Adjusting Trajectory & Slipping Schedule

Carrell didn’t believe in building big chips anymore. It wasn’t that it was too difficult, it’s that it took too long for a $600 GPU to turn into a $200 GPU. AMD believed that the most important market was the larger (both in quantity and revenue) performance mainstream segment.

Rather than making the $200 - $300 market wait for new technology, Carrell wanted to deliver it there first and then scale up/down to later address more expensive/cheaper markets.

The risk in RV770 was architecture and memory technology. The risk in RV870 was architecture and manufacturing process, the latter which was completely out of AMD’s control.

Early on Carrell believed that TSMC’s 40nm wasn’t mature enough and that when it was ready, its cost was going to be much higher than expected. While he didn’t elaborate on this at the time, Carrell told me that there was a lot of information tuning that made TSMC’s 40nm look cheaper than it ended up being. I'll touch on this more later on in the article.

Carrell reluctantly went along with the desire to build a 400+ mm2 RV870 because he believed that when engineering wakes up and realizes that this isn’t going to be cheap, they’d be having another discussion.

In early 2008, going into Februrary, TSMC started dropping hints that ATI might not want to be so aggressive on what they think 40nm is going to cost. ATI’s costs might have been, at the time, a little optimistic.

Engineering came back and said that RV870 was going to be pretty expensive and suggested looking at the configuration a second time.

Which is exactly what they did.

The team met and stuck with Rick Bergman’s compromise: the GPU had to be at least 2x RV770, but the die size had to come down. ATI changed the configuration for Cypress (high end, single GPU RV870) in March of 2008.

And here’s where the new ATI really showed itself. We had a company that had decided to both 1) not let schedule slip, and 2) stop designing the biggest GPU possible. Yet in order to preserve the second belief, it had to sacrifice the first.

You have to understand, changing a chip configuration that late in the game, 1.5 years before launch, screws everything up. By the time RV770 came out, 870 was set in stone. Any changes even a year prior to that resets a lot of clocks. You have to go back and redo floorplan and configuration, there’s a lot of adjusting that happens. It takes at least a couple of weeks, sometimes a couple of months. It impacted schedule. And ATI had to work extremely hard to minimize that where possible. The Radeon HD 5870 was around 30 - 45 days late because of this change.

Remember ATI’s nothing-messes-with-schedule policy? It took a lot of guts on the part of the engineering team and Rick Bergman to accept a month+ hit on redesigning RV870. If you don’t show up to the fight, you lose by default, and that’s exactly what ATI was risking by agreeing to a redesign of Cypress.

This is also super important to understand, because it implies that at some point, NVIDIA made a conscious decision to be late with Fermi. ATI wasn’t the only one to know when DX11/Windows 7 were coming. NVIDIA was well aware and prioritized features that delayed Fermi rather than align with this market bulge. GPUs don’t get delayed without forewarning. AMD risked being late in order to make a smaller chip, NVIDIA risked being late to make a bigger one. These two companies are diverging.


The actual RV870

Engineering was scrambling. RV870 had to be a lot smaller yet still deliver 2x the computational power of RV770. Features had to go.

The Other Train - Building a Huge RV870 Carrell Loses His Baby: Say Goodbye to Sideport
Comments Locked

132 Comments

View All Comments

  • devene - Sunday, February 14, 2010 - link

    Just like many others, I've been a long time reader and I just couldn't carry on without leaving a comment:

    This has been an article, just like the RV770 one. It may not reveal many facts but is tremendously insightful and inspiring. Thank you for bringing this deeply hidden information out to the public and to the "fans". Please do everything in your power to continue this trend.

    Once again, thank you Anand,
    devene
  • medi01 - Sunday, February 14, 2010 - link

    Germans say "lange Rede kurzer Sinn". So many pointless sentences that do not tell anything even remotely interesting.
  • TGressus - Sunday, February 14, 2010 - link

    Even the home team could not be sold on Eyefinity...
  • William Gaatjes - Sunday, February 14, 2010 - link

    Fantastic article.

    "
    First, it massively increased the confidence level of the engineering team. There’s this whole human nature aspect to everything in life, it comes with being human. Lose confidence and execution sucks, but if you are working towards a realistic set of goals then morale and confidence are both high. The side effect is that a passionate engineer will also work to try and beat those goals.
    "

    Finally, someone accepting and using human nature.
    And see it works out...

    The fun part is that a requested functionality that is desired but can not make it within the expected timeframe, can still be worked on and can be ready for the next "bulge" in the market. This way you relieve your engineers form stress, you have the time to sort errors and bugs out, you have time to solve unforseen consequences that always happen( people can get sick, a bug in software, machines breaking down) and you have a feature for the market department to market to the consumer for the next iteration of the product. This way you can use the free market to build an in the end perfect device. It is all about balance. If you have to invest to much energy in situation a, you will have less energy for situation b in a certain timeframe. We are bound by laws of nature meaning there is no "perpetuum mobile" in this universe. Nothing comes for free...
  • aegisofrime - Sunday, February 14, 2010 - link

    Anand, you have taken an article that is really technical in nature, and turned it into something entertaining to read and yet informative for non-engineer types. My hats off to you. This is really the right balance of information and readability. If only all the Scientific Papers I have to read were written like this!
  • dukeariochofchaos - Sunday, February 14, 2010 - link

    i wonder if you will give fermi the same drama queen touch?

    i hope so.

  • Jamahl - Sunday, February 14, 2010 - link

    I don't think anyone wants to read nvidia's marketing department tell us how awesome PhysX and CUDA is again tbh.
  • TGressus - Sunday, February 14, 2010 - link

    I suspect Fermi will be able to stand on it's technological innovation.
  • RJohnson - Sunday, February 14, 2010 - link

    ...and it's exorbitant price/die size will exclude mere mortals from owning one.
  • Spoelie - Sunday, February 14, 2010 - link

    That depends entirely on the openness of NVIDIA on the subject, historically not one of their strong points.

    In fact ATi's take on NVIDIA's design process has been more informative than what has come out of NVIDIA itself.

    But here's to hoping..

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now