(03-18-2015, 07:53 PM)BjorgenFjords Wrote: It's a safe bet that since no actual FACTUAL proof whether Big Maxwell is artificially gimped that neither of you truly know. Just conjecture and each of you can't take the other being right. So.... Stop.
Nvidia can probably do anything they want with the same hardware across GeForce, Quadro, Tesla. All via software.
So guys, it's really not that important. Titan X is a gamers card. Leave it at that.
There is enough FACTUAL proof: the reviewers guide followed by every single reviewer. They all explain the GM200 chip, just like they explained every single GPU before, whether a full chip or not. Why would nVIDIA lie about the quantity of FP64 units? Because they very explicitly said that there are 4 units per SM, down from the 64 on GK110. What gstandford can't seem to get around is that less FP64 units = reduced double precision performance. It's basic math:
4 units * 24 SM = 96
3072 cores / 96 = 32
This where nVIDIA gets their 1:32 rate from. Therefore GM200 cannot go over that rate. It's physically limited. Unless nVIDIA deliberately lied, which I don't believe. Giving that die size increased only 9% and they had to include things like double the ROP count of GK110, double the cache of GK110, among others, I tend to believe that trade off was needed.
(03-18-2015, 11:18 PM)RolloTheGreat Wrote:(03-18-2015, 07:53 PM)BjorgenFjords Wrote: It's a safe bet that since no actual FACTUAL proof whether Big Maxwell is artificially gimped that neither of you truly know. Just conjecture and each of you can't take the other being right. So.... Stop.
Nvidia can probably do anything they want with the same hardware across GeForce, Quadro, Tesla. All via software.
So guys, it's really not that important. Titan X is a gamers card. Leave it at that.
What's interesting to me about all the "DAAAAAAMMMNNNNN Eeeen-VE-DE-AA for milking profits from honest gaming fans!" threads is:
What would you prefer?
An AMD like situation where the company is always one step ahead of the Grim Reaper, low on R&D funds, low on staff, long time between releases and corners cut like the leftover HSFs on the 290 reference models?
Or making big money and putting out nice parts pretty regularly?
I'm sure some internet pundits "who could surely do it better" will say "But tRollo, somewhere between the profiteering and the flirting with bankruptcy is a happy medium where they make a fair profit and we get cards!".
To such naivete' I can only respond:
Sorry, Nvidia exists to take as much of your money as they can by any legal means. They are not your special friends, they are not concerned with anything but your wallet. AMD would do the same thing if they could.
You cannot say that and still say that nVIDIA having a monopoly is indifferent. It's all fine to follow nVIDIA logic as a company. But you cannot say that the status quo is not changed at all with a monopoly. Its already changing. You prefer like that? That's your stance. What you cannot say, for the third time, is that the price equilibrium that exists/existed does not change.