Is Charlie right

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
You either have very selective reading or you're just not getting it. These GPUs are HUGE power-hogs, and all that excess electric energy is transformed to thermal energy which in turn needs to be effectively dissipated for the card not to overheat. Nvidia is probably installing some very good reference cooling to dissipate all the thermal energy and keep all the heat in check, but there are physical limitations as to how much heat (thermal energy) you can dissipate with a dual slot cooler.

It was possible to cool G92 even with a single slot heatsink (albeit not effectively), so it was perfectly feasible to try for a dual slot-dual PCB card with a similar thermal envelope of two G92 cards. However, GT200s require dual slot cooling to work well within specifications because their thermal envelope is just so much higher than any G92 chip, so a Triple Slot cooler would be the logical step for a dual PCB card to work without extreme heat issues.

You're basically thinking of the end result (GPU temperature) and you're not thinking about what it takes to keep it at those levels compared to previous solutions, all that power drawn from your PSU has to go somewhere.

On another note, I'd like to see how many power plugs this thing would need, I don't think it would be too farfetched at least two 8-pin PCI-E and one 6-pin PCI-E even with a 55nm shrink.
 
Lets see around 750 wattage for a whole Systemwith triple SLI 280 GTX. Don't think those power levels are too out there:)

http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-280-sli-triple-review-test/3

And thats peak:)

So really not that much wattage being pumped into the 280 GTX


PC 100% usage (wattage gaming Peak) = 373 Watt load 280 GTX

PC 100% usage (wattage gaming Peak) = 317 Watt load for the 1 gig 4870

thats a 60 watt difference of electricity being pumped into the card. So really 😛
 
1 thing not one person has mentioned that owns, or has owned an nVidia card is, when comparing a nVidia card to a ATI card, the fact that theres more heat coming out the back of your rig is a good thing.

Dont forget, nVidias solution is to dump some of the heat back into the case, unlike ATI. Add that heat out the back, and its similar, as the power requirements are similar, as seen by the 4870 vs the G260 power usage.

So, in the end, Id prefer the heat on the outside of my case, whether its in idle or not, load or not, instead of some being left in my case
 


Method of cooling isn't an excuse, considering it can be changed, I mean we have dual fan 4870 X2s and regular turbine fan 4870 X2s.

Just because of the cooling, thats a stupid reason to say Nvidia just pumps it into the case, I mean thats not that hard to change. I can tell you this though, when I put my hand on the 280 GTX it pumps the heat outside the case, and very minimal inside the case. The 9800 GX2 I had pumped alot more inside the case.

If you look at the X2 and the 280 GTX, they both run a turbine with air being pumped out the back. So I don't kno about this heat in the case. Most of the argument I saw is the 9800 GX2 which pumped out the top, and not reall the sides.
 


But it's as expensive to make as the GTX series, so it's pointless to keep making them at a loss. It's like saying that in order to help your losses at selling Ferraris @ $30,000 a piece you decided to sell Lambos for $20,000 a piece while the competition has excess demand for their VWs and is selling them for $5,000 over value.

The 7950 GX2 was the first dual of Nvidia,
Click to expand...

No, the Gigabyte GV 3D1 66GT, Asus EN6800GT Dual and GV 68GT were the firsts, and then the humongous GF7900GX2


For my 280 GTX, BFG told me that 100 degrees should be the max the card could take, and if it stays around 90 degrees all together its fine, but not recommended. So I mean this whole thing about the heat I personally think its BS. No triple fan, no special cooling. Stock cooling.

So please no more of this heat nonsense, its just not a factor that this card falls under. My 280 GTXs make a 3 way sandwich, barely any air circulates in and out of my case because of water cooling.
Click to expand...

GTX280 consumes more power , in ICs power is turned into heat, GTX280 produces more heat than any other chip. That it runs cooled on its card is a result of the HSF assembly, and that's mainly due to alot more copper than the others.

However put that on a single card or a dual card and now you have to keep the cooling effective enough, that's the problem. Put a huge HSF on and R600 and you can make it's temp lower than a passively cooled HD4650, but that doesn't mean the R600 doesn't have a heat problem that needs to be considered when designing solutions to put the chips in.

PC 100% usage (wattage gaming Peak) = 373 Watt load 280 GTX

PC 100% usage (wattage gaming Peak) = 317 Watt load for the 1 gig 4870

thats a 60 watt difference of electricity being pumped into the card. So really 😛
Click to expand...

The thing to remember is that that's 60Watts that's primarily the GPU out of something where the entire system is running 373 W that's a large amount of power, so say that of the 320 watts in the 4870 half of it is the graphics card, then that's almost 40% more heat for the GTX280, so yeah that's a big difference.
 
BTW, charlie definitely has the knives out for nVidia, but the thing is that even if he's guessing maliciously, he's been getting it right more often than not sofar. Including the extent of the GPU bonding issue and the delay of the 55nm which was expected in August, Sept, Oct, Nov, and Dec by most everyone else (Fuad was saying a fall release which made sense to those of us who delt nV needed something ASAFP).

I wouldn't invest or bet money based on what Charlie says, but I also wouldn't bet against him either right now, especially on something like this where even a successful 55nm transition meant still far from the same production efficiency as the HD4K series (resulting in about 65% as many chips if it were a good transition). The delay suggests it's far from an easy transition, so I would suspect we're still seeing a 2:1 ratio even in 55nm, especially as the HD4K process matures.

PS, in the future Ranger, just link to the articles, it's not only a good policy it's actually also part of the forum rules.
 
Speaking of knives out for Nvidia, I'm about to bring a gun. Anyone see the article on [H]ard about Nvidia renaming the 9 series again? Seeing as they haven't brought any lowend parts out based on the new arch, they will instead rename the current 9 series cards with GTX names. They seriously need to stop trying to hoodwink us and just work on better cards.

I mention this because one, I'm pissed that Nvidia is renaming their cards yet again. Second, I wonder if this is a sign of serious problems. Anands article said that it takes about 9 months to spin a new arch down to the lower price points. While the GTX hasn't been out this long, I take it that they are having issues with the lower end parts. I assume this because they plan to rename current cards to give the appearance that they have a complete portfolio?
 
How come ur mad? You kno about the scheme ahead of time. I don't get how this can anger any1. Do the research and see whats going on. If idiots blindly choose a card, thats good for the company. Life is built on ignorance and I don't think Nvidia is to blame. I think its society to be honest. I mean no1 is mad that 2 months after the 4870 (or 3) the 4870 1 gig came out, pretty much kicking the 4870 512 out.

Honestly if my company had a high selling point by renaming the model...why not? Bring profit in for nothing. Its mostly like the car companies...but no1 says anything about that. Same car, maybe slight redesign. Same features almost.....Yet no1 complains:)

This is quickly turning into an Nvidia Hate forum, rather than a discussion, I mean we're supposed to be finding the problems in both companies, yet we have all fingers pointed at 1. Just link when the 8 series came out, we had our fingers pointed at ATI.

Move on, and look for what you need, don't get mad cuz they'll trick a couple of people.
 
That's old news, we knew for about 2 months that nVidia would be renaming their 9 series to GT 100 to sell to nvidiots around the world. Bet the grass doesn't look so green for the green team right about now...

One thing I hadn't considered that he mentioned is that nvidia has yet to release or even announce on the roadmap any midrange GT200 based products... Bet that whole "We do Huge Single die as opposed to scalable small GPUs" strategy isn't looking so juicy now either....

EDIT: That's simple, back then Nvidia had the lead and wasn't so deceitful, while AMD was letting us down left and right. Now AMD has come through with their claims, while nvidia has been screwing with us, some people are just not happy with their business practices from the past 18 months.
 
past 18 months was the era where Nvidia had the 8800 series out...ATI had nothing, don't forget that ATI was ATI before it became AMD. Now its not ATI, its AMD. Just cuz it has ATI's name, doesn't make it the same company.

Look at the 8800 GTX, its now 2 years running, and that card can sitll do current gen games MAXED OUT, even better than the 2000s 3000s, and the 4850 here and there. I mean really Thats impressive. I haven't seen a card put that much of a fight since the 1950 Pro, which did last, but didn't max out alot of games.

In stead of seeing both ATI and Nvidia making these stupid X2 and GX2 cards, I think both companies could benefit from a single GPU solution. I'll give you this much, atleast ATI put the effort of creating a unique card for the dual GPU instead of sandwiching the cards together like Nvidia.

But really, if it were my choice, 1 card , 1 GPU none of this does it scale crap.
Both companies should concentrate less on creating cards, and more on mastering the drivers that are out now, because honestly the 4000 series drivers are just pathetic at this point, and the tri sli drivers from Nvidia are the same.

Waste of money.
 
Past 18 months was the release of the 8600, when the disappointment began, because let's face it, between the HD 2600 and the 8600 it was a crapfest on the midrange. (You also failed to realize I didn't refer to ATI at any point in my previous post, I referred to AMD)

And even though the single GPU route is optimal to me as well, I rather have smaller, powerful enough GPUs any day over insane power-hungry, heat generating GPUs.


 
Thats where you and me differ, trust me the 8600s were nothing compared to the 500$ power hungry, bulky, slow and boiling hot 2900 XT. I mean both companies had their faults. Yet 1 comes out ontop I don't get it:)

And no 18 months ago, is when prices started dropping, and it was a month before the 8800 GT release....8600s were already pretty cheap then.

Although they didn't do justice in our desktops, they did in our laptops:)
 
I dont sway to either company as you can see from most of my posts. but in this thread some1 needs to play down the middle.

I don't care if you critize the living hell out of Nvidia. Just don't throw useless comments such as marketing schemes. I mean both cards did it. Remember the ATI GTO, XL, XT pro GTS AGP PCI.

Its just a shame to see anger being thrown in 1 direction and not the other.
 
Well I'm not set out to prove either company. Just what some1 needs. Do I prefer Nvidia over ATI? At the moment, yes because as an Enthusiast I take performance over Price/performance.

Seeing as 280 GTX tri is the strongest setup to date.

Do I put favor in Nvidia when giving out opinions. No, because to each his own, I'm not going to suggest a 4870 to tri sli board owned, just like I won't suggest a 260 GTX to a Crossfire board owner.

So please don't give reasons as to why I say what I say, i mean most of the ppl bad mouthing Nvidia are ATI owners, just like the opposite works for Nvidia owners.

So really threads like these will always spark up. I personally don't hold a grudge on either company. I switched to Nvidia cuz of the nonsense 2900 XT, because if that held its own in the market, I would prob still be an ATI holder atm.
 
18 months ago was June 2007 (The 8600 were released on Q2 2007, can't remember exactly when) not October-November 2007, gotta get that clock of yours checked out. And the HD 2900 XT was $380-420, and I don't know if you remember, but I was one of the biggest HD 2900 bashers back then (and it was justified).

I really hope you've just playing dumb with me since the beginning of this thread, because I first explained really well why the GT200 is an insane heat-generator and you didn't seem to get it, but now it's just too much.

The 8800 were good, but that's where it ended, they released the 8600, then paper-launched the 8800GT to hurt AMD sales of the HD 3800s (sneaky, but valid strategy though), then the 8800GTS G92 was released to start the confusion, shortly after the renaming began with the 9 series, and last but not least the release of the GT200 products at ludicrous prices... Reason? The "Just because I can" strategy that doesn't sit too well with me or many of it's customers. And don't forget the crapfest of horrible chipsets released by nvidia since the 680i, which haven't improved much if anything.

Even though it's valid economy to sell products overpriced if there's no competition, If you treat your customers like that, they'll buy once from you, but they might not come back. AMD/ATI could've released the HD 4000 at $300 and $450, but they decided for their own reasons (be it honesty, screwing nvidia or whatever you can think of) to release their cards at great price and that's where the started seducing me to their side.

EDIT: I lean towards ATI now (And I accept it), but it's because of the reasons above, not because I'm just a brainless tool that likes red over green. There's really no price/performance point that nvidia can compete at the moment, so my justified bias is a non-issue for the time being anyway.
 
8600 series april 17th 2007. Moving on

No I haven't been playing dumb, its just every1 is complaining about the scheme, yet you all know about it. None of you did it. Whats there to complain?

will you buy the next rename series? No

then? Long live idiocracy right?

I haven't been playing dumb, I've been playing the devil's advocate. Theres a difference. I mean these are very minimal reasons not to switch a company.

Price/Performance? 260 GTX was first to reach 200$. 9800 GX2 sub 300$ even a couple of months ago, perfomed better than any card out.

Really price/performance was started by ATI but is leaning towards Nvidia atm.

So really? There is no confusion. You don't seem confused do? Whats the problem?
 
The issue liquid is instead of coming up with new cards, they CONTINUE to rename old ones. Aside from the GTX, which consists of two cards, they are still using the same g90/g92 that they've been using for how long now? By the time real new cards show up, that figure will probably be at least 24months.

Anger/hate is the wrong word for me, but it conveys the feeling. I want innovation, not new names to F over the dumb. BTW, before anyone brands me one way or another, the new card in my computer is an 8800GS/9600GSO.
 
Well if the cards still hold their own, might as well port em further, get new public interest. its only been like a year that they've used it:)

They are still good cards right? Renaming them is just another way of saving money. Something ATI needs to learn to do. They already have share holder that owns 20% of AMD all together.

Only reason I'm not that hot over ATI anymore is because its not the same company. AT ALL. Its just AMD. I use to have AMD Xp + ATI nothing else. They fell behind too much. I needed to move forward. Good for them. I'm not jumping to ATI as my main card until I see consistency in performance, not GPU making.

I mean these ones are good, what about the 5000s? what gaurantees are there they will b awesome? None. Same goes for the Nvidia:)

We'll have to wait and see.

I could say the same thing and use my 4870 X2 in my secondary as an excuse for you not to judge me:).

Only reason i bought it because I was on the fence, which was better 4870 X2 quad or 280 GTX tri. I got my answer. So I went tri😛

every1 that posted here knows its a rename. Which is amazing for us. All the old cards will be marked DOWn sooooooo low. I mean ever since the 9800 GT I've been seeing 8800 GTs going for like 90$ in stores. Honestly you guys should be happy.

Out with the old, in with newer:)
 



ive got to disagree with you there, I for one dont like to see anyone getting taking advantage of, whether there nvidia idiots or not, a company should not have to sink that low, and what does it say about said company and the way they treat there buying public
 
In June, when I was claiming the 8800GTX was only a midrange card, I came against alot of opposition to this thought. So, since June, nVidia has made nothing but midrange "new" cards by only renaming them, some for the third time. Foll me once.... but again and again?

Tell me, when people come to forums, asking "I just bought a G150 (or whatevers equivilent to a 98GTX), and had previously owned a 88GTS512, and the performance difference is nil,why", hows this good for nVidia? And why would anyone defend that? If I defended this, Id hope to NOT run into anyone whos been taken in by this deception, as they may not understand why Im defending nVidias naming scheme. This is just a guess, tho maybe they would understand. Accepting this behavior from nVidia isnt acceptable, even if its your preferred company. Theres no "them", or those that buy lessor cards, and Im not affected, as long as Ive got the new top card, and its truly new. This paints nVidia in a bad light, it slows progress overall, just like not implementing DX10.1, which could have been done on nVidias new cards. Just understand, things like this is cutting to the quick, leaving only the most die hards standing fully behind nVidia, and thats not a good thing
 


Fifteen minutes of fame? :na: Try 18 months of pretty much uncontested dominance (Nov 2007 to May 2008). I don't think you have to worry about Nvidia falling behind or being unable to compete with ATI. They are still very competitive in many categories and price points as it is. This isn't close to the situation ATI was in about the time the HD 2000 series was released during the 8000 series dominance (and ATI had to "merge" to survive). ATI has pretty much spent this release and it will most likely be another year or two before they have any sort of meaningful refresh or new release. Nvidia will counter before then. Back and forth between the two - nothing new for the last 8 or 9 years.
 



With today's knowledge would u personally buy a 9800 GTX??? no Why? Cuz u researched. People need to learn to that. That closes everything because well its true:)

Don't forget its not really "Nothing" I mean the 9800 GTX can do tri, while the 8800 GTS can't. So really.....Its up to the consumer to notice these things, ask questions and then find out whats right.

Not rush head first into something that looks like a curtain and then ends up being a wall:)

If you argue this, then I'm sorry we're never going to be on the same page.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom