Talk:Turing (microarchitecture)

IP edit warring over ?.?
Please refer to WP:EDITWAR and WP:BRD. You were bold, I reverted you, and you reverted back. And what you are adding is not appropriate, it is question marks, without a space after them no less. The information you want to add is not "?.?" but some unknown version number. You are not clearly conveying that this is what you mean with "?.?". —DIYeditor (talk) 17:17, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * You're a moron and it shows, when Nvidia releases that info then someone can edit it easily. But I guess ignorant clueless people will always try to force their idiocy on others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.200.241 (talk) 17:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Looks like we have another individual back who strangely has the same potty mouth and bad attitude. Would not be surprised if were the same person as above. You must provide a source to support your claim that Ampere is the next consumer GPU architecture after Turing. It was properly cited that this was not known. Please see WP:CITE and WP:RS. —DIYeditor (talk) 10:53, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * https://www.marketwatch.com/story/nvidia-unveils-ampere-gpu-architecture-for-ai-boost-and-the-first-target-is-coronavirus-2020-05-14 "Nvidia did not release any information Wednesday about consumer GPUs using Ampere, but when asked by a reporter in the briefing about the difference between enterprise and consumer approaches to Ampere, Huang said “there’s great overlap in the architecture, but not in the configuration.”" Kindly stop spamming me if you're too stupid to find info on the Internet — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:E68:5425:8D5C:D0C4:2FA:F364:3BF9 (talk) 10:55, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "great overlap" is not a citation for anything. The statement that it is unknown on the other hand is cited. You have already been warned about the WP:NPA policy. —DIYeditor (talk) 10:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)