NV40 Yields

I

Inside_line

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 6, 2004
Messages
144
Hey guys, I was wondering what everyones perspectives are on the geforce 6 series yields. Obviously they are having huge problems with yield, since how long ago the card was introduced.... and you still have to be on 'pre-order' to get the mid-ranged GT, and the pretty much non-existant ultra... let alone the super non-existant ultra-extreme. Since the chip has so many transistors, it is obviously quite large and hard to get good speed out of them. The entire Geforce 6 line takes a backseat to the core speed of the Geforce 5 (325->400mhz compared to 400-->500mhz). Fortunately the architecture is so good... we see a better framerate. But it seems nvidia is just plowing ahead with .11 micron process, which will definitely increase yields (more chips per wafer, faster chips). My question to you is... do you think in another 1-2 months (Q3) we will see the same chips operating at 500mhz and in abundance. Another 100mhz on core speed would make the current line up seem like dog chow... consider already that the memory bandwidth is there ready for these new cores. I cant help but think something's brew'n.....
 
Is AMD behind because they are clocked so much lower than Intel? It looks like nVidia can do more job per clockcycle then ATI seeing how fast the 450 6800 ULTRA is compared to the higher clocked X800 XT PE. That wins several benchies even at ATI aa and aniso territory despite it´s lower clocks.
 
450Mhz core is 6800 Ultra Extreme speeds. The regular Ultra is 400/1100.

The real problem is the lack of Samsung 1.6ns RAM modules. The core yields are good enough but the RAM just isn't showing up fast enough to supply the demand.

ATI is having the same problem with their X800XT PE because it also uses the 1.6ns RAM.

The 6800GT's use a slightly slower 2.0ns module and the 6800GT's have been showing up fairly stead the last couple of weeks it seems. GameVE has some in stock. I know i saw the BFG 6800GT OC in stock there for $430. I just ordered the XFX 6800GT which was in stock there as well Friday night.
 
Yes I know 450 is ULTRA EXTREME speeds. But the only difference between the 6800 ULTRA and 6800 ULTRA Extreme is it´s clock speeds ;)
 
interesting... i didn't realize it was the memory preventing these cards from flooding the market. I'm still in a different boat when it comes to core speed... a bigger more complicated chip is harded to get good frequency yields compared to a smaller less sophisticated one. My thinking is more like... should we wait to buy one until .11 micron process is complete? I'd like to see the core speeds come up some more. Just take a look at the 6800nu vs. the gt. only a 25mhz difference in core, plus 4 pipes... but a difference of 300mhz on memory and 128mg ram. Obviously that memory bandwidth is there for those who can squeeze more core speed.
 
Inside_line said:
Hey guys, I was wondering what everyones perspectives are on the geforce 6 series yields. Obviously they are having huge problems with yield, since how long ago the card was introduced.... and you still have to be on 'pre-order' to get the mid-ranged GT, and the pretty much non-existant ultra... let alone the super non-existant ultra-extreme. Since the chip has so many transistors, it is obviously quite large and hard to get good speed out of them. The entire Geforce 6 line takes a backseat to the core speed of the Geforce 5 (325->400mhz compared to 400-->500mhz). Fortunately the architecture is so good... we see a better framerate. But it seems nvidia is just plowing ahead with .11 micron process, which will definitely increase yields (more chips per wafer, faster chips). My question to you is... do you think in another 1-2 months (Q3) we will see the same chips operating at 500mhz and in abundance. Another 100mhz on core speed would make the current line up seem like dog chow... consider already that the memory bandwidth is there ready for these new cores. I cant help but think something's brew'n.....
Click to expand...


Gt's are readily available at eVGA.com
 
It´s not the memory. The yields on the 6800 ULTRA:s are incredibly bad too. kind of explain why X800XT:s are here in bigger numbers too even if they where announced later on.
 
Nvidia is up to their waist in unsellable silicon is my guess.

Little comparison. Nvidia's top part has 16 pipes and a gazillion transistors. ATI's top part has 16 pipes and half a gazillion transistors.

BUT... ATI's backup (X800) that gets them $399 is a twelve pipe part.
Nvidia's backup part is 16pipe part with slower speeds.

Now just looking at that, which company is going to have more products available? Which is going to have less wasted silicon?
 
Allankyoto said:
Nvidia is up to their waist in unsellable silicon is my guess.

Little comparison. Nvidia's top part has 16 pipes and a gazillion transistors. ATI's top part has 16 pipes and half a gazillion transistors.

BUT... ATI's backup (X800) that gets them $399 is a twelve pipe part.
Nvidia's backup part is 16pipe part with slower speeds.

Now just looking at that, which company is going to have more products available? Which is going to have less wasted silicon?
Click to expand...


As a business owner my guts says nvidia wins this round . I think Nvidia will get back some market share with this one. The 6800GT is the "300A" of GPU's
 
I agree Nvidia will regain some market share but my guess is that their profit margin is a hell of a lot lower than ATI.

For example ATI orders a single wafer of silicon from TSMC. Let's say there are 1000 GPU/VPU's on the wafer. It comes out and 200of them qualify as full 16pipe X800XT's 200x$499.99. The remaining 800 it's pretty easy to qualify them as X800's since it's only a 12 pipe lower speed solution. Very little wasted silicon.

Then you have Nvidia. They do the same thing. Let's say they get the same 200 that qualify as 6800ultra's. 499,99 x200 I guess the getting the remaining 800 to all qualify as 16pipe GPU's is pretty darn tough. Hmm. Half?? 400x$399.99

Now which company is going to wind up taking home more money in this round? Still depends on sales but ATI is going to have more sellable product I'd say.

And please don't get me wrong, I love what Nvidia is techinically offering this round. I think the 6800 is a great GPU and I think they will win a lot of customers. I'm just pointing out the flaws in the current method of production (IMO)
 
To be honest a lot depends on which manage to manufacture the most cards in the beginning. I think ATI sold hell of a lot more X800 PRO:s for example than they would have if the 6800 GT would be released at the same time same with the X800XT...
 
Actually, my PNY Ultra is 400 in 2d and 425 in 3d (by default, I don't overclock). It can do 450, but runs too hot for my tastes...

burningrave101 said:
450Mhz core is 6800 Ultra Extreme speeds. The regular Ultra is 400/1100.

The real problem is the lack of Samsung 1.6ns RAM modules. The core yields are good enough but the RAM just isn't showing up fast enough to supply the demand.

ATI is having the same problem with their X800XT PE because it also uses the 1.6ns RAM.

The 6800GT's use a slightly slower 2.0ns module and the 6800GT's have been showing up fairly stead the last couple of weeks it seems. GameVE has some in stock. I know i saw the BFG 6800GT OC in stock there for $430. I just ordered the XFX 6800GT which was in stock there as well Friday night.
Click to expand...
 
Well according to nVidia latest news is that they have all the cores they wanted by now and not one manufacturer are complaining about lack of NV40 cores so it shouldn´t be long now until they are available in large numbers hopefully.
 
You know when I read that I really laughed my ass off. What company that agreed to manufacturer (and sell) Nvidia cards would publicly complain of a lack of chips? Wouldn't that be counter-intuitive to actually selling the product?

I'm going to be the best (name your brand) car dealership in the world. Dammit I'm going public because that brand car company doesn't have any cars to sell. Lol. That will make a successful business.
 
They wouldn´t lie at least because if they do they loose credibility ;)
 
oqvist said:
It´s not the memory. The yields on the 6800 ULTRA:s are incredibly bad too. kind of explain why X800XT:s are here in bigger numbers too even if they where announced later on.
Click to expand...

omfg, dude just can it, seriously. *You* don't know wtf NVIDIA's yields are for the 6800 Ultra. It's the memory. There are also way more Ultra's out there than X800XT's. Take a poll. Also, explain this Mr. Yields. The GT's are available at every Fry's in the country en masse. Fry's has received enough X800 Pro's to count on one hand. Nearly 100% of GT's can hit Ultra speeds without breaking a sweat. NVIDIA has no problem producing Ultra cores whatsoever. IT'S THE RAM.
 
Allankyoto said:
I agree Nvidia will regain some market share but my guess is that their profit margin is a hell of a lot lower than ATI.

For example ATI orders a single wafer of silicon from TSMC. Let's say there are 1000 GPU/VPU's on the wafer. It comes out and 200of them qualify as full 16pipe X800XT's 200x$499.99. The remaining 800 it's pretty easy to qualify them as X800's since it's only a 12 pipe lower speed solution. Very little wasted silicon.

Then you have Nvidia. They do the same thing. Let's say they get the same 200 that qualify as 6800ultra's. 499,99 x200 I guess the getting the remaining 800 to all qualify as 16pipe GPU's is pretty darn tough. Hmm. Half?? 400x$399.99

Now which company is going to wind up taking home more money in this round? Still depends on sales but ATI is going to have more sellable product I'd say.

And please don't get me wrong, I love what Nvidia is techinically offering this round. I think the 6800 is a great GPU and I think they will win a lot of customers. I'm just pointing out the flaws in the current method of production (IMO)
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but I think you are being way too simplistic. The two companies are not fabricating their products on the same technology. You are pulling numbers out of your ass and being completely unscientific about it. I think NVIDIA knows damn well what they are doing and in a year from now you'll see they made more money this round than ATI.
 
Inside_line said:
Hey guys, I was wondering what everyones perspectives are on the geforce 6 series yields. Obviously they are having huge problems with yield, since how long ago the card was introduced.... and you still have to be on 'pre-order' to get the mid-ranged GT, and the pretty much non-existant ultra... let alone the super non-existant ultra-extreme. Since the chip has so many transistors, it is obviously quite large and hard to get good speed out of them. The entire Geforce 6 line takes a backseat to the core speed of the Geforce 5 (325->400mhz compared to 400-->500mhz). Fortunately the architecture is so good... we see a better framerate. But it seems nvidia is just plowing ahead with .11 micron process, which will definitely increase yields (more chips per wafer, faster chips). My question to you is... do you think in another 1-2 months (Q3) we will see the same chips operating at 500mhz and in abundance. Another 100mhz on core speed would make the current line up seem like dog chow... consider already that the memory bandwidth is there ready for these new cores. I cant help but think something's brew'n.....
Click to expand...

My local Fry's had 30 GT's on the shevles last week. They all sold and now they have 30 more. They have never received an X800 of either variety. Most GT users also hit Ultra speeds easily on the GPU. The yields are fine. Ultra GPU yields are obviously terrific. Conclusion? Low supply of 1.6ns RAM.
 
eh, nvidia and ati make their bread and butter on oem deals with the large system vendors, not directly off us niche-market-early-adopters. Our job is just to influence all of those people buying dells to look for a nvidia or ati part.

As far as low core yields... if anybody is having that problem, I would guess that it is ATI with the XT PE. Almost every GT out there clocks to ultra speeds on stock cooling. How many 800xt pros have been modded to the full set of pipes and running at xt pe speeds?

Memory is the real culprit, as many have stated.
 
evilchris said:
I'm sorry but I think you are being way too simplistic. The two companies are not fabricating their products on the same technology. You are pulling numbers out of your ass and being completely unscientific about it. I think NVIDIA knows damn well what they are doing and in a year from now you'll see they made more money this round than ATI.
Click to expand...

I sure am pulling numbers out of my ass. I was only giving an example. I don't have the first clue what the yields are. I was trying to state that Nvidia has a more complicated chip to mass produce and are leaving themselves little fallback room if they don't get good yields. Guess you missed that.

And I think I said this before as well, I think Nvidia has a great product and I'm glad it's there pushing the industry forward.
 
I'm basically set to buy a 6800 GT, but part of me just wants to wait to see what the fall refresh 6900 and 6950 have to offer....
 
Hmmm, I was under the impression that IBM was doing most of Nvidia's fab work and is having HORRIBLE yields (+/- 1%).
 
DiscoStu said:
Hmmm, I was under the impression that IBM was doing most of Nvidia's fab work and is having HORRIBLE yields (+/- 1%).
Click to expand...

What made you aquire this impression? A website? Exactly. The yields are fine, as evidenced by all the GTs out there in massive quantities, of which nearly all can easily do Ultra speeds. It's the memory.
 
evilchris said:
What made you aquire this impression? A website? Exactly. The yields are fine, as evidenced by all the GTs out there in massive quantities, of which nearly all can easily do Ultra speeds. It's the memory.
Click to expand...

Actually I have a friend who co-op's with IBM in Vermont. He tells me this is a big topic in their weekly meetings and IBM is losing a ton of money cause of this at its brand new foundry. If you'd like, I'll inquire further.

Perhaps its a combonation of the two? (bad yields + lack of memory?)
 
DiscoStu said:
Actually I have a friend who co-op's with IBM in Vermont. He tells me this is a big topic in their weekly meetings and IBM is losing a ton of money cause of this at its brand new foundry. If you'd like, I'll inquire further.

Perhaps its a combonation of the two? (bad yields + lack of memory?)
Click to expand...

Is this the new fab that has sucked ever since they built it? I'm guessing this is why nvidia is going back to TSMC, and on .11um to get those yields up. That IBM fab was supposed to be ultra-techy... going into .09um territory if I remember right. I hope they get something fixed... .13um shouldnt be a challenge nowadays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top