AMD (ATI) aims to take back the mid segment

[Borealis7]

the site that kinda sounds like that rapper who pimps cars-labs

my take: if it outperforms the 1900XT and its around the price range XbitLabs say it is, it could be a good alternative to NOT spending 300+USD for decent gaming.

 

[tuteja1986]

The funny thing is that a dual x1950pro can beat up 8800gts/2900xt in alot of dx9/opengl benchmark in ultra high resoultion/AA which is funny i find.

http://www.techpowerup.com/rev...hire/X1950_Pro_Dual/13

Farcry 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 107.4FPS
8800GTX 768 : 115.4FPS

FEAR 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 38FPS
8800GTX 768 : 534FPS

Prey 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 52.4FPS
8800GTX 768 : 65.2FPS

Quake 4 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 32.9FPS
8800GTX 768 : 45.9FPS

X3 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 62.7FPS
8800GTX 768 : 57.2FPS

Problem with the x1950pro dual was it came out way too late , consumed more power than 8800gtx by 20W and it was bigger than a 8800GTX by one inch. I think ATI should release a non unified sharder architecture card with DX10 support . Something like the spec of x1950 256mb/512mb with DX10 support for $200.

 

[TejTrescent]

Eh, I'm of the same opinion. The HD2600XT really isn't that bad for its price, like they say, and I mean, if Crossfiring it is good (has anyone posted Crossfire benchmarks of it, anywhere?), the dual-chip solution should be SOMEWHAT close to that performance usually, and for only 30$-40$ more, it should end up as more than enough for me for my 1280x1024 screen. XD

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
The funny thing is that a dual x1950pro can beat up 8800gts/2900xt in alot of dx9/opengl benchmark in ultra high resoultion/AA which is funny i find.

http://www.techpowerup.com/rev...hire/X1950_Pro_Dual/13

Farcry 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 107.4FPS
8800GTX 768 : 115.4FPS

FEAR 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 38FPS
8800GTX 768 : 534FPS

Prey 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 52.4FPS
8800GTX 768 : 65.2FPS

Quake 4 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 32.9FPS
8800GTX 768 : 45.9FPS

X3 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 62.7FPS
8800GTX 768 : 57.2FPS

Problem with the x1950pro dual was it came out way too late , consumed more power than 8800gtx by 20W and it was bigger than a 8800GTX by one inch. I think ATI should release a non unified sharder architecture card with DX10 support . Something like the spec of x1950 256mb/512mb with DX10 support for $200.

And it performs worse on average, so whats the point again? Lol it gets trumped by the GTX

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: tuteja1986
The funny thing is that a dual x1950pro can beat up 8800gts/2900xt in alot of dx9/opengl benchmark in ultra high resoultion/AA which is funny i find.

http://www.techpowerup.com/rev...hire/X1950_Pro_Dual/13

Farcry 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 107.4FPS
8800GTX 768 : 115.4FPS

FEAR 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 38FPS
8800GTX 768 : 534FPS

Prey 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 52.4FPS
8800GTX 768 : 65.2FPS

Quake 4 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 32.9FPS
8800GTX 768 : 45.9FPS

X3 2048x1536 4xAA 16xAF
x1950pro dual : 62.7FPS
8800GTX 768 : 57.2FPS

Problem with the x1950pro dual was it came out way too late , consumed more power than 8800gtx by 20W and it was bigger than a 8800GTX by one inch. I think ATI should release a non unified sharder architecture card with DX10 support . Something like the spec of x1950 256mb/512mb with DX10 support for $200.


</end quote></div>

And it performs worse on average, so whats the point again? Lol it gets trumped by the GTX

If the X1950 Pro dual can compete with the GTX, then a HD 2600XT dual could destroy the 8600GTS, and at the $200~ price point be very, very attractive. Also, even with a dual-chip card, it will have fairly low power consumption.

 

[coolpurplefan]

What's the point of a dual-GPU card? Why not come out with a X2650 XT or X2700 XT?

Or, even X2699.9 XT

 

[nemesismk2]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: coolpurplefan
What's the point of a dual-GPU card? Why not come out with a X2650 XT or X2700 XT?

Or, even X2699.9 XT </end quote></div>

I would need something like the x2700 XT because right now I am not interested in the x2900 XT. If AMD (ATI) can release something which is faster than my x1950 XT and has a good price then they can put me down for one!

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: coolpurplefan
What's the point of a dual-GPU card? Why not come out with a X2650 XT or X2700 XT?

Or, even X2699.9 XT

That requires re-engineering a completely new card; it is much easier to stick two chips on to one graphics card than it is to design a new GPU.

The other problem with that is cost. It's alot cheaper to build two 390M transistor graphics processors than to build a single.... say 500-600M transistor card that would compete in the $200 range.

I think the real problem is, ATI doesn't have the transistor budget to make a part between the HD 2600XT and HD 2900XT. The HD 2600 is already 390M transistors, which is absolutely huge for a midrange card. The good thing is it's made on a 65nm process, which means it actually costs around the same/a bit less than the 8600, which has 289M transistors.

If ATI were to make a "HD 2650", for the $200~ price range, they'd need to add even more transistors and soon the card would be looking like a high-end card; 500-600M trans. for midrange? It is MUCH easier, and CHEAPER, to stick two GPUs on a card and get the same performance.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: coolpurplefan
What's the point of a dual-GPU card? Why not come out with a X2650 XT or X2700 XT?

Or, even X2699.9 XT

how about an X2699.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 XT? will it actually ever become an X2700 XT if we put enough 9's after the decimal point?