http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/02/17/nvidias-fermigtx480-broken-and-unfixable/

Nvidia's upcoming Fermi (previously known as 'GT300'), which will be the GTX470 and GTX480 products:

- Has clockspeeds that are 25% below target
- Has single-digit yields when 60% was considered the borderline of profitability for their last chip (GT200)
- Has no significant lead on a 5870 in the best-case
- Is the hottest graphics card ever made, consuming close to the 300W limit of PCIe power
- Is six months late (March launch, in tiny quantities)
- Can't be fixed on any of the above for another six months
- All its derivative parts are similarly broken and Nvidia's current products in those segments (indeed, in every segment) are losing anyway.

This is the worst chip I have ever seen. Worse than NV30, the R600, Phenom and Pentium 4 Prescott combined.

When I saw a negative thread about Nvidia's new chip, I somehow knew you'd be the one posting it Soleron, lol.

I think the worst thing for Nvidia is the second point, only single-digit yields?! Wtf?!

Holy crap, any of those individually would alone be pretty bad news, but jesus christ Nvidia have dug themselves a hole here O_O

I like AMD, but I'm not a fanboy. I actually want competition in the GPU market, those 5xxx prices need to come down. Charlie's articles haven't really been accepted by the mainstream until recently, when it turned out everything he's written about Fermi since early last year is correct (well, we'll know for certain next month).

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.

damn...what the hell is Nvidia making here? The Cell 2?

Oh no, they are more advanced then that. They are making CELL2.5.0.3

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.

lol, if they were making the cell 2, it would be about 20000X better than anything on the market.

Yes. Or so they would claim before its release...the reality would be something else.