So nVidia has unveiled their full top-to-bottom solution for laptops before doing so for desktops? I knew this day was coming, but I didn't know it was coming so soon. I guess desktops really are dying, then.
Yeah, pretty wild. But the desktop stuff is coming soon... VERY soon... and I suspect you'll actually be able to buy the parts before most of these 400M laptops ship.
Changing, not dying. As long as we use electronics, it will always be possible to go faster by increasing the power envelope, and that will always require more space for cooling.
That is actually brilliant. It lets them bring costs down by taking advantage of economics of scale. The redevelopment cost for new microprocessors is huge, so it is better to reuse an existing microprocessor than it is to make a new one.
I'm wondering more about the G53 non-3D variant... specifically if it has a 1920x1080 LCD.
3D is a silly gimmick and I want something with a higher resolution, though if the G53 really does use the 460M, it's going to be disappointing performance-wise compared to the existing G73, unless the 460M is considerably faster than the part it's replacing...
Honestly I'd prefer it if they had just stayed with AMD GPUs... the G53 with a Mobility Radeon 5850 would have been pretty cool. :(
It's annoying that it's so hard to find laptops with good LCDs.
No idea on if/when we'll see the new G53 non-3D. As for 1080p, there's a 3D Vision G73 coming. Yeah, I know you're not interested in 3D, but the 120Hz panels can be nice in other areas. Here's hoping the 1080p panel rocks.
You know what really grinds my gears? When GPU manufacturers release different parts with the same model number. First the GTX 460 and now the GT 445M, not to mention all the low-end parts from either company that might be either GDDR5 or DDR3, or come in wildly varying clock speeds (I'm not even talking about pre-overclocked cards, sometimes low-end cards especially are just clocked lower than standard). How do manufacturers justify confusing consumers like this?
GF104 8x48, GF106 4x48, GF108 2x48 at least according to most sites making GTX 470M and probably a re-release of GTX480M consisting of a GF104, GTX 460M and GT 445M based on GF106 and the remaining four gpu's based on GF108.
You're correct. I looked at the chip images NVIDIA sent, and 470M is clearly a different chip from 460M; 460M and 445M use the same chip shot (GF106), but apparently there will be a crippled 445M with 64-bits of the memory controller disabled. The remainder all use the same chipshot, presumably GF108, but as others speculate below there's still potential for another G 410M type chip that cuts GF108 down to 24 cores or something silly. Man I hope that doesn't happen....
Given Sandy Bridge looks to compete with G 310M, would you really want to "upgrade" to a discrete GPU that's only 50% faster than the Sandy Bridge IGP? I *really* hope that NVIDIA doesn't go any lower than the GT 415M; sadly, you're probably right and we'll see some silly "made for OEMs" garbage chip that has 24 cores and a 64-bit memory interface.
Since Nvidia has almost never upgraded the core (referring to the switch possible to a GF104 core for the 480M) and left the model number the same, I highly suspect a refined 485M is coming based on GF104. Nvidia got a lot of roasting for its hot chip. They may keep the power level and offer higher performance (typical) or lower the power, but I suspect they'll want to update the 480M for two reasons:
Give it a tiny bit more distance from the 470M Utilize the cheaper GF104 core from a manufacturing cost standpoint Get out from under the criticism that the 480M is too power hungry.
We shall see, but I smell a small update to the 480M. It won't really make current 480M owners all that sad because any step up in ability won't be very large. But it will get manufacturing costs in line and may help pricing.
Right now, nVidia parts are off the table for HTPC, because of lack of support for HD audio bitstreams. Was that feature mentioned? If not, will these parts bitstream HD audio, like AMD and Intel do now?
The 460GTX can already bitstream TrueHD and DTS-HD with ffdshow and WinDVD 2010 (with AnyDVD HD for encrypted blu-ray). It seems both the drivers and the players will need to be updated in the case of the other commercial players though, but the card already is capable. It would be pretty stupid if the next GF104 and 106, etc. desktop cards didn't bitstream. The mobile parts will likely also do.
Great summary of mobile gpu's I needed this. I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for more details on the GF 104. Hopefully they push these out quick for the xmas holidays. Too late for the school season.
3-D glasses on a laptop seem pointless. Laptops are PERFECT candidates for autostereoscopic displays. Single viewer/user environment with easily adjustable display angles. Once this shutter glasses fad is over, let me know.
It's just giving laptop makers even *more* excuses to put 1366x768 resolution displays on expensive, high-powered laptops.
It is very, very sad.
All 15" laptops should have 1920x1080 LCD options. I don't care if I have to pay more for it. I just want the option, damn it. "
Elect this man president! I keep seeing deals on awesome specked laptops that all have 1366x768 displays... Why power that with a 5650m it's so annoying. I just want a: 15" 1920x1080 Core i5 520m or a dual core AMD @ 2.8 Ghz+ (Virtualization) Dx11 ATi 5650 or Nvidia GT 435M SWITCHABLE GRAPHICS
Questions to laptop designers: Why do all the high-specked AMD laptops come with quads only? Why do you hate full HD screens? What use is a 16"+ screen @ 1366x768? Why don't you offer full HD screens? Why ship a laptop with a Core i5/i3 and discreet graphics and not make them switchable? The PM55 chipset is a frustration. Why don't you offer full HD screens? Why don't you offer full HD screens? Why don't you offer full HD screens? Why don't you offer full HD screens? Why don't you offer full HD screens? Why don't you offer full HD screens? Why don't you offer full HD screens? Why don't you offer full HD screens?
it's correct in the table but wrong in the text (along with the calculated percentage increase over GTX285M). Interestingly, as far as peak compute power is concerned, this actually makes GTX470M faster than GTX480M. Also, a GF104-based GTX480M wouldn't be possible, at least not with 352 cores - either 336 or 384 it must be (though possibly GTX470M is already close in performance anyway - see above). GTX460M is likely based on GF106, not GF104.
I've updated the tables based on images NVIDIA sent showing the chips. However, these "images" appear to be the same three chips used multiple times. Given that GT 445M lists two wildly different specs -- 128-bit 25.6GB/s and 192-bit 60GB/s -- I'm guessing they just disable 64-bits of memory controller. Still stinks though.
Some models with 400M should appear in a couple weeks. Honestly, I expect an initial price premium, but maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. It's very difficult to recommend anything with 300M now, though, unless it comes at a reduced price.
Since you guys raved about the Asus U30JC I went and bought one. Now I'm thinking I want to update my laptop. How about about something where you stick the GT 415M into the U30JC.
The reason I ask is for this is the most popular "mainstream" gaming card in current designs of laptops right now. Yes the GTX 480m may be the fastest but if nobody uses it besides select Alienwares and Clevos what does it matter?
The GT 335M is roughly at the same performance level as HD 5650, but obviously without DX11 support. Based on that, I would venture that even 420M might match the 5650; certainly 425M and up will be faster (unless you're bandwidth limited, which is entirely possible).
Our initial look suggest that the 12 EU version of the Sandy Bridge IGP will be at roughly the level of the G 310M. In other words, even the GT 415M looks to be around twice as fast, plus you get CUDA, OpenCL, DirectCompute, OpenGL 4.0, DX11, PhysX, etc. I'd say Sandy Bridge will make a direct replacement for G 310M (i.e. "G 410M") pointless, so perhaps that's why there's no castrated 24 core 400M chip with a 64-bit interface.
Looks like a solid lineup from everything below the gtx480m. Hopefully like others have suggested they updated the 480m to be a little more powerful at the same TDP or offer the same performance at a lower TDP.
I'm personally still waiting on any word or significant rumors regarding a a full 384 core GF104 desktop part.
Most interested in the 12-14" size range with the fastest possible GPU and decent screen options. The Sony Vaio Z is the only machine that fits the bill currently but it's way out of my price range.
Here's hoping something from this refresh gets stuck into a chassis that gives Sony some competition in this space.
Jarred makes reference to the fact that the GF1xx series strike a different balance between compute (shader) and memory bandwidths. I think that part of NVIDIA's motivation is indeed an expectation that future games will skew towards requiring more shader performance, but I think there's another factor: Fermi has an L1 data cache in each SM.
I do OpenCL and CUDA programming professionally, and I think that it's important not to underestimate the impact of cache. Many algorithms in graphics and elsewhere have access patterns that are best described as "localized but unpredictable". This means that the algorithm's data accesses tend to "cluster" spatially and/or temporally, but it's very difficult to predict *where* they'll cluster and it's therefore impractical to explicitly pre-load data into local memory.When running such algorithms Fermi needs less DRAM bandwidth for any given performance level than any other GPU on the market (and again, I say this as somebody who develops for and benchmarks these things day in and day out).
This is actually a bit of a repeat of how general-purpose CPUs and their associated memory systems progressed, beginning with the IBM 360/85 all the way back in 1969...
The Alienware M15x has already done 1080p in a 15.4" chassis I think, and there are several other 1080p ~15" laptops around. ASUS G51JX-X1, ThinkPad W510, and MSI's GX660R-060US are all 15.6" 1080p. But then, they're also non-3D and cost $1300 minimum.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
39 Comments
Back to Article
cplusplus - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
So nVidia has unveiled their full top-to-bottom solution for laptops before doing so for desktops? I knew this day was coming, but I didn't know it was coming so soon. I guess desktops really are dying, then.JarredWalton - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Yeah, pretty wild. But the desktop stuff is coming soon... VERY soon... and I suspect you'll actually be able to buy the parts before most of these 400M laptops ship.Jaybus - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Changing, not dying. As long as we use electronics, it will always be possible to go faster by increasing the power envelope, and that will always require more space for cooling.Mr Perfect - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Sad, isn't it? They're still pushing GTS 250s on the desktop, using three year old tech that's renamed half a dozen times.Shining Arcanine - Saturday, September 4, 2010 - link
That is actually brilliant. It lets them bring costs down by taking advantage of economics of scale. The redevelopment cost for new microprocessors is huge, so it is better to reuse an existing microprocessor than it is to make a new one.ganeshts - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Any models other than the Asus N73JQ announced? Which one is going to be reviewed next?JarredWalton - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
The only other ones I know of for sure are the ASUS G53Jw (3D Vision with GTX 460M) and Acer Aspire 5745DG (3D Vision with a 425M).drfelip - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
I saw other at Xotic PC: Asus N51Jq and G73Jw, so they have to be available very soon.synaesthetic - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
I'm wondering more about the G53 non-3D variant... specifically if it has a 1920x1080 LCD.3D is a silly gimmick and I want something with a higher resolution, though if the G53 really does use the 460M, it's going to be disappointing performance-wise compared to the existing G73, unless the 460M is considerably faster than the part it's replacing...
Honestly I'd prefer it if they had just stayed with AMD GPUs... the G53 with a Mobility Radeon 5850 would have been pretty cool. :(
It's annoying that it's so hard to find laptops with good LCDs.
JarredWalton - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
No idea on if/when we'll see the new G53 non-3D. As for 1080p, there's a 3D Vision G73 coming. Yeah, I know you're not interested in 3D, but the 120Hz panels can be nice in other areas. Here's hoping the 1080p panel rocks.LtGoonRush - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
You know what really grinds my gears? When GPU manufacturers release different parts with the same model number. First the GTX 460 and now the GT 445M, not to mention all the low-end parts from either company that might be either GDDR5 or DDR3, or come in wildly varying clock speeds (I'm not even talking about pre-overclocked cards, sometimes low-end cards especially are just clocked lower than standard). How do manufacturers justify confusing consumers like this?dingetje - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
they justify it with their huge mansions and fat bank accountsthey think they PWN us
Ushio01 - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
GF104 8x48, GF106 4x48, GF108 2x48 at least according to most sites making GTX 470M and probably a re-release of GTX480M consisting of a GF104, GTX 460M and GT 445M based on GF106 and the remaining four gpu's based on GF108.JarredWalton - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
You're correct. I looked at the chip images NVIDIA sent, and 470M is clearly a different chip from 460M; 460M and 445M use the same chip shot (GF106), but apparently there will be a crippled 445M with 64-bits of the memory controller disabled. The remainder all use the same chipshot, presumably GF108, but as others speculate below there's still potential for another G 410M type chip that cuts GF108 down to 24 cores or something silly. Man I hope that doesn't happen....The Crying Man - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Any idea when information on AMD's Radeon 6xxx will be available to compare them to nVidia's 400Ms?drfelip - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
I seriously doubt that. Either Nvidia is going to stay with the 310M series for the low end, or there is a 410M in the works.JarredWalton - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Given Sandy Bridge looks to compete with G 310M, would you really want to "upgrade" to a discrete GPU that's only 50% faster than the Sandy Bridge IGP? I *really* hope that NVIDIA doesn't go any lower than the GT 415M; sadly, you're probably right and we'll see some silly "made for OEMs" garbage chip that has 24 cores and a 64-bit memory interface.FXi - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Since Nvidia has almost never upgraded the core (referring to the switch possible to a GF104 core for the 480M) and left the model number the same, I highly suspect a refined 485M is coming based on GF104. Nvidia got a lot of roasting for its hot chip. They may keep the power level and offer higher performance (typical) or lower the power, but I suspect they'll want to update the 480M for two reasons:Give it a tiny bit more distance from the 470M
Utilize the cheaper GF104 core from a manufacturing cost standpoint
Get out from under the criticism that the 480M is too power hungry.
We shall see, but I smell a small update to the 480M. It won't really make current 480M owners all that sad because any step up in ability won't be very large. But it will get manufacturing costs in line and may help pricing.
YellowWing - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Right now, nVidia parts are off the table for HTPC, because of lack of support for HD audio bitstreams. Was that feature mentioned? If not, will these parts bitstream HD audio, like AMD and Intel do now?andy o - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
The 460GTX can already bitstream TrueHD and DTS-HD with ffdshow and WinDVD 2010 (with AnyDVD HD for encrypted blu-ray). It seems both the drivers and the players will need to be updated in the case of the other commercial players though, but the card already is capable. It would be pretty stupid if the next GF104 and 106, etc. desktop cards didn't bitstream. The mobile parts will likely also do.sotoa - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Great summary of mobile gpu's I needed this.I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for more details on the GF 104. Hopefully they push these out quick for the xmas holidays. Too late for the school season.
therealnickdanger - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
3-D glasses on a laptop seem pointless. Laptops are PERFECT candidates for autostereoscopic displays. Single viewer/user environment with easily adjustable display angles. Once this shutter glasses fad is over, let me know.synaesthetic - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Once this 3D fad in general ends, let me know.It's just giving laptop makers even *more* excuses to put 1366x768 resolution displays on expensive, high-powered laptops.
It is very, very sad.
All 15" laptops should have 1920x1080 LCD options. I don't care if I have to pay more for it. I just want the option, damn it.
manno - Thursday, September 23, 2010 - link
"Once this 3D fad in general ends, let me know.It's just giving laptop makers even *more* excuses to put 1366x768 resolution displays on expensive, high-powered laptops.
It is very, very sad.
All 15" laptops should have 1920x1080 LCD options. I don't care if I have to pay more for it. I just want the option, damn it. "
Elect this man president! I keep seeing deals on awesome specked laptops that all have 1366x768 displays... Why power that with a 5650m it's so annoying. I just want a:
15" 1920x1080
Core i5 520m or a dual core AMD @ 2.8 Ghz+ (Virtualization)
Dx11 ATi 5650 or Nvidia GT 435M
SWITCHABLE GRAPHICS
Questions to laptop designers:
Why do all the high-specked AMD laptops come with quads only?
Why do you hate full HD screens?
What use is a 16"+ screen @ 1366x768?
Why don't you offer full HD screens?
Why ship a laptop with a Core i5/i3 and discreet graphics and not make them switchable? The PM55 chipset is a frustration.
Why don't you offer full HD screens?
Why don't you offer full HD screens?
Why don't you offer full HD screens?
Why don't you offer full HD screens?
Why don't you offer full HD screens?
Why don't you offer full HD screens?
Why don't you offer full HD screens?
Why don't you offer full HD screens?
WhY wHy whY WHY!?
:)
Peace!
-manno
mczak - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
it's correct in the table but wrong in the text (along with the calculated percentage increase over GTX285M).Interestingly, as far as peak compute power is concerned, this actually makes GTX470M faster than GTX480M.
Also, a GF104-based GTX480M wouldn't be possible, at least not with 352 cores - either 336 or 384 it must be (though possibly GTX470M is already close in performance anyway - see above).
GTX460M is likely based on GF106, not GF104.
mczak - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Oh and gt445m should be solely based on GF106. All parts below that should be GF108, if rumours are to be believed.JarredWalton - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
I've updated the tables based on images NVIDIA sent showing the chips. However, these "images" appear to be the same three chips used multiple times. Given that GT 445M lists two wildly different specs -- 128-bit 25.6GB/s and 192-bit 60GB/s -- I'm guessing they just disable 64-bits of memory controller. Still stinks though.Infomastr - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Wonder how long it will take before these really start replacing 300M cards in current machines?JarredWalton - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Some models with 400M should appear in a couple weeks. Honestly, I expect an initial price premium, but maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. It's very difficult to recommend anything with 300M now, though, unless it comes at a reduced price.Zorblack1 - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Since you guys raved about the Asus U30JC I went and bought one. Now I'm thinking I want to update my laptop. How about about something where you stick the GT 415M into the U30JC.Roland00 - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
The reason I ask is for this is the most popular "mainstream" gaming card in current designs of laptops right now. Yes the GTX 480m may be the fastest but if nobody uses it besides select Alienwares and Clevos what does it matter?JarredWalton - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
The GT 335M is roughly at the same performance level as HD 5650, but obviously without DX11 support. Based on that, I would venture that even 420M might match the 5650; certainly 425M and up will be faster (unless you're bandwidth limited, which is entirely possible).marraco - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
The CPU integrated video of Intel will rule out all the "entry level" discrete chips.Nvidia and AMD will be forced to offer more juicy entry level cards.
I guess that the next generation of entry level will have at least geforce 8600 power.
JarredWalton - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Our initial look suggest that the 12 EU version of the Sandy Bridge IGP will be at roughly the level of the G 310M. In other words, even the GT 415M looks to be around twice as fast, plus you get CUDA, OpenCL, DirectCompute, OpenGL 4.0, DX11, PhysX, etc. I'd say Sandy Bridge will make a direct replacement for G 310M (i.e. "G 410M") pointless, so perhaps that's why there's no castrated 24 core 400M chip with a 64-bit interface.tviceman - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Looks like a solid lineup from everything below the gtx480m. Hopefully like others have suggested they updated the 480m to be a little more powerful at the same TDP or offer the same performance at a lower TDP.I'm personally still waiting on any word or significant rumors regarding a a full 384 core GF104 desktop part.
blah238 - Friday, September 3, 2010 - link
Most interested in the 12-14" size range with the fastest possible GPU and decent screen options. The Sony Vaio Z is the only machine that fits the bill currently but it's way out of my price range.Here's hoping something from this refresh gets stuck into a chassis that gives Sony some competition in this space.
patrickjchase - Saturday, September 4, 2010 - link
Jarred makes reference to the fact that the GF1xx series strike a different balance between compute (shader) and memory bandwidths. I think that part of NVIDIA's motivation is indeed an expectation that future games will skew towards requiring more shader performance, but I think there's another factor: Fermi has an L1 data cache in each SM.I do OpenCL and CUDA programming professionally, and I think that it's important not to underestimate the impact of cache. Many algorithms in graphics and elsewhere have access patterns that are best described as "localized but unpredictable". This means that the algorithm's data accesses tend to "cluster" spatially and/or temporally, but it's very difficult to predict *where* they'll cluster and it's therefore impractical to explicitly pre-load data into local memory.When running such algorithms Fermi needs less DRAM bandwidth for any given performance level than any other GPU on the market (and again, I say this as somebody who develops for and benchmarks these things day in and day out).
This is actually a bit of a repeat of how general-purpose CPUs and their associated memory systems progressed, beginning with the IBM 360/85 all the way back in 1969...
JackNSally - Monday, September 6, 2010 - link
"OpenGL 40." in the supported features. I believe you mean "OpenGL 4.0" unless nVidia is jumping far, FAR into the future.JarredWalton - Monday, September 6, 2010 - link
The Alienware M15x has already done 1080p in a 15.4" chassis I think, and there are several other 1080p ~15" laptops around. ASUS G51JX-X1, ThinkPad W510, and MSI's GX660R-060US are all 15.6" 1080p. But then, they're also non-3D and cost $1300 minimum.