BRIGHT SIDE OF NEWS About | Advertise | Contact BSN USER Login
| Register 		SUBSCRIBE Newsletter | RSS Feeds
Friday, March 19, 2010
Email this to a friend.
Your friend's e-mail:
Your Name:
Your e-mail:
Message subject:
Comments
well duh by: Anonymous on 2/27/2010
Of course it was a dummy and if you didn`t figure that out then you are too.
nVidiot Site Of News by: Anonymous on 1/21/2010
Why don´t you be honest and call this site nVidiot Site Of News, when this is what this site really is about.
The fakes have it. by: Anonymous on 1/5/2010
You see Sean,

That card isn't due out until march now!
Nvidia knew they couldn't get a card out and needed to slow ATI down. In the end it was TSMC that dropped the ball, but thats besides the point.
Anyway, Speculation is trying to glean the truth from the lies, the cause from the effect, the purpose from the marketing.

Nvidia's response was based on negating sales loses and trying to convince people they have something under the hood.

I'll be surprised if I see a bench mark at CES.
GT300 Where Art Thou? by: Greg442 on 11/9/2009
Well, we've seen the paper launch, now lets see the real thing.
by: Anonymous on 11/2/2009
"Ask around and you will find that 99% of products shown to the press and intended for them to handle or even be displayed are simply dummies with either dead components or nothing under the "hood" at all."

[citation needed]
@ Ironic by: Sean Kalinich on 10/29/2009
actually nVidia did admit it was a dummy card. They called it a Mock up. but have stated over and over the demo was on a real Fermi Card.

I am not sure how that is FUD. When a company releases a new product they do not say "here is a mock up of the new Prduct X" they say "here is product X"

It is an important thing to take note of as it is a common practice in all industries.

It was the FUD that followed claiming that the dummy (fake) card was proof of a conspiracy by NV that is the issue.
by: Anonymous on 10/28/2009
This is ironic, given the whole Fermi launch was Nvidia providing FUD against the 58xx launch.

AMD has product out there and selling now - Nvidia just has promises and very badly made dummy product that they won't admit to. Nvidia are the only people producing FUD in this matter.
lol by: Anonymous on 10/13/2009
this information was "leaked" from within amd...

every single person who looked at the card or the pictures of it and knows the basics of pc hardware could tell it was a dummy card... it was so obvious... alleging that amd "leaked" this or started a pr campaign against nvidia for showing a dummy card is ridiculous...
@Sean sean sean by: Sean Kalinich on 10/11/2009
Again, this is a normal business practice. AMD does it to Intel. Do you know that AMD typically rents out a suite close to where Intel is having IDC and pulls people in there to show them the virtues of AMD?

Intel "leaks" information to dampen AMD announcements. ATi did it to NV. NV does it to AMD/ATi.

I agree that NV should have shown more, they should have shown a DX11 demo. They should have shown a game running. That is what I think was missing out of the Demo.

I personally do not care if there was a piece of pizza under the hood. I have seen more mock ups, demo shells and simulated software than I can to write about.

The fact remains that the fake card is not the real news. It is a diversion, and one that AMD would like people to focus on right now.

58xx is a good card, I have not said otherwise. But with this being pushed and talked about it does show that they could be very concerned with Fermi and NV right now.

I would like to see people get over the faked card and look at what the demo showed and what it could mean for the future of the GPU (and not just from NV).
Sean Sean Sean by: Anonymous on 10/9/2009
People have been awaitng the 5800 series for months, and also seeking news of the GT300. September 22nd ATI released the 5870 in an amazing fashion, the eyeinfinity, 24 monitors thing was very impressive. In all the fanfaire of the 5870 release approximately 1 week later Nvidia demo's a "mocked up" GT300. Coincidence? I think not. Okay demo cards are a normal industry standard, we get that. What we have a hard time with is that this was done so close to the released date of the ATI 5870. In my opinion it "appears" Nvidia was trying to tarnish the launch of the 5870, thats why the whole fake demo card is causing such and uproar. While demo cards maybe normal, its the timing of the fake demo that's problem here. It was poor judgement to show a "mocked up" demo card in this climate, with the 5870 newly released. They should've just shown the actual card, (if they have one) wires hanging out, duct tape and all, then they wouldn't have this mud on thier face, for showing the "dud."
The root of the issue by: Sean Kalinich on 10/9/2009
"Lord Jesus, what is WRONG with you? How many sites ran articles on the Fermi architecture on that day? Only MOST of them. To the point I was getting pissed because I was more interested in reading the 5850 reviews and that was getting crowded out by the Nvidia Fermi story. "

You were more interested in reading about the 5850....

This pretty much explains your perspective on the issue. This is an agnostic view of thing and not an anit-nVidia one.

It is not hard to sell out when there is a short supply one that even AMD admitted to.

here is a short list of other people doing the same thing....

The Fermi Demo was a Demo.
They did not show the card that it was run on..

The AMD DX11 Demo at Quakecon was a Demo.
AMD did not show the card that it was run on.

Phenom I was demoed prior to launch at 3GHz, the launch clock speeds were much lower. Yet AMD claimed they would scale to 3GHz at launch.

The Fermi Card was a Teaser Photo Op done very poorly. The Dell Showing was a product release/announcement of a product launching this month. The Amado XPS was waived around then put away. Engadget ran the story about the Adamdo only being waived around. It compares as there is no proof that Dell has this ready for launch or that it is anything other than a pipe dream at this stage.

Raytracing Demos by Intel are of relevance as they can be run on a CPU. The actual system was closed and people were not allowed to see into it. SO the Raytracing Demo might have been faked and only run on the CPU.

There are four examples of other companies doing the same type of thing.

You have already stated your alliance yet you accuse me of being biased. Something that does not fit with my comments nor with the article.
by: Anonymous on 10/9/2009
***So,as with my other article, I guess that is why Dell just did the same thing. They are worried that other companies are selling better so they "flashed" the Adamo XPS without showing it off or even opening it.***

?? How is this remotely pertinent? OR significant? Comparing a computer makers new model compared to a graphics company next generation chip ... ... man, that makes NO sense, doesn't even belong on the same planet.

***I see no mass defections to the 5800 that you speak of, Many OEMs are still reporting shortages of the GPU. Remember that at Quakeconn AMD did not show the press the card or the rest of the parts in the system being used for the demo. They did the same thing with Eyefinity.***

?? Again, wtf? You're not making sense. It's a new card, with the initial run already sold out and production ramping up. There can be no serious question AMD can sell all the 5870 and 5850 cards they can produce through the rest of the year. How about instead of strawman arguments you try to make honest rational points?

***Again I am not saying anything bad about AMD, these are examples of how this is nothing new and only being used to spread bad PR and FUD about another company while doing exactly the same thing themselves.***

You have given NO valid examples of AMD doing 'exactly' what Nvidia just did.

***It is wrong to apply one set of standards to one company and not to all. Yet I did not see a large number of articles about the "fake" Adamo used at Dell's Launch of it. Nor did I see any about the locked cases for the AMD DX11 and Eyefinity demos.***

First, it was not a 'launch', it was a teaser photo op. Second, it's JUST A LAPTOP MODEL. Third, the whole IDEA of such a product is HOW IT LOOKS, actual RELATIVE performance is secondary. Fourth, You didn't see any other articles about the Adamo being 'fake' because no one else is ******** enough to CARE. 5. The AMD demo's were done months BEFORE any next generation cards were released, there was a REASON to keep some things under wraps. But by Nvidia's presentation, the AMD cards were already released, there was no REASON for Nvidia to cover anything up.

***The same can be said about Raytracing demos given by Intel...***

Again, no relevence. It was PURELY a technical demonstration of ray tracing capability, and so understood as such ... by ALMOST everyone.

***It is only a small number of sites with a history of anti-NVIDIA articles that are running this as a major story. My question above and still is "why?"***

The only site it was a MAJOR story on is Semi-Accurate. It was a story on several other tech sites BECAUSE IT IS A RELEVANT STORY?

***Why is it the one thing they are covering?
Why does anyone feel that showing off this dead and faked card means anything?***

Lord Jesus, what is WRONG with you? How many sites ran articles on the Fermi architecture on that day? Only MOST of them. To the point I was getting pissed because I was more interested in reading the 5850 reviews and that was getting crowded out by the Nvidia Fermi story.

***You could conversely say that showing a disabled card means that the BOM used must not be working out and needs to be rebuilt.

That would not be true, but it could be speculated also.***

Utterly no proof. Whatsoever. Or any reason for them to do so. Maybe AMD didn't want someone smuggling one of the cards out and pre-releasing benchmarks? That thought ever cross your mind?

Same can't be said of Nvidia, can it? Wasn't even a possibility their card was a 'needing to be rebuilt' BOM card was there? Because THEIR card was a crude chop job of some OTHER card they had laying around that they CLAIMED was a real Fermi card.

Dude, you are Wile E Coyote 30 feet past the edge and nothing but air under you feet. I know it sucks to be so wrong, but so wrong you are and I suggest you do some introspection to find out how it is you got there.

For a reactionary fanbois say what you said is one thing, but you write articles for a tech site ... that is something altogether different. The two should never cross paths like they did here.

Ryan Shrout over on PC Perspectives addressed this topic in an article and podcast and shows the way for an AGNOSTIC tech site to do it right.
Ok by: Sean Kalinich on 10/9/2009
So,as with my other article, I guess that is why Dell just did the same thing. They are worried that other companies are selling better so they "flashed" the Adamo XPS without showing it off or even opening it.

I see no mass defections to the 5800 that you speak of, Many OEMs are still reporting shortages of the GPU. Remember that at Quakeconn AMD did not show the press the card or the rest of the parts in the system being used for the demo. They did the same thing with Eyefinity.

Again I am not saying anything bad about AMD, these are examples of how this is nothing new and only being used to spread bad PR and FUD about another company while doing exactly the same thing themselves.

It is wrong to apply one set of standards to one company and not to all. Yet I did not see a large number of articles about the "fake" Adamo used at Dell's Launch of it. Nor did I see any about the locked cases for the AMD DX11 and Eyefinity demos.

The same can be said about Raytracing demos given by Intel...

It is only a small number of sites with a history of anti-NVIDIA articles that are running this as a major story. My question above and still is "why?"

Why is it the one thing they are covering?
Why does anyone feel that showing off this dead and faked card means anything?

You could conversely say that showing a disabled card means that the BOM used must not be working out and needs to be rebuilt.

That would not be true, but it could be speculated also.
by: Anonymous on 10/9/2009
It is obvious to anyone not an utter imbecile it was a rather desperate attempt to slow down the defections to the 5800 cards by any means possible, up to and including a fake pcb and outright lying = they don't even HAVE an actual sample of a Fermi pcb board to show off. And their self described frankenstein looking working prototype as the reason no photographs were allowed, they are not IN AMDs positiion, handing out actual populated final spec pcb boards and chips all over the place. They needed to provide some PROOF they aren't up to their eyeballs in sheepdip if they wanted to stop the defectons to AMD. That they provided NO certified proof, ALL the hardware except for one single hand numbered chip was either fake or beind the green curtain, there remain only smoke and mirrors to try to delay the defections.

How you can possibly think this is of no consequence boggles the mind. It shows they aren't even remotely close to being where AMD was in their similar show four months before they released the 5800 cards.

Even IF a respin isn't necessary it's going to be long months before Fermi see the light of day in numbers big enough to matter.

And when that does finally happen, AMD with months to optimize their yields on an inherently cheaper die and pcb will be able to undercut Fermi to a point that after satisfying their few thousand hard core fanbois, Nvidia will have to cut their prices to razor thin margins to compete at all.

Final note: it was Nvidia that INITIATED the FUD here with their lies and fake card. All the sites you're complaining about did was report on the fact based ACTUALITY of the situation and make logical deductions based on the data so revealed.

That that makes them FUD spreaders in your mind suggests a need for you to clear you head and reassess your operating basis.


Sean sounds like a fan boy!!!!! by: Anonymous on 10/8/2009
Dude you sound just like a "fanboy". Fact remains that your beloved Nvidia time is running out. Again they have no x86 license and Intel is going "Larabee, Laughabee" whatever you want to mock it and AMD has "Fusion". Nvidia has......ION LOL what a joke!!! I dont see them lasting another year, maybe 2 if they are lucky. Someone is going to buy them out I say Intel. So sorry to sound so prude against you bro but I am not buying your story, the facts speak for themselves you cannot rebut the obvious.
opinion by: Anonymous on 10/8/2009
Okay Sean,

I think I understand you now. I think you have also clairified, at least to me, you position on this article and why/what was important about it.

I think something along the lines of the last response should have been included in the article as it would have helped clear things up a little.

thanks for your response.
112 by: Anonymous on 10/8/2009
ATI HD 5870X2 лучшее!
by: Anonymous on 10/8/2009
ATI лучше!
FUD by: Sean Kalinich on 10/7/2009
Looking over the comments here it does not appear that people are concentrating on the information given out at GTC.

It is also part of my job to look at things like this and find the reasons behind them.

After receiving the e-mails and then seeing the articles pop up a day or so later I began to wonder about the reason for the "news" and why it was done.

I checked my information about dead/deactivated products at press events (even AMD later confirmed they do this), checked the time lines with my sources, and wrote the article. We have other articles that were written by our staff that cover the the parts of the conference we were able to get into.

Even if I do not sway the fans one way or the other, a few people might take a closer look at the issue and reconsider their stance on this. If that happens with even a handful of people then the article was a success and worth all of the insults that have been hurled at me (although I have to say I got a kick out of the cheerleader one)

Sean
by: Anonymous on 10/7/2009
So why are you perpetuating the story you say should not even be front page news? Why even write this article?

People are fickle and if "news agencies" let it go, we'd forget about in a matter of weeks. Old news. Who cares?

The smart people to whom this information is important to do not need these types of articles that are spreading FUD, as you put it. They have already formed their own opinions on the information presented at GTC and articles like this are not likely going to sway them one way or the other. Your article, though you are attempting to debunk the FUD, is in fact perpetuating it.
@Opinion by: Sean Kalinich on 10/7/2009
My information does not come from NV. My only good contact there is with the Tegra team at the moment. Yes I can e-mail them and get basic answers, but not much more. I have not had a good relationship with NV PR (GPUs and Chipsets) for many years. (you can even ask CD about that)

My information comes from sources with different OEMs and other companies that NV has to work with to produce their products.

This is where the launch dates I talk about come from. Also where I got the information that all companies do this. Speaking with them they were also at a loss as to why this was a big deal.

NV did not show the card at the demo, yes that is true. Remember AMD did not when they demoed Evergreen DX11 performance at Quakconn either. The system had a frosted window and the press were not allowed to see inside. This is not an attack on AMD, just showing that this is common at this stage of the game.

The reason behind the article is that out of all the things that could have (and should have) been covered at the event, the fake card becomes the big one. It makes no sense I could understand attacking the demo, the way it was done, the lack of DX11 performance being showcased. all of that, but a fake card?

Why that one topic, it is out of place. As you said my job is to find things like that and point them out. That stood out like a sore thumb. There were so many other things that could have been covered, but all we see is an uproar over a fake card...
Opinion by: Anonymous on 10/7/2009
Hey Sean,

I think I have isolated my problem with you regarding this article(not you personnally). You beleive that that Tech sites are spreading FUD about tech in general and in this case NVIDIA's GT300. I believe techsites spread FUD too! so we agree with that. I however believe that Tech companies try to spread Trust,Confidence and Hype and that the truth is something that must be dug for.

Did you see a running Board? WHY NOT!"being banned from the event is a good reason ;-)" It was messsy is not a good enough answer from Nvidia for not showing a running prototype. However I will say I believe they may have had running silicon. If they don't they're in really big trouble. You're point that it doesn't really matter isn't true, it was a mistake they made, and mistakes from PR people often reveal more than what they say.
A 30% increase in speed on a prototype is good, but nothing to get overly excited about, especially before clocks are made final, YOU know that too! That depends on what clocks they can get while maximizing yields. Yields on a massive die I might add.
I believe Fermi's performce should be better than Cypress, I am in a position to wait it out but others are not. They would like to know if it is going to debut in Nov or Dec or Jan or Feb. You have only Nvidias word on this. Nothing else.
Did you do any investigative reporting to try and figure out when a launch date might come. No...(this looks like I'm attacking you but I'm not, texting is very impersonal!)
My understanding is that this is A1 silicon(nvidias first version) for the biggest most massive chip ever made by them. Most companies usually have at least 1 revision sometimes 2 before releasing. You don't think that might impact the launch date.
No Sean, my problem with your position in this article is that you are merely trying to reinforce a companies campaign of Trust,Confidence and Hype building with no investigative work to back it up. You even seem to believe(and I may be wrong in this assumption) that the board(PCB) was NOT cut.
Okay, maybe you didn't you don't think it matters but it obviously was.
I think your BIAS is showing, whether it is Pro manufacturer or Pro NVIDIA is irrelevant!

P.S. I've worked with BOM's at PE photovac(sadly gone) and am very familiar with them.
P.P.S. This is NOT a personal attack on you. I reread my previous post and realized it did sound VERY aggressive. I appologize for that.
by: Anonymous on 10/7/2009
This is a very poorly written article. It sounds like the opinion of a 12yr old cheerleader copied off a myspace blog. AMD doesnt have to spread word of a fake GF100, because Nvidia showed it to the world...

I like Theo's articles and dedication to objective journalism, but this opinion piece sux bigtime. At least with Demerjian's articles you can sift though 95% opinionated bs and get 5% hard info with a little patience. Theo's articles read better than Charlies, but sometimes don't have the same info. Fudo is just a NV shill now.

Anyway, bad bad article.
@BOM Part 2 by: Sean Kalinich on 10/7/2009
You of course know that a build of materials has many different levels.

"In electronics, the BOM represents the list of components used on the printed wiring board or printed circuit board. Once the design of the circuit is completed, the BOM list is passed on to the PCB layout engineer as well as component engineer who will procure the components required for the design."

It just means that it is a list of the materials to be used. It does not signify a completed product by any means.

9 time out of 10 the BOM is finalized before the the debug stage as you have to have one to build the debug cards...

So having a Demo that is a "production level BOM" means nothing, as you have to clarify the stage of production. Engineering production? Debug Production? Final Production? where is it at with that list?
@BOM by: Sean Kalinich on 10/7/2009
Again, you miss the point but play into the increasing problem with internet news sites.

I am doing my job by pointing out the problem with all the hype over this. The problem is that it is all FUD (fear uncertainty and doubt).

By concentrating on the fact that the board was fake it takes away from the actual GTC conference and the demo that was performed where the Fermi Architecture performance in GPU computing was shown off.

As a journalist it is my job to point this out too. Lets look at the facts in the case shall we?

We have information being spread around by an employee(s) at a competing company (one that has already sent false and inaccurate information before). Picked up and turned into a major issue by someone with a known hatred for NV (Charlie). Why is no one asking that question? Where is any mention of Fermi Performance to go with that article?

This seems to fit your criteria for doing my job doesn't it?

"That's where YOUR JOB comes into play. You should be trying to find out the most acurate information"

I am trying to get people to focus on the information provided at GTC (again Fermi performance and the Demo), yet all most of you seem to be concerned with is that fake card. How is that looking for information about Fermi Performance?

Again focusing on the card being faked is also a carefully planned marketing ploy. It is all FUD intended to pull "the media attention away from the competitor and putting themselves in the best possible light."
BOM by: Anonymous on 10/7/2009
So Sean, you think that the board Nvidia showed could have been made to run if it had been filled properly with the right components.
I think the sawed off end might have caused problems. ATI showed a disabled board but the board was a TRUE representation of the BOM (BUILD OF MATERIALS just in case your didn't know what that stands for). This indicates that all parts are ready to go and only minor things are left to do on the design, like testing for best clock speeds on the yielded chips.
NVIDIA most likely doesn't even have a board ready.
You have a very simplistic view of the graphics card industry. Nvidia always very carefully plans their marketing strategy, whether it be making launches on the same day as ATI or making Announcements on the same day as ATI, it's always about pulling the media attention away from the competitor and putting themselves in the best possible light. This is a good strategy for the company but a consumer must always be wary of what he is being spoon fed and try and discern the truth.
That's where YOUR JOB comes into play. You should be trying to find out the most acurate information on product, effieciency, yields and release dates, not just marching along with the NVIDIA parade.
by: Anonymous on 10/7/2009
The difference was that ATI didn't stage a photo-op for a card that didn't exist, you dummy.
@cut down board by: Sean Kalinich on 10/6/2009
The question is... does it matter if it was?
Everyone is centering on the FUD. Who cares if it was a cut down snickers bar under there?

The demo was on a debug card. So the demo was real.

Just like when AMD showed off DX11 at Quakeconn. It was a Debug board, where was all of the press on that saying it was not a real production board?

It was not a product launch it was a demonstration of the new Fermi Architecture.

Why is everyone one so intent on the fact that is was not a real board?

here is a quote from AMD
"we disable the boards but the image that you showed is the production level BOM"

So AMD purposely disables their samples for demo and the press. Should I write up a whole news story on that? Nope it is a common industry practice. really get over the fake board, it is a non issue and meant to divert you from the real news of GTC, the Fermi cGPU performance shown
Cut down board by: Anonymous on 10/6/2009
Sean you are a complete tool if you cann't see that the board has been cut down. IT IS BLATANTLY OBVIOUS. I don't know if it is because you haven't bothered to look or because your loyalties are to NVIDIA, and don't get me wrong I have an SLI system right now, but I'm looking for news and speculation on when these cards are going to be released. Part of the purpose of sites like this are to help squeeze an little truth from the rumors and corporate information or misinformation.
Nvidia is OBVIOUSLY in a bad spot and NEEDS to pull ATI's Teeth a little until their product comes out. Since I am waiting for a GT300, I'd rather it came sooner, but I don't believe for a minute it will come any sooner than late january or Febuary in any volume that matters.
Nvidia most likely showed the dummy board to make people think it was much closer to launch than it is. Come on it's SpiNvidia, they are experts at manipulating the press.
This article makes you look like either a naive fanboi or bought press!

Anthelvar
Time Lines by: Sean Kalinich on 10/6/2009
According to all of the information I have the launch is still some time in November.
This puts is 30-60 days away.

As for who leaked it that is important as it shows the source of the information and casts it purpose into doubt.

I have no idea how GT300 will perform as I have not seen the card in my lab for any testing. This is the same as the HD5870 I have not seen that card either.

This article was not about the cards themselves, only about the FUD that is being spread around as "proof" of something.
by: Anonymous on 10/6/2009
I really don't care who leaked the "fake card scandal." The problem is the demo card, or dummy card, gave the appearance that GT300 was very close to release, when the opposite is true, we're still a few months away at best, and several months at worst. There were Nvidia fanboi bragging how the GT300 was gonna wipe the floor with the 5870, as if they were gonna buy the GT300 next week or so. I'm not an expert, but it seemed to me Nvidia was trying to steal some of the thunder from ATI's 5870. It's not a federal crime, but they got caught with their "slip showing", which doesn't look good for them. I would actually like the see the GT300 cards, sooner rather than later, not that I'd buy one(no matter how good or bad it turns out), I'm going Dragon Platform, so hoping the 300 series would drive down the price of the 5870's :)
Again Missing the Point by: Sean Kalinich on 10/6/2009
The 5870 cards shown were not functional. If you put them in a system they would not run. That makes them fake (i.e. not real) cards.

AMD showed dead wafers and said "Look here is our 40nm GPUs" those were not working and would never make it to a graphics board so that statement was a lie (by the same logic being used by all the FUD going around).

Same thing with boards being shown a launch events. If they will not function they are not real. they are dead display samples.

There is nothing proving that the board used was cut down (other than one or two people saying it is) or that it was part of a mainboard.

The let me give you an example from personal experience. I received a 6800 GTX from Leadtek as a review sample. When I got it the card would not work and all of the CDs in the box were blank. I contacted my PR Rep. He apologized and said that card and box was used as a display sample at a show (the 6800 GTX had already launced) and should not have been sent to me as it was a non-functional display only sample. I was sent a new sample for review. I still have the other card on my self. It is common for this to be done for displayed products.

As a further example of this typical behavior I used the Auto Industry. I went to a car show and looked at the 2010 F-150 (a car that I can buy right now) the display they had looked complete, but talking to the Ford Rep he told me it was not a functioning vehicle, in fact he said none of them were.

Yet I do not see any outcry over this. To make this into a HUGE story is simply an attempt at negative PR and FUD mongering. If NVIDIA cannot produce the cards on time then there is a reason to talk about this.

I can remember AMD telling everyone that the original Phenom would scale to 3.0GHz, In fact they showed it off at that speed. However the clocks of the released CPU were nowhere near that speed.

How about AMD/ATi showing off Physics on a GPU? They demoed it but it never materialized. Does that mean they were lying then? This subject is a Non-Iusse period. At no time was that card called a live sample. He did not pull it out of a system and say "Here it is" no he showed a display sample to give an idea of what the final Fermi Based Telsa will look like. Saying here it is.
NO... by: Anonymous on 10/6/2009
"My opinion then and now is the same - using mockups is nothing special. Intel showcases wafers of dead products..."

Am I a dumbass or is a wafer of chips completely different to what is supposedly a finished, almost-ready-for-retail card?
Intel would say that they are ramping a process node hence the demonstration of 45nm or 32nm wafers. I don't think Intel are dumb enough to showboat a fake chip in a heat spreader and say this is the next gen Haswell.

To showcase raw silicon is one thing (and good on nVidia for showing the "0935A1" chip) but to flat out lie to its followers with showboating what was supposedly the final Fermi retail card is outright deception.

They've lost my vote.
hmm by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
Are you retard or something?
by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
Are you seriously equivocating AMD's 5870 press event pictures (where the cards were real and all the photos look pretty much like the final retail cards) with cutting a rectangular shape out of a motherboard, taping it to a heat shroud, and declaring it a photo-op for your next generation architecture?
by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
Nvidia was wrong. They tried to deceive.
RE: Dire Warning, Theo by: Theo Valich on 10/5/2009
Greetings Rick,

First and foremost, we are not allies with any player in the industry sans the consumer. On the site, I did not notice we have a bias towards anyone. And if we were aligned with nVidia, then that company would not make a witch hunt after our first GT300 story broke.

As you may have noticed, BSN* as such is running Google Ads in the initial phase of the site exactly to avoid being accused of bias. We had a Palit related story [AMD 4850 GDDR5 story], which caused heavy accusations but in the end, we were right and Palit was punished by AMD - there are no allocation set for 5850 and 5870 coming from the only company that only wanted to do custom PCB implementations.

And if you're alleging that we're receiving money from industry players, I would really like to earn that Ferrari soon - so please tell your sources that so far, they've yet to find the correct bank account.

We were banned from the keynote, press conference and all 1-on-1 meetings following our disclosures. If you're implying that we are on nVidia's payrole, that's a really good one. They didn't even pay for breakfast - luckily, there was Safeway's market on the corner of 2nd and San Carlos.

Ed.
Ah I see, by: Sean Kalinich on 10/5/2009
So when AMD showed 40nm wafers at CES we should have called them on that?

Those wafers were dead, non usable garbage.
But they showed them and the world crowed that AMD and TSMC had hit 40nm first.

Again it is a common practice for this industry and others to show empty shells at launch and at trade shows. Nv did not say that the cards were available today? They said they are here, this means the architecture is finished and they are being rolled out. Launch is still looking like early November with availability in near the end of November.

Remember the hardest part of making a new graphics card is the actual GPU. the PCB is easy comparatively. Just like when AMD was showing the 5870s this board still has bridged traces and other "fixes" on it. They did not let anyone see that card either, but I did not see anyone calling it fake and making a big deal over that.
Dire Warning, Theo. by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
Ya know, Theo, I've heard some pretty convoluted self-justifications in my day, but your assertion that "everybody launches with fakes, so it's no big deal if nVidia does it", really takes the cake.

nVidia's reputation industry-wide over the past few years has been so hideous, they had BETTER come out with working silicon and SOON, otherwise they might as well fold up the tent and sneak out of town.

You decision to ally your site with them, "The Way You're Meant To Be Played"(tm) payments aside, means you're on really thin ice, bro. Any more unearned passes to nVidia by this site, and you might as well go sit in a corner and play with yourself, your credibility in the industry will be totally destroyed.

Rich Wargo
Official BSN* stance by: Theo Valich on 10/5/2009
The article above is author's opinion and should be taken as such.

When it comes to relationship between BSN* and nVidia and any accusations of bias, bear in mind that BSN* was banned from the Jen-Hsun's keynote and all 1-on-1 meetings with nVidia staff. We only had access to the conference.

If you wonder why, the answer was article published on April 22, 2009 and subsequent reposting on September 30, 2009.

Here at Bright Side of News*, you will get the complete information. AMD launching 5870 with less than 20,000 cards worldwide, nVidia's specifications months ahead...as well as opinion articles by my colleagues that have decades of experience in the industry.

Having said that, feel free to comment the article - I only wish to repeat that profanity will not be tolerated and those comments will be deleted.

On the subject of GT300 mockup board, we were informed more than 24 hours than any of the sites wrote the story. Given the source and subsequent crisis in relationship between nVidia and BSN*, I wasn't able to run that story in time. My opinion then and now is the same - using mockups is nothing special. Intel showcases wafers of dead products, SSD makers promise us hundreds of gigabytes in SSD and yet, those shells are empty and the products don't arrive when they're supposed to.. bottom line - nothing new.

But if nVidia does not launch the product in time frame we were given, you'll be the first to know.

Ed.
where's GTX380? by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
the card shown by nvidia is a Tesla class card. why everyone everywhere talks about it like it's the geforce card?! I don't care if Jensen held a chicken thigh in his hand announcing their new card. This debate is for supercomputing followers and they can wait and see if performance is like nvidia's demonstartion. Even the new architecture should not be a fever-concern to a gamer who's comparing HD58** cards to what's coming up from nvidia. I really don't think the high-end GT300 geforce is going to do all of that cGPU stuff (or at least not at that data processing performance). Of course it will do a lot of CUDA (and PhysX of course) but it's not like you're gonna buy a gaming card and go search for oil in the fields using it. So there's no such thing as "fermi VS HD5870" now. We wait to see the new flagship geforce card, which nobody knows about yet. Then people may decide on what to buy if they wanna compare AMD's DX11 products as "gamer card", which is the a competition AMD already edging nvidia at if not taking the lead.

nvidia already said the HD5870 performance can be beaten by their next generation, I think they mean the "Fermi-based" geforce can do 3D better, not that announced Tesla card.
haha what a moronic article by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
"haha what a moronic article"

Yes that that, so bullshit news is now bullshitnews/nvidiaprnews ha

Douche
WTF? by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
This website should be renamed as Retarded Side of News* (RSN*).
??? by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
You have made BSN lose all credibility with this article.
by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
The last sentence should be "complimentary," not "complementary."
by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
Excuse me, but this is the worst article i've seen here. What do you want to tell the readers?
1. You say AMD leaked the Information about the fake.
-> Please give me the Link to this, because i know some people who saw it was a fake independently and they do not work for ATI or AMD.

2. Dummys in auto trade shows are mainly there because comapnies want to check the Design. Do you buy your Tesla-Card beacuse it looks good or shiny? never heard of that. So the Dummy Nvidia showed was pretty useless, while for example car dummys in trade shows do have a purpose. So these to things are not comparable at all.

Everything would have been easier if Nvidia just had stated that this Fermi-Board was a dummy, while the sample behind the scenes was real.
Then all this confusion could have been avoided.

I like Bright Side of News, but this article made me reconsider that.
makes a difference by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
Actually, it matters. I'm currently debating whether to grab 2 5870's and in cf or wait for the gt300 and grab the High end card(depending on prices). seeing him holding the card saying "this is it!" made me think of waiting a month for it to hit the streets would be fine; however now that we know he lied (key point), he looses credibility on things like launch date, etc. I mean, read the latest articles on the launch date, supposedly it was going to be out this month but then they turn around and say there guna delay it for Black friday. sorry but thats kinda anoying since i had to pass up my chance at grabbing 2 hd 5870's since the brand i want is always out of stock not to mention limited to one per customer... Looks like red team is getting my money this time around. meh, nvidia would probably have a 20% faster card for twice the cost of AMD's cards.
by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
Like many of the sites gone wild and choosing fronts.

Lately Fudzi**a kisses nVIDIAs butt like there is no tomorrow.
(fudzilla.com/content/blogcategory/37/34/)

This site is just as FUD as many others.
BSN-what's that? BullSh!tNews?
(brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/5/16/nvidia-g%28t%29300-already-taped-out2c-a1-silicon-in-santa-clara.aspx) - really? And why do they make A1 silicon since "between January and March" up until: pc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/pcw/docs/318/660/html/05.jpg.html ???

SemiA**urate is on AMD payroll,probably. Do I need to say more?

I don't like the fact that the tech sites are choosing sides in the war where the consumer wins.
(nVIDIA vs. AMD vs. Intel)
I want clean, accurate, HONEST news/info/leaks.
Those I like are: TheTe**Report,XB**Labs and techP**erUp!
FunnyBoy by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
In last few years nVidia is leading the market because it has better products. And I'm not fun boy. I simply love better products! All this stupid talks can start when nVidia fail to deliver in December. Till then spend your time on creation not diversion. Peace!
LOL by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
Since when does it not matter when you are lying to shareholders about having a real "Fermi" card in your hands.
NV Fanboi 4 Sure by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
Oh please! The author is clearly a Nvidia FanBOY. The person who analyzed the mock up was clearly trying to drive traffic to their website. They were probably ATI/AMD FanBOYs as well.

Based on the supposed specs, the GT300 will destroy the 5870. Maybe even the 5870X2. If it does, I think that is great! It will lead to more price wars and then the consumer wins. Doesn't matter which brand you prefer.

Nvidia WILL take the high end. The only real questions are:
1. When?
2. Profitably?
3. Who will win where it counts? The mid range is where the money is made. Which ever company can spit out the best $180 to $225 card with the best profit margin will win the next round.

It looks like DAMMIT will own the rest of this year as the speculation is that Nvidia will get a GT300 onto shelves by December, but the mainstream parts won't appear until January.

The good news as a consumer is that it looks like they will keep trading punches for another round at least.
Lies are newsworthy. by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
"is this really news worthy?"

In this case, yes. NVidia didn't say "here's a mock up" which nobody would have minded, they said "here's the card!". It matters to shareholders because it gives a false impression of nVidia's progress. It matters to consumers because they're the ones making purchasing decisions.

Intel can show upcoming products quite happily at shows and they quite happily say that the chip is a year off, etc. So why can't nVidia?

"This information was “leaked” from a source inside AMD"

Really? That doesn't jibe with the tech forum website analysis of the pictures.
Eh? by: Anonymous on 10/5/2009
I think this was first noticed by Semi Accurate's forum members rather than ATI insiders.

Besides, wasn't the issue that nvidia tried to deceive people about it rather than just stating it for what it was - a mock up.
© 2009 - 2010 Bright Side Of News*, All rights reserved.
Top Stories
Most commented
Highlight
  • LSI Announces PCIe Based Solid State Storage Solution.
  • PowerDVD 10 creates 3D movies from 2D ones, MKV included
  • Update: Updated GTX 470 / 480 Specs Leak Out
  • Apple loses Director York to an aneurysm
  • Apple loses Director York to an aneurysm
Recent news
March 20, 2010, 20:00 UTC

Dear Readers,

In order to enable new features for the site, we'll be temporarily offline on Saturday, March 20th 2010 at noon Pacific, 3PM Eastern or 8PM/20:00 GMT/UTC. We should be offline for 15-25min, after which you should be able to see new features.

Thank You for understanding,

The BSN* Team
© 2009 - 2010 Bright Side Of News*, All rights reserved.