The "pascal" chips shown on the Drive PX 2 module are in fact normal Maxwell GM204. So Nvidia lied again. Looks like they still have problems with Pascal and TSMC's 16FF+ process. AMD in contrast already showed their next gen Polaris GPU based on Glofo's 14LPP back in December running Star Wars Battlefront.
more info: semiaccurate.com/2016/01/11/nvidia-pascal-over-a-year-ahead-of-1416nm-competition/
Jen-Hsun Huang says that this are Pascal GPUs: https://youtu.be/Sdvuhbd1DG8?t=2m30s
pictures of the Drive PX ": www.flickr.com/photos/nvidia/24142175011/
post yfw wood screws are real and nvidia actually used them
Nvidia is slow on process updates, thats normal.
Violating SEC rules however? Hahahahahaha
What'll be interesting is when the differences between TSMC and Samsung/Gloflo's process pop up.
So they lied to all of their investors?
Isn't this shit illegal?
At CES Nvidia displayed what they claimed was a carputer card using 2 new Tegra SoCs with Pascal based GPUs. They touted its awesome performance, and its great perf/watt.
Problem is that it doesn't exist. That card in the OP is a non functional mock up that is using two laptop GPUs. It is made to look like real hardware, but its yet another fake from Nvidia to drum up hype.
No vendor is producing the same design across both foundries. There is no direct way to compare their given characteristics as a consumer.
Where do you read GP100 and Q1 2016 in the OP?
I would also assume that Nvidia would use two GP104 on the drive px 2 based on the 8 TFLOPS for the whole system. I'm also quite sure that there will be no pascal based consumer cards before Q3 2016.
If you compare the two gpus on the drive px 2 with the gpu on the GTX 980 PCB you will see that they are the same (apart from the imprint). Also read the article from semiaccurate.
>In fact they have no competition.
>shilling this hard
>>Problem is that it doesn't exist. That card in the OP is a non functional mock up that is using two laptop GPUs. It is made to look like real hardware, but its yet another fake from Nvidia to drum up hype.
but did they have actual working model show the performance ?
>posting monthly sales as if they mean anything
Nvidia released an entire new product stack during that period, whilst AMD released nothing.
>hurr why r nvidia sell mor?
>August 20, 2015
>AMD's Radeon market share continues to collapse, now resides at a troubling 18 percent
Nobody like the 3xx inb4 390/290
AMD clearly didn't expect TSMC's slip on 16nm to be as bad as it was and just punted on the R9 3xx gen with the exception of "hey, we can do HBM!".
They seem to have their shit together better than Nvidia at least as of CES 2016, where working Polaris cards were supposedly shown behind closed doors to a few select journalists.
Both companies really need to figure out what they'll to in 2017-2020, when they're still stuck on 14/16nm nodes and they already hit thermal/power budget with Pascal and Polaris. :/
what are we supposed to take from this other than the fact that its not HBM?
I think even mid-tier Polaris is still gonna be stuck on GDDR5.
Am I supposed to know Nvidia serial numbers off hand, or it there some reason this couldn't just be their GP104/GTX 1060 or whatever?
Produced in week 3 of 2015 by TSMC.
It's also supposed to be on their 16nm FinFet process.
TSMC, at that date, had absolutely NO chance in producing a working chip with that manufacturing process, much less one the size of Pascal.
it's a shitty notation since it really only applies to ATSC broadcasts or maybe standard HDMI signal modes, but it's easier to type and read than Full [email protected], [email protected] or whatever.
>slimier tech company than nVidia?
> old Microsoft
> even older IBM
> Apple - about par
> Google - selling your life to the gov't and highest corporate bidders
> Facebook - ditto, but at least 2x as Jewish
even AMD has had their fair share of slimy shit in the past.
the whole sector's pretty fucking dirty.
nvidia showed off a functional pascal die all the way back in the summer, showed a live demo behind closed doors in q3 '15 and in the last two weeks sampled GP104 with gddr5x to reviewers. NDA expires soon.
so does this imply a real Q1/Q2 launch, or what?
also, will this just be a cooler and cheaper 980Ti equivalent?
don't feel like waiting till Q4 for real Pascal if newest CurryNiggerTech "reporting" is accurate.
>nVidia at CES present automatic car drive module
>they put two maxwell in the PCB instead of pascal
>OH MY GO NVIDIA LIE IT'S NOT PASCAL ITS OVER
who the fuck care about ????
>Why not just make it use the car's normal cooling system?
Are you crazy, do you know how hot are car radiator, over 200° and the AC will make condensation.
>which gave us Fermi with a fuckton of problems
Can you elaborate because right now the 290, 290x, 390 and 390x are hotter than fermi
>Nvidia is shit
>ATI is shit
>You will never be excited about video cards ever again due to the shitty atmosphere around them
Where do we go from here, boys?
how wasteful is it to use a proper GPU in applications like this?
it seems like all the transistors for special purpose units (ROPs/TMUs/tessellators/whatever) would be completely wasted.
wouldn't something that was just pure ALUs be better for this?
or is just Nvidia trying to force GeForces into a new segment?
>Can you elaborate because right now the 290, 290x, 390 and 390x are hotter than fermi
No, they aren't. GCN throttles at 95 degrees celsius, Fermi didn't, leading to temperatures exceeding the boiling point of water. Fermi also didn't perform very well and had a nasty habit of killing itself. In one case this literally caused a house fire.
thermi and GCN were both designed for GPGPU shit, and I really hope the AMD reverses that trend with Polaris.
Being able to do 1:2 DP:SP in hardware doesn't mean shit to me if it's gimped to like 1:16 or whatever by firmware/driver/fusing.
More transistors to ROPs, cooler ALU array pls.
>AMD has fully functional Polaris chip for live demo
>Nvidia can't even do a mockup
Pascal confirmed delayed?
When will it stop?
because of The Way It's Meant to Be Gimped, most games are bottlenecked by ROP and tessellator throughput, not shader math or bandwidth.
The reason is that Nvidia ROPs do 2x4 pixel blocks while AMD does 4x4, so by flooding the scene with gorillions of 1-pix triangles, they can waste 94% of their competitor's capacity vs. only 88% of their own.
> thanks, HairWorks
>So they lied to all of their investors?
>Isn't this shit illegal?
I don't know, is it?
At least it didn't kill anything, like a laptop display.
inb4 the problems MSI afterburner is causing with crimson, afterburner is third party software that explicitly voids your warranty.
No, they don't. Nvidia has their share of issues too.
Don't think so, it's an assumption in good faith.
Got *anything* to back that up or are you just pulling that out of your arse?
That is one hell of an assumption anon. Remind me how much the 750ti consumes again? How about the GT 620? HD 7750?
This is also ignoring the fact that the cards were frame limited.
>the cards were frame limited.
750ti is used as a mobile chip with the same clock as the desktop version and that's a 60W chip. More power than what the Polaris chip they showed uses.
Just buy a new card every eight years, when the old one struggles to run future-gen games at the lowest possible resolution and graphical settings, rather than every six months to one year when your current one works fine.
Along with the official slides and every tech site that reported it.
Also, your entire argument seems to be "It uses very little power so it must be a mobile chip!" which is some of the dumbest reasoning I've heard in a while.
Old MS, new MS if you count Botnet10, old IBM, Facebook with their constant psychological experimentation on users that's barely legal. Google steals your data, but at least they contribute to OSS and tell you what they're stealing.
ITT: AMDerps don't realize that prototypes are basically mockups for marketing and actually think that polaris is taped out and ready just because AMD told them so and they 'demoed' it with bullshots.
Again you're all retarded for comparing imaginary products that don't even exist yet.
>Pascal hasn't been seen running once
>amdrones trying to force a meme THIS hard
I suspect a March/April release.
was this a product release or a trade show? Why would they show off the guts of unreleased hardware at a tradeshow?
all we normally get is heatsink shrouds on mockups in those big assemblies
Prototype for self driving car bullshit.
It's not a product for the market anytime soon. It's literally marketing bullshit which is what Prototype means. The end product will probably be nothing like what is demoed.
AMDerps just reaching for straws.
>NVIDIA IS FINISHED CARS ARE OVER
>Live demo for journalists
>Journalists got actual chips to hold and lock at
>Su says Polaris in stores before Back to School Season
>Nvidiots still pretend it's not happening
Maybe (what these AMDrones don't want to admit) Nvidia doesn't want to leak any of the future possible BTFOness of Pascal to AMD while secretly mass producing them and showing off Maxwell for (kek self driving car prototype this shit isn't even for market).
>Lol Pascal is ded lol
>At the 2015 Consumer Electronics Show, graphics chip designer NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) unveiled the first-generation of its Drive PX platform for automobiles, aimed at enabling advanced driver assistance features and, eventually, autonomous driving. The hardware was impressive, featuring two of the company's Tegra X1 SoCs, and more than 50 automakers, suppliers, developers, and research institutions have used the platform for autonomous-driving research and development.
Drive PX is a deep learning platform. Software is trained on a supercomputer by feeding it enormous amounts of data, and that software is then run on the Drive PX system within a car to identify objects such as other cars, pedestrians, and road signs.
The second-generation product, unimaginatively called Drive PX 2, was announced at the 2016 Consumer Electronics Show. Drive PX 2 is vastly more powerful than the first-generation product, with NVIDIA stating that the new platform has more than 10 times the computational horsepower than the original Drive PX. Drive PX 2 consists of two next-generation Tegra processors,
>Anything to do with Pascal
>Implying Polaris has
Except AMD showed it off to journalists behind closed doors last month, and a number of them have confirmed seeing it up close and in person. Even faggot Nvidia shill Ryan Shrout noted that he'd seen it.
I should have bought AMD stock back when it was $1.7 a piece.
He gets on AMD's shit too; like when they pulled the marketing slide that compared memory quantity as if it was performance for the 390X vs 980.
Or that article where he called the exact performance of the 7970 vs 680 and had the 680 ontop.
I bet you think this shit is really pascal too amirite?
>AMD is expecting so much volume
Inaccurate. They're using two fabs because they're also fabing Zen. Don't be fooled into thinking they're expecting large volumes. Apparently the yields on 14nm are low as fuck unless your name is Intel.
>Apparently the yields on 14nm are low as fuck unless your name is Intel.
>i7 and i5 shortages still ongoing
Nope, not even for Intel. There's a reason why Broadlake was delayed until the launch of Skylake.
there are no linux drivers for my 2yr old ati card and trying to code OpenCl and OpenGl on windows with a shitty ati dev tool that havent been updated in 5 yrs is not going to happen.
Nvidia all the way, everyone saying something else is an unskilled pleb on windows or mac
This, anyone shitting on Nvidia's drivers because they aren't open source need some perspective because AMD's attitude to software and drivers is 'just make your own lol, ours will probably just fry your cards'
There are still shortages of select 14nm silicon that are best suited for the unlocked SKUs. I'm guessing that the acceptable yields are far greater, but either the performance consistencies have become tighter (yielding less stellar chips per batch) or the performance consistencies are lower than intended (causing a much more stringent performance goal and again reducing the number of acceptable chips per batch).
I'm going to go with yields being average, but the performance consistencies being too tight, leading to a much smaller number of unlocked-ready chips.
Which also means Samsung.
>AMD doesn't have to even have a relationship with Samsung for that, there are load sharing agreements between Samsung and GF for 14nm, so it stands to reason some of the AMD product will be fabbed by Samsung.
They said is was Pascal, implying that pascal is not only taped out but in production.
If it was not pascal, then that is securities fraud - as clearly then pascal is not ready for production.
All of this culminates in the fact that some investors may have made decisions based upon 'facts' presented by nvidia which were in fact falsehoods.
This isn't 'fraud' because a few neckbears won't get their GPUs early, it's fraud because they've lied to investors.
Ok then let me say it differently: There is no driver that doesnt crash the system the moment you install it.
Youve never tried it obv because if you did you wouldnt write any of this.
After 3 days of trying to make this shit run I stopped. I will never ever buy ati again.
I think it was here, but last year I remember an anon threatening to kill himself halfway through January. Somebody mentioned a release date and he said thought it was still December and realized he wasted a month of his life doing whatever.
Prototypes are not final products. Especially considering it's literally an unrelated product and a PROTOTYPE of a product that's literally not even in consideration of production.
Any conclusions you draw from your own deductions is not fucking fraud you delusional autistic cuntrag.
Again conclusions you draw from observations and deductions are not fraud. Just because some speculators get burned doesn't mean it's fraud. It's not a misleading and deceptive statement.
>muh internet lawyering while not actually educated in law
>Implying self driving cars are a thing in 2016
>Intend to sell development kits to car industry
>Pretend to have a prototype with Pascal chips working
>Turns out it's fake
>Turns out Pascal is nowhere near as ready as Nvidia promised
>Intend is the same as selling right now
>Prototypes are the final product: the meme
>It's fake (LOL PROTOTYPE MOCKUP HARDWARE ISN'T THE FINAL PRODUCT: RING THE NEWSPAPERS THE SKY IS BLUE)
>Turns out pascal is nowhere near as ready as Nvidia promised  [conjecture and imagination aren't the same as facts]
>The DRIVE PX 2 development engine will be generally available in the fourth quarter of 2016. Availability to early access development partners will be in the second quarter.
They are promising working products by Q2 and they only have a crude mockup to show now. Clearly there is something wrong considering Pascal should already be in volume production if they want to beat Polaris to market.
The development engine is the product, dipshit.
They don't have it. They don't have it because they don't have any Pascal chips. By Q2 AMD will already have Polaris in stores while Pascal is only available in limited numbers for whichever car makers are lucky enough to be Nvidia's "early access" partners.
Nvidia hasn't talked about consumer GPUs at CES because they won't have any before the second half of 2016. That's probably how bad it is.
>is the product
No it isn't, it's for devs to develop software for the product.
It doesn't even mention a devkit. It's literally software.
>They won't have any before the second half of 2016
The last time the announced the Maxwell launch they literally released chips the next day. So if their last launch is anything to go by they like keeping stuff on the hush because of the strategic advantage and not actually playing catch up like AMDumb who have to hoot and holler 24/7 in case people forget they exist.
They are promising Volvo trial cars on the streets with actual customers driving them in 2016.
Do you think Volvo will let customers step into cars running on hardware that has only been available for testing since 2016?
>Do you think Volvo will let customers step into cars running on hardware that's only been available for testing since 2016?
No, but they'll sure let a bunch of retarded devs jump into it and get themselves killed in the name of making safer cars for their customers.
>Volvo will use the NVIDIA DRIVE PX 2 deep learning-based computing platform to power a fleet of 100 Volvo XC90 SUVs that will hit public roads next year, driven by actual customers as part of the the Swedish carmaker’s Drive Me autonomous-car pilot program.
Well how the hell could you look at an unlabeled die and call it a GM204 then?
It isn't labeled, it looks like a slightly different size (maybe, even if it was it doesn't matter).
I'm not trying to side with nvidia here as they are known liars, but to say that is a GM204 is just retarded.
Can someone explain the nvidia woodscrew meme to me again?
roughly six years ago JHH was waving around pic related at a presentation and claiming it was a functional Fermi card.
There was an 8pin on the side
that didn't match up with any leads on the PCB
and two stickers were literally cut in half
they cut it with a hacksaw.
yeah, that was hilariously bad.
"Pascal" Drive PX 2 could at least be a functional prototype, but their marketing would never allow them to say it wasn't Pascal at this point in time.
Is Polaris/Pascal the next 970 Pro/Dustbuster situation?
Most prototypes for show at conferences are faked, and then the real deal is finished up in time for release, this isn't "faking" they just need some issues to work out, and show a similar product to investors and nerds.
you are forgetting that the current goes both ways... 3 ground wires 3 +12v ones.
Even still, thats 180 watts + whatever wattage the pcie slot has.
6 pin has some much smaller standards of 75 watts.
>Wonder how that works because the corsair psus allows up to 40 amps.
The PCIe spec allows for only 150W over PCIe 8 pin though. Which is ridiculously small. the G18 cables most quality PSUs use can handle more than twice as much without being in danger to get to hot.