
503mm^2 Intel Dunnington, 6 core Xeon (45nm)
480mm^2 Nvidia G200b
334mm^2 ATI 5870
296mm^2 Intel i7-870
The die is as expected; big but not really that huge and certainly not the biggest Nvidia have made.
If they had executed well, all would be fine.
Fermi size taken from SemiAccurate, but probably not far off. Most other sizes taken from Wikipedia, so they must be right ;)
Considering the size difference and the release date, if it does not destroy the 5870, then it is complete fail.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix
Absolutely it is a complete fail, but only because their poor execution means they can't tap into some of that area or work at full clock speed or intended voltage. It is a rubbish chip and a fail, but will people please stop saying it is massive!Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
Edit to add: Saying it is a "massive fail" is of course quite reasonable opinion :D
I'm with you on this one, it would need to be far better than the ATI 5xxx series to be successful - the power connectors imply big power consumption/heat/cooler/noise and the big die might mean big price too. They've also left it very late to release their DX11 cards so again they will need to be great performers/decent value to sell well! Nvidia does have a rather large group of fanboys though...