@Hans

"Wrong. To be GLSL capable, the hardware must have programmable vertex and fragment/pixel shaders (plus geometry shaders for advanced stuff, but not a requirement for basic GLSL)"

Well I kind of assumed that was a given, considering we talk about a programming language.

"Not only that, but the shaders must support a certain minimum set of features. This is why some cards are listed as shader model 2, 3 or 4 cards, the GPU has enough functionality to support shader model 2, 3, or 4."

To start with,
Shader model # has nothing to do with OpenGL whatsoever. it's DirectX shader specifications.

And no, GLSL or OpenGL for that matter does not care #### about how the driver implements the functionality. They only specifies what should be supported- this is also why OpenGL is not pixel exact.

@DrBombcrater

Quote:

DrBombcrater wrote: @Hans Quote: Journalists should be reporting on what has happened, not making predictions on the future, or claiming to know what people were thinking. There's plenty of predictions/speculation/guesswork in journalism, there has to be. Check out any newspaper or TV channel for examples. You mention Charlie's assertion that NVidia management is killing the company. That's business analysis - taking known facts and extrapolating future trends using (in this case) the writer's own knowledge of the industry and the company in question. That's a perfectly respectable task for a journalist; open a copy of the Financial Times or Wall Street Journal, although unlike them Charlie doesn't charge you for reading

I'm well aware of rampant speculation of mainstream media. Here we have journalists who turn every article they write into a reason why their favourite political party will win, or should win, the next election (effectively trying to change events rather than reporting on them). A journalist's job is to report what's happening with as little bias as possible. Just because mainstream media doesn't stick to this, doesn't mean that it's all okay.

Now on to your suggestion that his assertion that NVidia is being killed by mismanagement is just business analysis. That is NOT business analysis, that is stating an opinion as if it were fact. He lacks the data required to do any proper business analysis, and nothing was given to back that up. Quoting sales figures and trends, and saying what might happen if the current trends continues is one thing, stating that it's all due to mismanagement is another.

Hans

_________________
http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work.

@Frek

Quote:

Frek wrote: @Hans "Not only that, but the shaders must support a certain minimum set of features. This is why some cards are listed as shader model 2, 3 or 4 cards, the GPU has enough functionality to support shader model 2, 3, or 4." To start with, Shader model # has nothing to do with OpenGL whatsoever. it's DirectX shader specifications.

If you compare DirectX specifications with the GLSL specifications, you will see that Shader Model 2 cards are insufficient for GLSL. Many of the manufacturers use the DirectX specifications as the reference for what they support. It's not ideal, but which shader model is supported is often the closest that you get to knowing whether the hardware has everything that GLSL needs or not.

Quote:

And no, GLSL or OpenGL for that matter does not care #### about how the driver implements the functionality. They only specifies what should be supported- this is also why OpenGL is not pixel exact.

And cards that are listed as supporting shader model 2 do not support everything that GLSL specifies, end of story. Claiming that a card is GLSL capable because the driver emulates all the missing functionality in software is not going to get a game that requires that missing functionality working. Nor do I think that you can really call them fully GLSL capable, and that goes for older ATI and NVidia cards too.

Hans

_________________
http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work.

@DrBombcrater

Quote:

It's more a case of the AMD chipset market abandoning NVidia.

I agree the problem is nVidia not the too small market. If they had a product that was more competitive this wouldn't be a problem. Not sure what AMD's current marketshare was but earlier this year it was in the low 20s.

nVidia made chipsets for Apple who clearly do not have a 20% marketshare so small markets seems to be one they thought they could play in. Rumors are Apple is dumping nVida with a Mac mini Atom powered with GPU on the CPU from Intel in early 2010. We'll see if the rumors are true.

@Hans

Well with that logic no card will be GLSL capable other but intermitent, as the GLSL specification evolves with every release.

@BrianK

Quote:

nVidia made chipsets for Apple who clearly do not have a 20% marketshare so small markets seems to be one they thought they could play in. Rumors are Apple is dumping nVida with a Mac mini Atom powered with GPU on the CPU from Intel in early 2010. We'll see if the rumors are true.

isn't the Intel Mac Mini using Intel graphics?

maybe this will make a few feel better?
Nvidia announces next-gen graphics chip

it's a two pager with lots of info

_________________
"The system no longer works " -- Young Anakin Skywalker

@Interesting

Quote:

isn't the Intel Mac Mini using Intel graphics?

Nope. nVidia 9400M

Quote:

Nvidia announces next-gen graphics chip

Actually with the problems nvidia is having right now I feel better not using them. As for the GT300/Fermi -- that is also being discussed in the thread. They showed a mock up and claimed to demonstrate a real one. (Just don't look at the hardware). It was supposed to launch in Nov but won't come until early 2010. When asked why they said 'Cuz it's f***king hard to make a video card this complex'. (Edit) This gives ATI time to own the market and time to make a similar top end chip.

Last edited by BrianK on 09-Oct-2009 at 01:41 AM.
Last edited by BrianK on 09-Oct-2009 at 12:06 AM.

@Interesting

The first revisions of Intel Mac Mini used GMA 900 unless I misremember.

Here's a recent description of nVidia's problem.

nVidia released the GT220 and GT210 cards. They average about $75 and $45, respectively. nVidia already has cards at this price point. The 9600 series is a bit less, $50-$80 depending on your memory selection. nVidia's 9600 bests the GT220 in performance. The same goes for the GT210 against the 9500 series. The 9500 series is closer in price to the GT210 and performance is closer but the win still goes to the older and less expensive option.

The GT2x0 does have some better option such as LPCM over HDMI and Direct X 10.1. The later adds a bit of performance, nothing to write home about. For Home Theatre fans the LPCM over HDMI is a nice add and a good reason to use the new cards.

Except (you know there's always an except) not only does nVidia lose against itself in price it gets smacked around by ATI. For $60 one can get an ATI HD4670. It beats the GT220 card in everything. Add in here the GT220 does have an expensive $80 option w/ GDDR3 memory. For $10 more one can get an ATI HD4850 card, that nearly doubles the performance of the GT220, which is promptly sent home crying to Mommy.

Sorry nVidia but a more expensive cards with less performance and DirectX 10.1 when 11 is a week away is not a winning product.

@BrianK

Well, nVidia is "positioning" the GT220 between the 9500 en 9600 series, so the performance is around what you would expect, a bit to low perhaps. Not many dx10.1 titles around as well ofcourse.

However, the naming conventions that nVidia has used in the past 2 years is not making all of this any easier at all.

Last edited by Seer on 14-Oct-2009 at 04:05 PM.

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

@Seer

Quote:

Well, nVidia is "positioning" the GT220 between the 9500 en 9600 series, so the performance is around what you would expect, a bit to low perhaps.

I have no problem having multiple chips for different performance segments. It's rolling out a new processor with less performance at a higher price. The GT220 is priced at and above the 9600 series. The 9600 outperforms the GT220. Sp another way at looking at this might be the GT220 is a bit too low, at least for it's price.

@Seer

Or go here

http://www.osnews.com/story/22314/


The real interesting stuff starts at paragraph 6.

Guess who will have first and best access to a CPU/GPU combo from wintel,,, oops, intel.

And, other than the OS, what will make Macs different?

If the graphic card companies disappear...........?

@Mechanic

Quote:

Guess who will have first and best access to a CPU/GPU combo from wintel,,, oops, intel. And, other than the OS, what will make Macs different?

Don't forget Apple now owns their own CPU developers. We've yet seen what is to come of that arrangement. Move from x86 to MIPS perhaps?

Quote:

If the graphic card companies disappear...........?

They wont. They just won't be stand alone companies but part of a larger chip developer company. ATI+AMD making AMD for example.

I'll create a new rumor. ATI is weak. ATI may well be positioning themselves for a take over. Apple might bite.

@Frek

Quote:

To start with, Shader model # has nothing to do with OpenGL whatsoever. it's DirectX shader specifications.

OpenGL roughly follows DirectX releases. For example, OpenGL 3.0 is roughly equal to Direct3D 10.0.

"Full use of OpenGL 3.0 requires the same level of hardware as is required for DirectX 10 support" - Wiki.

Last edited by Hammer on 15-Oct-2009 at 01:56 PM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)

Looks like Charlie Demerjian was right yet again. NVidia confirmed to AnandTech that they are ceasing production of the GT200b GPU and all cards based on it (GTX260/275/285,etc) have gone EOL:

Quote:

NVIDIA told me two things. One, that they have shared with some OEMs that they will no longer be making GT200b based products. That’s the GTX 260 all the way up to the GTX 285. The EOL (end of life) notices went out recently and they request that the OEMs submit their allocation requests asap otherwise they risk not getting any cards.

Not a surprising move, to be honest. They already lose money on most of the GTX cards, the price cuts required to make them competitive against the new Radeons would bleed NVidia dry very quickly. But it is catastrophic for those NVidia board partners that don't have another line of business to fall back on, those guys probably won't be in business in a couple of months because there's no money to be made selling uncompetitive low-end DX10/10.1 cards, which is all NVidia has now.

_________________
Who do you serve, and who do you trust? - Galen

Well, Considering Apples new line up (who is an affiliated partner with nVidia) consists of nVidia based gpus only.
I consider this rumor debunked now.

@Frek

You need to pay attention. It's not a rumour, to repeat what I said before, Nvidia confirmed the death of the GT200b to AnandTech:

"NVIDIA told me two things. One, that they have shared with some OEMs that they will no longer be making GT200b based products. That’s the GTX 260 all the way up to the GTX 285. The EOL (end of life) notices went out recently..."

And the Apple situation isn't relevant. Their new models are using the GeForce 9400M, which is an IGP not a GPU, and the one remaining product of NVidia's doomed chipset division. As far as I can see Apple is exclusively using AMD GPUs in its new models, which ties in with the rumour that they recently purchased AMD's entire remaining stock of Radeon 4850 and 4870 cards.

Last edited by DrBombcrater on 20-Oct-2009 at 07:25 PM.

_________________
Who do you serve, and who do you trust? - Galen

@DrBombcrater

Did you pay attention to the article you linked to?

"If you look carefully, neither of these statements directly supports or refutes the two articles above. NVIDIA is very clever.

NVIDIA’s explanation to me was that current GPU supplies were decided on months ago, and in light of the economy, the number of chips NVIDIA ordered from TSMC was low. Demand ended up being stronger than expected and thus you can expect supplies to be tight in the remaining months of the year and into 2010."

...

"If anything, NVIDIA has proved to be a resilient company. Other than Intel, I don’t know of any company that could’ve recovered from NV30."

...

You are right however; the stronger models features Radeon.
GT 120 is still present widely - which is to be considered "middle-end market" so, the original article is fubar.

@Frek

Did you pay attention to the article you linked to?

Reading the part you bolded, nVidia doesn't confirm the rumors (duh) but doesn't deny them either. If the rumors are 100% false why not deny them ? Some truth must be in the nay sayers stories.

You may also notice nVidia is holding (stopping) development of both Intel and AMD chip sets, giving "bogus" (imho) reasons to do so. (AMD market share being low (as it was ever really high to begin to be honest) and Intel doing with it's cpu what AMD has been doing for ages already.

Anyway, there's more to it then nVidia is telling, not saying the doom talkers are right. But if nVidia wanted they could easily order a few extra chips to meet "demand".

Let's see if they can bring out an affordable GT300 before xmas. If not AMD is in for a good ending this year.

Last edited by Seer on 20-Oct-2009 at 11:05 PM.

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

@Seer

No serious companies deny or confirm rumors based on speculation through official channels, no matter how true or false they are.
So that reason is void.

I don't think we will see anything new prior to christmas from nVidia, neither do I think it's important for the long perspective.