View Full Version : ATI's R520 silicon "fantastic" - sources
coldpower27
08-31-05, 11:44 PM
We shall see, Nvidia has shown part of their hand, it's time for ATI to show part of their's.
I am hopeing for a competitive part.
This thread reminds me why I hate THG.
ok if the r520 is so great why is ati taping out the r580 now.... so soon to launch of the r520
Well, i think its a part of the competition cycle. ati-will be/is taping r580 incase the G70Ultra does exist.
From tape-out to product shipped in quantity to vendors it usually takes 3 or more months. But having the next genration ready gives some safety margins in case the R520 blows or if the competition simply has a better answer ready.
If I recall correctly, in 1999 NVidia taped out the first GeForce already in april even if the TNT2 was fresh from introduction.
Hmm.. intresting.
Performance: i can understand, every company claims its products r faster than the other.
Image Quality: How can/will it be superior/better in Image Quality?
Extreme Pixels (gay)
The R520 "should" be faster than the 7800GTX, if it is not, I consider it a failure. But remember, nVidia probably has an Ultra with 512mb up its sleeve. Don't you find it strange that the PCB obviously has room for 512mb, but no announcement yet? I think they are waiting for the R520 to hit.
Exactly. ATI has had time to make sure that their "Flagship" R520 is faster than NVIDIA. This is one of the reasons why yields are a big issue. They are busy trying to get high enough yields on a high enough clock rate part to 1) at least match NVIDIA's GTX and 2) surpass it by a confortable margin. If they don't do #2, they have failed. Bare minimum they have to do #1.
Extreme Pixels (gay)
Exactly. ATI has had time to make sure that their "Flagship" R520 is faster than NVIDIA. This is one of the reasons why yields are a big issue. They are busy trying to get high enough yields on a high enough clock rate part to 1) at least match NVIDIA's GTX and 2) surpass it by a confortable margin. If they don't do #2, they have failed. Bare minimum they have to do #1.
Well said made a lot of sense
Of course it will outperform the 7800GTX. They had lots of time to improve clockspeed and performance. I beleive the R520 was delayed, due to the release of the 7800GTX. ATi had to go and beef the 520 up so that the difference will be substaintial.
IMO, it would be pathetic for ATi to relase a GPU latter than Nvidia and still loose in performance. :rolleyes:
As for visual quality. I have had 3 nvida cards, and 3 Ati cards. All I can say is that fan boys are dreaming the difference.
Vagrant Zero
09-09-05, 01:09 AM
Meh the whole it's coming out later so it must be better crap doesn't fly with me. Everyone remember the 5800? Ya, I know trying to remember those days through the haze of a ****-faced hangovers is diffucult but try.
The 5800 made me an alcholic.
AthlonXP1800
09-09-05, 11:12 PM
Of course it will outperform the 7800GTX. They had lots of time to improve clockspeed and performance. I beleive the R520 was delayed, due to the release of the 7800GTX. ATi had to go and beef the 520 up so that the difference will be substaintial.
Not with 16 pipeline R520 XT, someone obtained R520 XT engineering sample (http://www.hkepc.com/hwdb/r520firstlook-e.htm) clocked 650MHz, the performance is lower than Geforce 7800 GTX but confirmed that 24 and 32 pipeline versions existed that are faster than Geforce 7800 GTX:
As the card maker doesn't wish to reveal the R520 performance yet, but we can confirm that R520 at 24pp or 32pp will not be lower than that of the GeForce 7800GTX. Even though the 32pp and 24pp R520 mass production will face some difficulties, but the 16 pipelines R520 using the 90nm core will be clocked high to maintain a certain level of competitiveness.
ATI had decided the final clock speed for R520 XT is 600/1400, the performance will be lower than the engineering sample, they need these clock to achieve the yield. But with 24 and 32 pipeline versions still have bad yield, I dont know if we will ever see it in R520 XT versions in the light of day, ATI probably will save 32 pipeline for R580 due to release next year.
From Anand this morning.
The 90nm R520 components will come in three flavors as we mentioned earlier, all with the X1800 Radeon moniker. The available marketing information claims that the GPU uses an "ultra-threaded quad-core 3D architecture" and a "512-bit ring bus" memory controller. For those of you who know a little bit about GPU architecture, the core-quads split the pipeline in the GPU into groups of four (hence the word "quad"). The documentation hints that there are four quads, so expect to see 16 pipes on this card. There are some "confirmations" of 24pp and 32pp, but the roadmaps clearly say four quads (at least to begin with) due to yeild. All signs indicate that a future generation, R580, will use six quads instead. The 512-bit ring bus actually excites us the most; Cell's Elemental Interface Bus (EIB) uses a 16-byte wide quad ring bus, capable of transferring 16-bytes per cycle to the various SPEs. R520's ring bus would actually be four times wider than the bus found on Cell; though this implementation is in R520's memory controller rather than the PPE-to-SPE interface. With all the hype for R520 so far, everyone is banking on the memory controller to put X1800 ahead of G70.
You should put in Anand's correction:
With all the hype for R520 so far, everyone is banking on the memory controller to put X1800 ahead of G70.
ATI's 512-bit Ring Bus and R520 Product Naming (http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2527)
Personally, I think the R520 will be completely whipped but the 7800GTX. After all, it's just a beefed up 9700, right? Right? :p
Graphicmaniac
09-10-05, 10:59 AM
if r520 will just be a x800xt+sm3 and hdr then...
people! run to buy x800gt,gto and gto2 till they exist! ehehe
damnit x1800xt sounds stupid as hell.
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/video/ATI/x1800.png
Well, that looks like 10,1800 XT (Ten Eighteen Hundred) :p
Well the 512bit bus with internal could put it infront if it can do small bytes of data very quickly so it's like cache then the diffrence could be like the Centreno Vs the Prescott. After all why have large bytes of data and smal bytes of data moving at the same speed when you can fetch the small sooner. This can reduce latency quite a bit.
|JuiceZ|
09-10-05, 05:37 PM
damnit x1800xt sounds stupid as hell.
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/video/ATI/x1800.png
lol
superklye
09-10-05, 06:06 PM
Meh the whole it's coming out later so it must be better crap doesn't fly with me. Everyone remember the 5800? Ya, I know trying to remember those days through the haze of a ****-faced hangovers is diffucult but try.
The 5800 made me an alcholic.
I love this guy.
Treason
09-10-05, 07:28 PM
damnit x1800xt sounds stupid as hell.
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/video/ATI/x1800.png
Lol nVidia wins by default. No benchmarks needed. :afro:
Your telling me... When is nVIdia and ATI gonna grow some balls and think up a different name!
The ATI Radeon 101800 XT PE Crossfire Pen15 Edition.
I've had enough of the wacky names.
I want ATi XXX Pen0s edition :D
Kombatant hinted over at R3D that it won't be called x1800xt.
Riptide
09-11-05, 10:16 AM
Your telling me... When is nVIdia and ATI gonna grow some balls and think up a different name!
I agree... Anyone got a serious suggestion for it?
I agree... Anyone got a serious suggestion for it?
I don't think NVIDIA or ATI will lose GeForce or Radeon because they've spent a lot of money marketing those names and most people already know those names.
I've never understood why they don't just call it what they call the cores only more intuitive.
For instance:
High End: NVIDIA GeForce G78
High End: ATI Radeon R580
Then they could use the third digit for speeds within the class.
NVIDIA GeForce G780 wouldn't be as desirable as the NVIDIA GeForce G781.
ATI Radeon R580 wouldn't be as desireable as the ATI Radeon R581.
Middle: NVIDIA GeForce G760
Refresh: NVIDIA GeForce G790
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.