RayTracing كتقنية أمامها سنوات طويلة حتى يستطيع العتاد أن يتعامل معها ونجد لها تطبيقات فعلية وخصوصاً مع ال Global Illumination الذي يجب أن يعمل معها بالتوازيالمشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Hameedo
مازال هذا اطلاقاً ورقياً يا عزيزي لأنه لم يتم اختبار البطاقة فعلياً بالأرقام والإعدادات وكل شيء ووجود عروض فيديو لا يجعله اطلاقاً عتادياً
أنت ترى ان الفيديوهات المعروضة تعطي صورة عن الأداء بسبب السلاسة ولا أعرف كيف تحكم عليها بذلك علماً بأن مثل هذه الفيديوهات تعمل بمعدل 30 اطاراً في الثانية كحد أقصى ولنر الفيديوهات معاً :
1-أول عرض تقني في CES توقف الجهاز عن العمل وفي أول العرض لم يكن هناك سلاسة
2-عرض Unigine Heaven Demo تم التغيير فيه بين "بدون ترصيع" ثم "بدون ترصيع Wireframe" ثم بترصيع Wireframe" ولم أر "مع ترصيع" + "بدون ترصيع" على التوالي كي أحكم بالسلاسة لأنه كما قلت الإطارات محدودة على 30 اطاراً أو أقل
3-عرض Dark Void : هناك توقف كثير حدث في اللعبة ولم تكن تعمل بسلاسة
4-عرض Farcry2 كان يعمل جيداً ولا نعرف بالفعل أي بطاقة مستخدمة GTX360 أم GTX380 ولكن يوجد شيء تعجبت منه للغاية :
لو كان ال GF100 يعطي 84 اطار وال GTX285 يعطي 50 اطار فكيف ينتهي الإختبار على الجهازين في نفس التوقيت ؟! :confused:
الطبيعي ان البطاقة التي تعطي معدل اطارات أعلى تنهي الإختبار أسرع
الغريبة انه في ال Loop الثاني حدث ذلك بالفعل ولكن لأن تحميل الإختبار أخذ وقتاً أكبر مع ال GTX285
تعجبت انه لا أحد ذكر تشارلي الأسطورة الذي لا يصمت أبداً في أي موقف :D
فقد ذكر في مقاله الذي نشر يوم 17 الكثير من الأشياء
يقول :
ال GF100 يستهلك 280 وات وغير قابل للتصنيع !!!
https://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/01...anufacturable/
يبدو انه اعتمد على حقائق مثل ان nVIDIA لم تذكر أي شيء عن الحرارة واستهلاك الطاقة وحجم النواة :
https://www.hardocp.com/article/2010...cts_opinions/3NVIDIA’s omission of discussing die size, power usage, and clocks is very disconcerting. It was explained that these facts were skipped over so as to not give AMD an informational and competitive advantage. While I am sure you could argue this as true, it is uncharacteristic for NVIDIA to "hide its light under a bushel." Let’s face it, these guys will send out self serving PR every time the paper gets changed in the executive washroom. I would suggest that these issues are not being disclosed because NVIDIA does not want to see its stock take a beating over building a huge power pig of a GPU. Hence forcing another TP change. GF100 is going to be big and hot and require plenty of air flow. Its stock has been heading steadily down since its CES announcements and I don’t think a day of "paper launches" is going to bring it back around.
كما يقول تشارلي ان تكلفة تصنيع نواة ال GF100 هي ضعف تكلفة تصنيع نواة Cypress
ويقول :
Moving on to tessellation we said last May that Nvidia does not have dedicated hardware tessellators. Nvidia said the GF100 has hardware tessellation, even though our sources were adamant that it did not. You can say that Nvidia is either lying or splitting hairs, but there is no tessellator.
Instead, the GF100 has what Nvidia calls a 'polymorph engine', and there is one per SM. Basically it added a few features to a subset of the shaders, and that is now what it is calling a tessellator, but it is not. ATI has a single fairly small dedicated tessellator that remains unchanged up and down the Evergreen HD5xxx stack. On ATI 5xxx cards, tessellation performance takes almost no shader time other than dealing with the output just like any other triangle. On GF100, there is no real dedicated hardware, so the more you crank up the tessellation, the more shaders you co-opt.
Nvidia is going to tout the 'scaling' of its tessellation capabilities, but since it is kicking off the GF100 line at the top, scaling is only going down from there. ATI's 5xxx parts don't lose anything when going down, nor do they lose die area when going up.This caps the price Nvidia can charge for GF100 cards at the price of Hemlock, or less. Since GF100 silicon at 40 percent yields will cost about $125 for the raw unpackaged silicon versus a consensus number of less than $50 for ATI's Cypress, ATI can likely make a dual card for less than Nvidia can make a single GF100. The 280W power draw means it is almost impossible for Nvidia to put out a dual card with all units active, leaving the slippery slope of fused off shaders and downclocked parts to hold the fortNvidia has been telling its AIBs (Add In Board makers) that the initial GF100 chips they will receive are going to be massively cut down and downclocked, likely at the same 448 shaders and rough clocks as the Fermi compute board. There will be a handful of 512 shader chips at 'full clocks' distributed to the press and for PR stunts, but yields will not support this as a real product.
To make matters worse, SemiAccurate's sources in the Far East are saying that the current A3 silicon is 'a mess'. Last spring, we were told that the chip was targeted for a top clock of 1500-1600MHz. The current silicon coming out of TSMC, defects aside, is not binning past 1400MHz in anything resembling quantity, with 1200MHz being the 'volume' bin. Even at 75 percent of intended clocks, the numbers of chips produced are not economically viable.Unfortunately for Nvidia, the architecture is badly designed. The best granularity for fusing off units loses 32 shaders. In its Fermi guise, the GF100 sells for $2,500-$4,000 as a Tesla board, and that is a downclocked 448 shader chip. It is quite telling that Nvidia is unable to cherry pick enough fully working parts to support the meager numbers that the Tesla volume requires, especially in light of the margins on those parts.
Nvidia has promised AIBs chips in late February, so a March release seems feasible. The AIBs were cautioned at CES that they would only receive low quantities of the fused off parts, and fewer if any of the 'full' 512 shader parts. If you are waiting in line for the chips Nvidia showed off or the chips that the press will be given, it will be a very long wait, but you will have lots of company.Look for a lot of FUD coming out of Santa Clara over the next few weeks. It has nothing to sell but is desperate to keep ATI from booming in the GPU market. ATI on the other hand has multiple lines of DX11 parts on the market in all but the lowest price tier, and those will come in very short order.
Until it can 'launch' parts in barely above PR stunt quantities all Nvidia can do is spin. In the meantime, ATI is fast approaching the six-month window traditionally needed for launching derivative parts, and will likely have the next full generation finished before any GF100 derivatives launch, if they ever make financial sense at all. When you don't have product, spin, and Nvidia is putting most ice skaters to shame with its current hot-shoe dance
المفضلات