nvidia titanium faster
<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-07/2002b-0731-jaq-atnvidia.phtml"; target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-07/2002b-0731-jaq-atnvidia.phtml</a>;
check this out! sounds promising
check this out! sounds promising
Comments
<hr></blockquote>
Right from nVidia's mouth.
Deep down we all knew it, as cool as ATI cards may get (ala 9700), Apple no doubt has a long term relationship (maybe even a contract) with 'little n' and we will not likely see ATI cards standard, at least in desktops, for some time.
Get used to it.. they are her eto stay. And, I for one, can't say I am at all disappointed.
Viva la NV
Apple/nVidia co-developed Quartz Extreme/OpenGL graphics card
? AGP Pro110 8x
? 512MB DDR2 RAM
? dual nv30 GPUs
? dual ADC ports
? Mac OS X/OpenGL/Maya optimized drivers
? US$1,000.00
Cheers!
nTroducing the nEw pOwermAcintosh
pOwered bY nVidia's nEw nForce
Fasten your safety belts, ladies and gentlemen.
[ 07-31-2002: Message edited by: Leonis ]</p>
<a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=4732"; target="_blank">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=4732</a>;
Xbox.
x86.
PPC.
Wonder if involvement with Apple's needs have added to slippage?
Or was the co-venture with M$ to blame
Nvidia are usually more punctual than this.
Oh, well. 3Dfx found to their cost...that playing 'King of the Hill'...means...sometimes...you lose, right?
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>Are Nvidia spreading themselves too thinly?
Xbox.
x86.
PPC.
Wonder if involvement with Apple's needs have added to slippage?
Or was the co-venture with M$ to blame
Nvidia are usually more punctual than this.
Oh, well. 3Dfx found to their cost...that playing 'King of the Hill'...means...sometimes...you lose, right?
Lemon Bon Bon</strong><hr></blockquote>
Didn't nVidia aquire 3Dfx?
Oh well. I just hope the NV30 and the ATi 9700 will both be available for the new towers (8x AGP please!) so I can choose one at least.
<strong>Are Nvidia spreading themselves too thinly?
Xbox.
x86.
PPC.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, Xbox and x86 is basically the same thing. Any by saying basically I mean exactly, spot on.
<strong>
Well, Xbox and x86 is basically the same thing. Any by saying basically I mean exactly, spot on.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think Lemon was referring to the fact that analysts believe that nVidia is falling slightly behind ATI becomes of the GPU they developed for the Xbox. While having some similarities, it is a different card and nVidia spent a lot of time (and resources) developing it.
From my limited understanding I have garnered this: it is not so easy to add lots of parallel programmability and yet make dramatic increases in outright speed (polys, textures, fill rate yadda yadda). Look at Matrox and their Parehalia, it doesn't really provide better performance than a Ti4600 on any of today's games. But, it might perhaps be able to do more interesting things in the future.
Rumor has it that nVidia isn't really 100% stoked about nv30. At one point one of their people might have suggested that they wouldn't meet their own performance expectations because they'd spent too much time on other projects (x-Box, nForce). That's interesting.
ATI now has two cards which are both FAST and eqully programmable, differing only in speed, but also, as is usually an ATI forte, the bottom spec can enter the market at a consumer/OEM friendly price where it will kill anything nVidia currently has in that space.
So, after years of ATI, apple could change only to find itself on the second tier card yet again. HAHAHA!!!
Realistically, both ATI and nVidia should offer admirable performance in the next generation, but I'm really interested to see if ATI has any notebook plans for its 9000 GPU ???
yes yes, I know nVidia has the best outright performance at the moment and that Apple uses their product, but for what seemed like the longest time we pined for nVidia, nVidia, and now that we might get all nVidia, it might have been better to go with ATI.
<a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.07/Nvidia.html"; target="_blank">http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.07/Nvidia.html</a>;
AFAIK the Gamecube uses a PPC processor designed by IBM, called Gecko. (I think the ATi card is called Dolphin).
JP.
<strong>Well, Xbox and x86 is basically the same thing. Any by saying basically I mean exactly, spot on.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually the x86 and the PPC GPU cards are exactly the same thing, whereas the XBox chipset was an intermediate version between the geForce3 and 4.
I disagree with the analysts -- nVidia is late with the nv30 because it is the most complex GPU attempted to date, not because of the XBox. They were on track for now until they suffered some unforeseen setbacks in the design process.
Keeping the performance crown in the world of silicon chips if a difficult and fleeting thing -- "leaders" usually only hold that title for less than a year at a time. ATI may have wrestled the crown away from nVidia for now, and if they are lucky they'll keep it beyond when the nv30 ships... but after that its up in the air again. Both companies will have their next parts coming out and due to the way they both run seperate development teams in a leapfrog fashion, either of them could take the crown next time around.
The same goes for AMD, Intel, Moto, and IBM... at least for the target markets that each of them chooses to aim for (i.e. Moto hasn't aimed for the desktop processor crown in a while).
<strong>
AFAIK the Gamecube uses a PPC processor designed by IBM, called Gecko. (I think the ATi card is called Dolphin).
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but this has nothing to do with ATI.
The Dolphin development was done by a team of people at a company called "ArtX" that ATI bought before the GameCube arrived... thus its not strictly true that it was an ATI part. It is this team which developed the R300, and next we'll see if ATI's original R200 team can manage to build the R400 and keep the performance lead.
great hardware with shitty drivers is like a fast car with no gas.
who gives a crap what the hardware is if it won't run.
<strong>
Well, Xbox and x86 is basically the same thing. Any by saying basically I mean exactly, spot on.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually they're not. The Xbox may be powered by a PIII cpu but it's connected to a TV instead of a monitor. For this reason, the graphics controller is much different. First of all, it operates at a set, lower then average (TV) resolution. Because of this it requires less memory and benefits more from anit-aliasing. Simply put, there are different requirements for the Xbox then a desktop PC. For this reason, they are different.