Introducing AMD’s Radeon 7000M and NVIDIA’s GeForce 600M Mobile GPUs
by Jarred Walton on December 7, 2011 2:45 AM ESTNVIDIA’s GeForce 600M Parts
We just covered the AMD side of things, but yesterday NVIDIA quietly refreshed their entry-level and midrange mobile GPUs in a similar manner. We weren’t briefed on the updates, most likely because there’s not much to say. Like AMD there are three "new" 600M parts. Here’s the overview of what NVIDIA is offering, with the previous generation equivalents listed for reference.
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M, GT 630M, and 610M Specifications | ||||||
| GeForce GT 635M | GeForce GT 555M | GeForce GT 630M | GeForce GT 540M | GeForce 610M | GeForce 520MX | |
| Core Name | GF106/GF108 | GF106/GF108 | GF108 | GF108 | GF119 | GF119 |
| Stream Processors | 144/96 | 144/96 | 96 | 96 | 48 | 48 |
| Texture Units | 24/16 | 24/16 | 16 | 16 | 8 | 8 |
| ROPs | 24/4 | 24/4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Core Clock | 675/753MHz | 675/753MHz | 672MHz | 672MHz | 900MHz | 900MHz |
| Memory Clock | 1.8/3.6GHz DDR3/GDDR5 | 1.8/3.14GHz DDR3/GDDR5 | Up to 900MHz (1.8GHz) DDR3 | 900MHz (1.8GHz) DDR3 | 900MHz (1.8GHz) DDR3 | 900MHz (1.8GHz) DDR3 |
| Memory Bus Width | 192/128-bit | 192/128-bit | 128-bit | 128-bit | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| Memory Bandwidth | 43.2/57.6GB/s | 43.2/50.2GB/s | 28.8GB/s | 28.8GB/s | 14.4GB/s | 14.4GB/s |
NVIDIA has the specifications up for their 600M parts, and it appears that they’ll be doing a straight rebadge without changing the clock speeds from the 500M equivalents—in fact, they’ll even keep the craziness that is the GT 555M. The only difference we could find is that GT 635M GDDR5 variants may have slightly more memory bandwidth (or more likely is that the spec page just doesn't adequately describe the bipolar nature of the product). What they will be changing is the apparent positioning of the products. The GT 630M and 610M drop 10 points from the model number, while the GT 635M drops 20 points; that appears to leave room for future GT 640M/650M parts, though nothing has been announced as yet. We also don’t have information on pricing, but there’s a possibility that with the drop in model number the prices will also be lower.
Like the AMD 7000M launch, GeForce 600M looks to be more about marketing and product positioning than anything. Mobile GPUs are about a generation behind their desktop counterparts, so with the renaming both AMD and NVIDIA are paving the way for new high-end GPUs to replace the current HD 6990M and GTX 580M. Thus, when we see the desktop HD 7970 and GTX 680 (or whatever they end up being named), we’ll should also see HD 7970M and GTX 680M. If recent history holds, those will end up being mobile variants of HD 7700 and GTX 660 (whatever those entail).
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
64 Comments
View All Comments
MrSpadge - Wednesday, December 7, 2011 - link
It's another case of "If it looks the same, how will people know I've upgraded?"This time it's the laptop OEMs, not some consumer standing in the queue.
MrS
Ryan Smith - Wednesday, December 7, 2011 - link
You've hit the nail on the head.Laptop OEMs are already launching their 2012 products, and even though they don't have any new hardware to work with (versus whatever they launched 6 months ago), they need "newer" products. It's very similar to how car manufacturers operate.
So AMD and NVIDIA are obliging them, hence the rehash for the 7000M and 600M series. It doesn't really excuse this mess, but the customer gets what the customer wants.
mariush - Thursday, December 8, 2011 - link
Laptop/netbook manufacturers want new models when the new versions of their laptops are made... sort of like the clothes with the spring-summer releases and autumn-winter collections.They just want bullet points on pages, differentiating their new laptops from the old stock - they don't care if they're faster, better and they certainly don't care what company they order from so both companies are pressured into releasing something, anything, just to keep their contracts and move stuff.
Pantsu - Wednesday, December 7, 2011 - link
Laptop makers want new models, Nvidia and AMD can't provide them, hence they rename old chips. TSMC just isn't ready with 28 nm.Hopefully these rebadgings at least drop the prices a bit, but then again we'll never know that, only whether they'll show up in cheaper laptops.
Looks like there's bound to be supply issues with new 28 nm desktop GPUs when they actually release them. What a surprise.
gevorg - Wednesday, December 7, 2011 - link
... they had to fail in mobile GPU line tootipoo - Wednesday, December 7, 2011 - link
The mobile lineup using last generation chips is nothing new. I'm pretty sure the GTX500M series is based on 400 series parts, if I'm not mistaken. Still waiting for the *real* new cards.xxtypersxx - Wednesday, December 7, 2011 - link
Actually, 500 series parts are substantially improved over the 400 series parts as they benefit from chip refinement and the addition of Nvidia's 3rd transistor type to lower power draw and heat. Performance doesn't change a ton, but they are certainly more different than anything we see the two companies announcing today.TerdFerguson - Wednesday, December 7, 2011 - link
AMD and NV have been ripping consumers off with these same designs for quite some time, now. Instead of regularly bringing out new, higher performing, products that replace older models at the same price while greatly improving performance, they give us new incarnations of old tech. I understand the concept of binning, but they've been selling hobbled versions of their $600 flagship boards across the entire product line for so long now that it is just absolutely repugnant. I honestly hope and pray that Intel's upcoming integrated graphics parts are good enough (and they don't need to be much better) to light a fire under the stagnant, price-fixing, hegemons of the graphics industry.bji - Wednesday, December 7, 2011 - link
Ripping people off because they don't produce products on a time schedule and with a price that you approve of? That's ridiculous.If the graphics industry is stagnant, it's because the market is shrinking. Most people are happy with their consoles or with console-level performance on their desktop. Fewer people are willing to pay more money to increase the resolution that they can run their game at when the difference in enjoyment of the game is negligeable.
Also the suggestion that Intel's integrated graphics are even *close* to being able to compete with any flagship product from AMD or NVidia is also ridiculous.
AMD already produces an integrated graphics solution that is far, far better than anything Intel can produce, and is likely to produce in the forseeable future; it's what's in the A-series of AMD CPU.
AlB80 - Wednesday, December 7, 2011 - link
Look at the die size and you understood VLIW5 (32-bit) is the most effective architecture. And also it's modern.