gpus - Gizmodo

posts about #gpus more →
Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
Giz Explains: Why Tech Standards Are Vital For Apple (And You)
Your Graphics Card Is Obsolete Again: ATI and Nvidia DirectX 11 Cards Soon
AMD Unveils World's First DirectX 11 Graphics Processor, Takes It for a Spin in Public
Renesas Cellphone Processor Handles HD Video at 1080p With Surround Sound
Why Windows 7 Is Snappier Than Vista
ARM's GPUs Will Make This Year's Mainstream Phones More Powerful Than the Current iPhone
Ex-Apple Engineers' Caustic Startup Promises 200x Faster Ray-Tracing Graphics by 2010 (Suck It, Crysis)
Do the New MacBook Pros Have Faulty Nvidia Graphics Cards?
Nvidia GeForce GTX 295 Graphics Card Is Insane: Two GTX 260s Bolted Together

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

Gregory Carvlin
10/01/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
But what will it run now that it can run crysis?
Reply

Ghede promoted this comment Edited by Gregory Carvlin at 10/01/09 2:59 AM Gregory Carvlin was starred Gregory Carvlin was unstarred

Ghede
10/01/09

@Gregory Carvlin: Will it run fifteen instances of crysis?
Reply

Ghede was starred Ghede was unstarred

mikecoscia
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
Finally a GPU to go along nicely with my i7
Reply

SegamanXero promoted this comment mikecoscia was starred mikecoscia was unstarred

nicolasgoddone
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
Actually they don't need to explain the name since Enrico Fermi actually developed the 1st nuclear reactor :S thats ... [en.wikipedia.org]
there's the little poodle for ya
Reply

SegamanXero approved this comment nicolasgoddone was starred nicolasgoddone was unstarred

Nick
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
alright, to all you dorks that keep calling matt out and seem to be new to the interwebs -- look at the damn article title before *gasp* saying matt doesn't know who fermi is. it's not just a coincidence. friggin' 'tards.
Reply

Nick was starred Nick was unstarred

CommentingpointlesslyisMeh
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
So...DirectX11 or no?
Reply

Grinning Kestrel
09/30/09

@CommentingpointlesslyisMeh: Yes.
Reply

SegamanXero promoted this comment Grinning Kestrel was starred Grinning Kestrel was unstarred

Kakkoii
09/30/09

@CommentingpointlesslyisMeh:

GT300Runs:
DX11, DirectCompute, OpenCL, OpenGL, CUDA, C code, C++ code and FORTRAN code. It can basically do what your CPU does now, but a whole lot freaking better. It won't be hard at all for someone to port their windows applications to run on Nvidia's GPU's now.
Reply

SegamanXero approved this comment Kakkoii was starred Kakkoii was unstarred

hfutrell
09/30/09

@Kakkoii: "It can basically do what your CPU does now, but a whole lot freaking better. It won't be hard at all for someone to port their windows applications to run on Nvidia's GPU's now"

I hate to poop your party, but GPUs are not just super awesome CPUs.
Reply

dingus promoted this comment hfutrell was starred hfutrell was unstarred

Kakkoii
10/01/09

@hfutrell: And I love to poop on your party, because I never said they were. I said this new one is. Nvidia has configured their cores to now finally do C and C++ operations without need for rewriting your whole code. Read the damn article.
Reply

Kakkoii was starred Kakkoii was unstarred

hfutrell
10/22/09

@Kakkoii: "It can basically do what your CPU does now, but a whole lot freaking better" Read your own comment instead.

I can name you quite a few things your CPU can do better than Fermi will: branching, recursion, or any task that can't be parallelized into thousands of threads. The fact that Fermi can run C++ code does not imply it will do it better than the CPU for a given task. #nvidiafermi
Reply

hfutrell was starred hfutrell was unstarred

Nick
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
matt, what disappointements me about this article is the absence of the word teraflop. why didn't you say teraflop?
Reply

Nick was starred Nick was unstarred

OCEntertainment
09/30/09

@Nick: "Here. Here's the graphics card you'll need for your machine."
"How many teraflops does it have?"
"....."
Reply

OCEntertainment was starred OCEntertainment was unstarred

Kakkoii
09/30/09

@Nick: Because we can't know how many Teraflops it's capable of until we know that clock rate of the GPU and Memory.

But if I had to guess, it's at least 4 Teraflops+
Reply

SegamanXero approved this comment Kakkoii was starred Kakkoii was unstarred

Xndingo
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
i can finally rub everything about the new nvidia gpu specs to my friend's face!he kept blubing about how ati is better cause he has an ati card and that they have gddr5 and it's double,triple,quadzillion pumped!hell yeah!
Reply

ripfire promoted this comment Xndingo was starred Xndingo was unstarred

ripfire
09/30/09

@Xndingo: Just make sure you guys mop up the floor when you're done with your contest.
Reply

ripfire was starred ripfire was unstarred

CodeJanitor
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
Fermi, Enrico Fermi. I'd like my graphics radiated, not stirred.
Reply

SegamanXero approved this comment CodeJanitor was starred CodeJanitor was unstarred

Topsy_Elephante
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
Fermi is named for Enrico Fermi. He did some key early research on the first controlled nuclear reaction at the University of Chicago.
Reply

Bertone77 promoted this comment Topsy_Elephante was starred Topsy_Elephante was unstarred

FuzzysFriedChicken
09/30/09

@Topsy_Elephante: You would think people on a tech site would know one of the more famous scientists of the 1900s.
Reply

matt buchanan promoted this comment FuzzysFriedChicken was starred

matt buchanan
09/30/09

@FuzzysFriedChicken: uh, hence the references to radioactivity and nuking in the headline. still sounds like a poodle.
Reply

matt buchanan was starred matt buchanan was unstarred

LastVigilante
09/30/09

@Topsy_Elephante: Fermilab is practically in my backyard. My lawn is fertilized by smashed atoms and quark fragments.
Reply

SegamanXero promoted this comment LastVigilante was starred LastVigilante was unstarred

anexanhume
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
I think your description answers your own question about the name guys.

Now give me benchmarks.
Reply

anexanhume was starred anexanhume was unstarred

Anonymoose
09/30/09

@anexanhume: *randomly throws out number while waving index finger in the air frantically*

12!
Reply

valkilmerisawful promoted this comment Anonymoose was starred Anonymoose was unstarred

valkilmerisawful
09/30/09

@Anonymoose: What? 479,001,600? That IS impressive.
Reply

valkilmerisawful was starred valkilmerisawful was unstarred

Acheron's Grief
09/30/09

@valkilmerisawful: @Phokal: @Anonymoose: WRONG! It's 42! It's ALWAYS 42!
Reply

valkilmerisawful promoted this comment Acheron's Grief was starred Acheron's Grief was unstarred

valkilmerisawful
09/30/09

@Acheron's Grief: @Phokal: @ Anonymoose: That's what I said... 479,001,600... What's the problem :)
Reply

valkilmerisawful was starred valkilmerisawful was unstarred

taniquetil
09/30/09

@valkilmerisawful:

Vegeta, what does 3dMark06 say about it's power level?

IT"S OVER X90000!!!!!
Reply

valkilmerisawful promoted this comment taniquetil was starred taniquetil was unstarred

valkilmerisawful
09/30/09

@taniquetil: Hahahahaha

"IT'S... NOT... POSSIBLE!!"

HEART CLICKYUP!
Reply

valkilmerisawful was starred valkilmerisawful was unstarred

hazmx
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
I will just say it. It will ok many of those GPu already do.
Reply

hazmx was starred hazmx was unstarred

Anonymoose
09/30/09

@hazmx: i appreciate that you went ahead and just said it, but i'd appreciate it if you just said it again, but with all the words this time.
Reply

dingus promoted this comment Anonymoose was starred Anonymoose was unstarred

32ndnote
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
Fermi's a pretty good sad poodle name. If that's what they were going for, they should have named it "li'l brudder" though.
Reply

Edited by 32ndnote at 09/30/09 5:15 PM 32ndnote was starred 32ndnote was unstarred

32ndnote
09/30/09

/*image upload fail*/
Reply

Edited by 32ndnote at 09/30/09 5:17 PM 32ndnote was starred 32ndnote was unstarred

superg05
09/30/09

In reply to Nvidia Fermi Next-Gen Graphics Architecture Has 512 Cores for Radioactively Melting Faces
now get together with amd and apply to a cpu
Reply

dingus promoted this comment superg05 was starred superg05 was unstarred

dingus
09/30/09

@superg05: I'd like you to think about that for a minute and get back to me when you've figured out why that will never happen.
Reply

dingus was starred dingus was unstarred

John Lin
09/03/09

In reply to Giz Explains: Why Tech Standards Are Vital For Apple (And You)
I've worked with an "open standard" committee before and like to contribute here.
I think there is A LOT of confusion due to the complexity of the issues.

First, there is some confusion between "open standard" and "proprietary" - the two concepts are not mutually exclusive, but are often used interchangeably carelessly. In many cases, that is ok, but in other cases, it just adds to misunderstanding.

Proprietary simply refers to who owns it - and most standards are owned by somebody - a company, an alliance, a non-profit group. For example, "Microsoft proprietary standard" simply means Microsoft owns it. It could still be an open standard.

An open standard is one that is accessible by a other entities, usually for little or no fee, but usually still requires some license agreement to acknowledge ownership, define "compliance" with the standard, and how licensees can claim support of the standard.

The structure of fees is usually hidden from consumers - the manufacturers pay - whether a flat fee or a per unit fee - so just because it's open doesn't mean that its free.

For many standards "developed" by non-profit organizations (Bluetooth, for example) - there are actually companies who participate in supporting the non-profit, both by contributing funds as well as engineering resources. (Standards don't just write themselves) Sometimes, companies license or transfer their technology (patents) to the non-profits as part of their contribution and to help speed along development. (After all, why keep reinventing the wheel?) But sometimes, committees staffed with people from competing companies have conflicts and need to work through them - sometimes resulting in compromises that no one is happy with.

Obviously, the companies that are interested in helping develop a standard have something to gain by it - by selling chips or connectors, or by being able to plan for incorporation of new standards into their products.

For companies like Apple, there are many factors to consider in whether to go proprietary or to adopt an open standard. Is the open standard a quicker way to market? (maybe, maybe not - some committees take a very long time to get consensus to ratify a new standard) Open standards may mean greater choice of suppliers - there are many USB controller chip suppliers, for example. Open standard components may cost less due to more competition among suppliers. An open standard may mean more potential partners. On the other hand, proprietary standard may mean more control, quicker to market and better fit for the company's goals, as well as competitive advantage.

There are strategic reasons to consider on top of all that. Microsoft didn't sell more Windows OS by developing IE - but it didn't want to be left behind and let potential competitors develop substantial revenue sources. Microsoft's consistent strategy has been to develop their own standards and products to compete with any market leader - witness IE, MSN, WMV, Zune, Bing. Apple, on the other hand, adopts open standards when it makes sense, and develops proprietary when available open standards don't exist or aren't a good fit with it's (Steve's) vision for new products.

Basically, my point is that, as much as we all want to distill complex situations down to the simplest terms - good/bad - the reality is almost never that simple. Life would be boring if it were, no?
Reply

matt buchanan approved this comment John Lin was starred John Lin was unstarred

Worf
09/03/09

In reply to Giz Explains: Why Tech Standards Are Vital For Apple (And You)
Actually, Apple charged a license fee to use the term "FireWire". That's why there are 3 different names for it. FireWire cost 25 cents a device (it's free now). That's why PCs called it IEEE1394 (the standard behind it). Sony did their own thing and introduced the unpowered version, which they called i.Link.

And USB 3.0 can't beat Firewire in a few areas, notably instant networking (plug two computers together via one FireWire cable - instant network), or remote debugging (kernel debuggers often use FireWire or serial).

It won't die out - it's a better a/v spec than USB - even 3.0 won't beat it in that regard.
Reply

matt buchanan promoted this comment Worf was starred Worf was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

Gizmodo Team

SUBSCRIBE TO Gizmodo

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment