GM200/Titan X announced with slow DP

[Picao84]

[quote='Picao84' pid='1038' dateline='1426757061']

I have no idea what your talking about when you say your being hunted for being pro AMD.  Do W-H-A-T-?

I'm not posting more here, but this point needs clarified. I am NOT pro AMD or an AMD fan, nor have ever been. I'm neutral with a slight bias towards nVIDIA (did you play Bioware/D&D games? Same logic as "neutral good"). Here is the the point that here some cannot understand. Here, if you post something that is not along the lines of "nVIDIA is good/AMD is bad", you are seen as pro AMD. Rubbish. Yes, I did imply Rollo and Keysplayr are overly pro nVIDIA, which is not exactly unknown to anyone. And I only said that after Keysplayr got in the way of my debate with Rollo, not to add something to the conversation, but to, out of the blue, say that my post was overly emotional. His first post on this thread. That is very significant and set the new tone. Something that he continued doing as the thread progressed. That is my rational for the "pack" comment, since most of his posts targeted me instead of adding to the conversation. Had he not done that, things were probably different. Clarification over.

---

You can't design a modern FP64 unit to be as slow as 1/32 natively.

Its not the unit itself that it is slow. But I've already shown you the math behind the "1/whatever" rate. You ignored it. I actually learned it from real CUDA developers that know how the chip works and try to extract every bit of performance from the chips. But hey, what do they know right?

nvidia doesn't fundamentally alter the ALU's in a SMX between big and small die either.  The Scheduler may get more capable between big and small dies (as was the case with GK110 vs GK104).

Basically you design the SMX once, and that is the basis for everything from the smallest Tegra die to the monster Tesla die.

The only thing that differs is the number of SMX's on the chip and how complex the scheduler is.

*sigh* Wrong, wrong, wrong.

GK104 SMX:


GK110 SMX:


Impressive how many here go "la,la,la,la" and say there is not factual evidence when nVIDIA is so open about it. Instead they rely on "ifs" and "buts" and hypothesis that nVIDIA is not saying the full truth, bla, bla, bla. They rely on "wishful thinking" and their own flawed interpretation of how things work, and accuse the person who presents facts of "spewing bullshit". Hey, sorry if I expected such big nVIDIA fans to actually read technical material (White Papers) provided by nVIDIA themselves.

Go on on your crusade Gstanford for an holy grail that does not exist (GM200 cannot go over 1:32). I won't delay you more.