What's Under the Hood?

As the title of the article implies, the GeForce 7300 is NVIDIA's very first shipping 90nm part. In order to come out with the 7800 series as early as they did, NVIDIA didn't want to try anything tricky like pushing the process envelope and moving to 90nm. Sticking with the 110nm process proved to be a good decision for NVIDIA this time around. With TSMC bringing out their 80nm process and NVIDIA just now starting to manufacture 90nm parts, it will be interesting to see who takes the next step towards smaller transistors. ATI has been pretty aggressive recently, but the 80nm process should be a fairly simple transition (as far as fabrication process transitions go), so it could go either way.

Aside from transistors with 90nm gate lengths and FP16 framebuffer blending, the 7300 will also carry NVIDIA's TurboCache technology. With relatively few vertex shaders, pixel shaders, and render outputs, a little die area can afford to be spent on beefing up caches to allow for the efficient use of higher latency system memory. This allows NVIDIA to "support" games that require more RAM than is physically present on the card. With the GeForce 7300 sporting 128MB of RAM, TurboCache allows games to treat the graphics subsystem like it has 256MB of RAM. Likewise, the 256MB version of the 7300 will look like it has a 512MB framebuffer to software.

In addition to allowing programs that require more graphics memory to run efficiently, NVIDIA is also able to cut the bandwidth to graphics memory down without taking a large performance hit. The bandwidth gained through TurboCache augments the bandwidth of onboard memory and should provide some good speed advantages for low end parts. The 128MB version of the 7300 will have a 64-bit memory bus, which is actually on the high end for TurboCache parts. It is likely that the extra RAM and onboard memory bandwidth boost in this generation of TurboCache parts is there to enable the use of memory intensive HDR features (like the FP16 blend absent from 6200 parts).

The rest of the NV4x/G70 features will also come along with this new budget part without exception. This includes NVIDIA's PureVideo features for clean DVD viewing and efficient playback of HD content, and the possibility of SLI in the future. SLI is not part of the 7300 series at launch, but, if NVIDIA's track record is any indication, we can all but guarantee SLI support. Shader Model 3 is of course supported, but with fewer pipelines, the efficiency of high end features like looping and conditional rendering will not be optimal. We should also see more efficient handling of math intensive shaders due to the 7 series ability to handle more Multiply-Adds per clock than the 6 series. Here's the full breakdown of what the GeForce 7300 brings to the table.

Budget Card Features
  Radeon X1300 GeForce 6200TC GeForce 7300
Vertex Pipelines 2 3 3
Pixel Pipelines 4 4 4
Render Outputs 4 2 2
Core Clock Speed 450 350 550
Memory Clock Speed 500 350 350
Memory Size 256-512MB 16-64MB 128-256MB
Memory Bandwidth 64-128bit 32-64bit 64bit
GPU Video Decode yes yes yes
FP16 Filter no yes yes
FP16 Blend yes no yes


Clearly, the 7300 will be able to win out over the 6200 TC in any flavor, but we will need to wait until we get our hands on a part to know exactly what flavors of X1300 it will match up against. Listed in our table is our best guess match (the vanilla X1300), but we'll try to test as many flavors as we can when we are able to do a performance comparison.

For now, we can at least take comfort in the fact that a >50% increase in core clock speed, increased memory size and bandwidth, and higher level of architectural efficiency over the 6200 TC will help make the new GeForce 7300 very competitive at a <$100 price point. While it may not get everyone's blood boiling, the 7300 is not just an exciting part for the budget market, but it will help raise the bar for the minimum target that game developers will be shooting for over the next couple of years.

Index
Comments Locked

24 Comments

View All Comments

  • Puddleglum - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    You're mything with your facts. The quote "Because many game developers write software for the least [slowest] common denomintaor" is indeed true. However, obviously there are some games that simply push the envelope well past the slower cards. You cannot reason that "this card is once again not need when on board video will do," if you're basing that on "Most real games this card can't do anything."

    One of the more real games that exists right now is Battlefield 2, which will run on a GeForce FX 5700; EA recommends 256MB of on-card RAM. This card not only beats out a 5700, but, from the article, there may be a 256MB version with the 7300. For < $100.

    Upgrading from onboard video will be a common reason for a buyer to look at this card, as this card brings the user into the possibility of playing nearly all games that are out right now. Not only will it play the game, but this card will support the new features, such as rendering DX9 or even HDR, where I don't believe any onboard can touch right now.

    There will certainly be customers in line at Fry's with a game in one hand and a 7300 in the other.
  • highlnder69 - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    "Now all we really need is for Intel to care about putting performance and quality into their graphics hardware."

    Maybe they should start with their processors first and then move on upgrading their integrated graphics...
  • deathwalker - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    ouch..you are mean. It is amazing how Intel has let themselves fall from there position of dominance in the processor market forn years ago. Then again..did they really fall or is it the prespective that thay have fallen when measured agains how fast AMD has come on since the since the introduction of their XP line?
  • neogodless - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    While it is impossible to do a direct match-up between PCI Express cards and AGP, I'd like to see how this competes against previous budget cards, or even previous mainstream cards that can now be bought on a budget. At the very least, I'd like to see this compared to Dell's de facto PCI Express card, the Radeon X300 SE, because we can see what kind of upgrade option this would be for those on a budget.

    And... in a perfect world, it'd also be put up against the likes of the previous generation as well, but those are all AGP... oh well!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now