| ssj12 said: And they have a reference GPU to prove this? If they do I'll believe them, if not, then frankly your blowing smoke on an untested product. |
He's been right on every statement or claim we can test. And these haven't been vague things; when he said them, they were considered raving fanboyism and complete fabrication. At the time there were many conflicting rumours sites changing their story every few days (Fudzilla has listed seven distinct release dates for Fermi so far. None correct.) yet Charlie stuck to his March prediction giving full and detailed reasoning.
- Last May, he said that Fermi would arrive in March. Everyone else was sure it would be in time for the Windows 7 launch.
- GT212 being cancelled. It was. GT214 being redone as GT215. It was. All of GT215-218 being severely delayed from the original Q2 timeframe to November at retail.
- Fermi needing two spins, and the timings of their respective tapeouts and first silicon. They are confirmed, because the 6 month delay that implies them has passed.
- Huge power requirements - the demos at CES (months after the claim) with their power plugs proved this. Also confirmed in last month's public statement that Fermi will be hotter than GT200, again months after when he said it.
- The fake Fermi boards at GTC. First pointed out by him and now accepted.
- The clockspeeds and bins being disappointing were confirmed after a few months by the Tesla document which I'll link if you ask.
- The rest of the stuff (how TSMC works, how long it takes to respin, the cost estimates, the BoM estimates) are all public knowledge if you phone the respective suppliers as a customer.
And all this with zero confirmed evidence to the contrary. He also has a forum post record of a few hundred posts where you can see the story unfolding with reasoning. If this was fabricated he would have tripped up in the record by now.
