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 - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Yes that is quite disappointing, but the 3 million transistor count and ddr5 somewaht makes up for it, and the fact that we're told by the red roosters that even 153 bandwith is plenty or just a tiny bit shy, and with what it looks like the 384 bit ddr5 4000 or 4800 data GT300 will come in at 192 bandwith minimum, or more likely 240 bandwith, quite a lot higher than 153.6 for ati's 5870.---
So really, what should I believe now, 153 is really plenty except in a few rare instances, or what you say LOL @ Trolls should believe, that 192 or 240 is worse than 153 ?
--
You might LOL @ TRolls, but from my view, you just made an awful fool of yourself.
HINT: The ati 5870 is only 256bit, not 384, and not 512.
Now, look in the mirror and LOL.
sigmatau - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
I know the ATI cards have 256 bit connections dumb ass. I'm just using your logic (or lack of it.) ATI has been able to outperform Nvidia cards with their 256 bit connections so your point about bandwidth is meaningless idiot.Now go pull that G295 out your ass, ok?
SiliconDoc - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Golly, that ddr5 has nothing to do with bandwith, right, you stupid idiot ?--
Talk to me about the 4850, you lame, near brain dead, doofus. It's got ddr3 on it.
---
See, that's the other problem for you idiotic true believers, NV is moving from 2248 data rate ram on up to 4800.
But you're so able to keep more than one tiny thought in your stupid gourd at once, you "knew that".
BTW, you're not doing what I'm doing, you're not capable of it.
Now that sourpussed last little whine by you, the 295, beats everything ati has, making your simpleton statement A BIG FAT JOKE.
moltentofu - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
My god silicondoc you aren't really succeeding here. At what purpose? To convince people not to buy ati cards? You are such a complete, massive ahole it makes me want to go out and buy ati cards in bulk just to spite you.I'm guessing that if nvidia PR ever watched you rant your all-caps rants they would politely request that you stop associating yourself with their product.
Go ahead everybody google "silicondoc" if you have a strong stomach. Talk about spreading yourself all over the tubes! This guy's fingerprint is unmistakeable. Looks like he got banned on the HondaSwap forums after 14 posts. Guess he sucks on every forum. Maybe anandtech could ban him?
SiliconDoc - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
I think every one of you, that instead of actually leaving me alone, or responding with a counter argument to my points, every one of you that merely got logged in, and ripped away at me with an insult ought to be BANNED.That's what really should happen. I make my complaints and arguments on article and cards and companies, and the lies I see about all those, and most, but not all of you, have no response other than a pure trolling, insulting put down.
Every single one of you that came in, and personally attacked me without posting a single comment about the article, YOU are the ones that need to be banned.
Your collective whining is pure personal attack, and instead of commenting on the article, your love or hate for it, you texted up and did one single thing, let loose a rant against me. Just because you could, just because you felt apparently, "it was taking the high road"... which is as ignorant as the lies I've pointed out.
Time for YOU PEOPLE to be banned.
(minus those of course that actually made counterpoints, wether or not they insulted me or complained when they did - because AT LEAST they actually were discussing points, and contributing to the knowledge and opinion groupings.
Like for instance Monkeypaw, who made a reply that wasn't a pure trolling hate filled diatribe like you just posted, having nothing to do with the article at all.
Take a look in the mirror then consider yourself fella.
bobvodka - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
In which case I request that YOU are banned for calling ME a liar when I did nothing beyond reply telling you how, on launch day, I ordered a HD5870 and had it the next day.SiliconDoc - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
Oh you're full of it again, you pretended your view is the world, and therefore lied your butt off, and in a smart aleck fashion, PERIOD, pretending everyone doesn't know a few trickled out, which if you had clue one, you'd KNOW I was the one who posted that very information on this site.Claiming anyting else, is plain stupid, smart alecky, and LYING.
Just because drunken bob got a card, he claims, on the morning, it shhipped that day, he had it immediately, and has been enojying it ever since, the whole world is satisfied with the paper launch, that "does not exist in bob's drunken vodka world" where who knows what day it is anyeway.
You know, you people are trash,and expecting anyone else to pretend you're not is asking for way too much.
shotage - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
SillyDuck - please tone it down. You're getting out of control again!tamalero - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
hu.. you'r the one insulting every people who doesnt share your opinion with your "RED ROOSTERS" and other stuff...you're really special Mr. Doc, but in the sad way.
SiliconDoc - Thursday, October 1, 2009 - link
What red roosters, there aren't any here I'm told. Just plain frank and honest people who tell the truth.So if I say red rooster, it cannot possibly mean anyone here, posting, lurking or otherwise, as I'm certain you absolutely know.
( not like coming down to your level takes any effort, there you are special, just for you, so you don't feeel so bad about yourself )