Has ATI given up the high end race?

[Wreckage]

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3334&p=22

With AMD dropping out of the high end single-GPU space (they will still compete with multiGPU solutions), NVIDIA will be left all alone with top performance for the forseable future.

Many people expected this would happen once they got bought out by AMD. Will this turn NVIDIA into something like Creative (with their soundcards). I think it will be interesting how this generation plays out and what the next generation will bring. I think this will be a major change in the computer industry.

I locked this thread once. Now I'm going to lock it again.
-ViRGE

 

[happy medium]

Easy answer? Yes when it comes to single gpu's.

 

[airhendrix13]

I really hope AMD bites Nvidia in the ass with this. The recent release of the GT200 cards is a great example of how Nvidia is getting a little ahead of themselves. It's great that Nvidia is pushing GPU's forward, but the price point these cards are being set at is rediculous.

I think the argument AMD is doing poor isn't true. I think it more has to do with that AMD has had to step back, take a look at where things are going, and reevaluate where they are at. Nvidia and Intel are taking the high-end market, and AMD is just starting to realize that they currently cannot compete there. I think it would be a smart move on AMD's part to take advantage of the high prices of the new high-end products and capture the mid to low-end market.

The fact is most people aren't ready for the new high-end products, and I think AMD is realizing this and is going to do well in the near future, and I hope they do.

And this from someone who has an Intel / Nvidia PC.

Ryan

 

[happy medium]

Originally posted by: airhendrix13
I really hope AMD bites Nvidia in the ass with this. The recent release of the GT200 cards is a great example of how Nvidia is getting a little ahead of themselves. It's great that Nvidia is pushing GPU's forward, but the price point these cards are being set at is rediculous.

I think the argument AMD is doing poor isn't true. I think it more has to do with that AMD has had to step back, take a look at where things are going, and reevaluate where they are at. Nvidia and Intel are taking the high-end market, and AMD is just starting to realize that they currently cannot compete there. I think it would be a smart move on AMD's part to take advantage of the high prices of the new high-end products and capture the mid to low-end market.

The fact is most people aren't ready for the new high-end products, and I think AMD is realizing this and is going to do well in the near future, and I hope they do.

And this from someone who has an Intel / Nvidia PC.

Ryan

I don't see how Amd can compete unless they sell there cards real cheap.

Nvidia has all segments of the videocard industry covered.
There 8800's/9600/9800 series covers all the mid range and low end cheap.

Comming soon or out allready.......9800gt,9600gt,9600gso
9500gt,9400gs.

 

[Extelleron]

Dropping out of the high-end race?

Considering that R700 will no doubt outperform GT200, likely by a considerable margin, definitely not. Just because AMD is doing it different doesn't mean they are not competing.

HD 4870 is going to be competitive with GT200 in certain benchmarks, HD 4870 X2 is going to demolish it. And there will be no trade offs with it, because even if CF doesn't work, single GPU performance is still around that of the GTX 260/280. Then when Crossfire kicks in.... it's in another league.

 

[zod96]

Ati has a card the 4850 that is about 75% the performance of the GTX280 for $179.99 where as the gtx280 is $600 right now the economy sucks I think the 4850 is going to be a big winner for AMD/ATI

 

[SunnyD]

No.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Considering that R700 will no doubt outperform GT200,

Please provide proof.

 

[airhendrix13]

AMD has said many times that they've had a product that will take the cake, but generally performance-wise, it doesn't happen. They have to undersell Nvidia until they truly make a breakthrough.

 

[Aberforth]

Well, AMD shouldn't announce their products until a month before their release otherwise it will only make nv tweak their GPU's very badly and re-schedule Q4 releases.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Considering that R700 will no doubt outperform GT200,

Please provide proof.

http://www.tweaktown.com/revie...al_thoughts/index.html

The other thing I have to say before I wrap this all up is that I?ve tested the HD 4850, and I?ve tested it in Crossfire. Now, if I hadn?t tested those cards I may have been more impressed with the GTX 280, but I have. I?ve seen the performance figures the cards put out. We also know the price on a pair of HD 4850s is going to be under $600 AUD, while the new GTX 280 in stock form seems to be launching at the absolute cheapest in Australia in the low $700 AUD area. Ouch.

http://www.eetimes.com/rss/sho...SSfeed_eetimes_newsRSS

"AMD says its 4850 device at about 110 W and $199 will deliver about 75 percent of the performance of Nvidia's high-end GTX280 which costs $649 and dissipates 236W. Two of the AMD [4850] parts on a board will hit graphics benchmarks about 30 percent higher than the Nvidia device, the AMD spokesman added.

HD 4850 Crossfire (or HD 4850 X2) outpeforms GTX 280 by a large margin, I don't think we have to worry about HD 4870 X2 outperforming it with higher clocks + GDDR5.

 

[happy medium]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Considering that R700 will no doubt outperform GT200,

Please provide proof.

I thought the 4870 competes with the 9800gtx?

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Extelleron


"AMD says.....

Such reliable sources. :laugh:

Until the card is for sale and has been benchmarked by Tech Report, Anandtech, etc.

It's not real.

 

[airhendrix13]

^ Agreed.

AMD has become a book of empty promises as of late and I won't believe what they say until I see it first hand.

But if that does hold true, that should give Nvidia a run for its money...atleast for a little while...

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Extelleron


"AMD says.....

Such reliable sources. :laugh:

Until the card is for sale and has been benchmarked by Tech Report, Anandtech, etc.

It's not real.

Where in my post did I say anything about AMD promising anything? Tweaktown is not AMD and they confirmed what the EE Times report said in their GTX 280 conclusion.

It's real and whether or not you want to accept that is up to you. You don't have much longer to wait (9 days) until the truth comes out.

 

[airhendrix13]

Whether it holds true or not, I think AMD has to come up with a better strategy than the recently popular "lets just throw more at it" strategy. I would like to see something from AMD that uses a single card solution to take on Nvidia. Sure putting 2 cards together, calling it one product, and calling it a day works, but it isn't that progressive.

 

[Warren21]

I love how you two (Wreck/Air) bash the AMD quote and totally ignore the independant source (TT quote).

While I do agree 100% that one cannot set something in stone until the thing is actually available, there is no sense in totally denying its existence and projected performance. Like Extelleron said, if 4850 CF is purported to outperform GTX 280, then 4870 CF should do so with an even wider margin.

And quoting airhendrix13, "that should give Nvidia a run for its money...atleast for a little while..."

The little while being the time it takes NV to release their GTX 280 refresh on 55nm with 1GB of GDDR5, since the GT200 arc is GDDR5 capable. They're targetting R700 with said refresh, since R700 > GTX 280.

Also, whether you think it is 'that progressive' or not, FPS is FPS, no? This situation didn't stop NV from claiming the perf. crown with the 7950 GX2 vs. X1950 XTX (though the 7950 GX2 generally was an unreliable POS). If they can offer me better performance for less money and the product works as it should, I see no reason not to continue doing so (ATI going multiGPU on one card, that is).

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

yeah baby, go ATI

 

[happy medium]

So right now the best bang for the buck (high end) is 2-8800gts's in sli for 300.00$?
It seems faster then a gtx280 and will smoke a 4870 right?

 

[airhendrix13]

I never once said that the article was false, I did say that AMD has had many products that have claimed greatness, only to be less than that.

I would love to see what Extelleron has been saying and what the article says come true, but I'm naturally more skeptical than that.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: airhendrix13
Whether it holds true or not, I think AMD has to come up with a better strategy than the recently popular "lets just throw more at it" strategy. I would like to see something from AMD that uses a single card solution to take on Nvidia. Sure putting 2 cards together, calling it one product, and calling it a day works, but it isn't that progressive.

At this point in time I would agree with the majority of this board in that I would prefer a single-GPU solution over a multi-GPU one. Certainly from the end-user perspective, a single-die R700 with 1600 SP, 64 TMU, and 32 ROP would be better than a dual RV770 card.

But I think that AMD's way of doing things will eventually win out. HD 3870 X2 was a slightly better multi-GPU solution than 9800 GX2 / 7950 GX2 IMO. It integrated everything on to one PCB and, according to reviewers, appeared and acted like a single-GPU card for the most part. R700, HD 4870 X2, will hopefully make more strides in the direction of improving multi-GPU solutions such as possibly a pool of memory shared by the two GPUs. Certainly R800 and on would be expected to improve further. The bottom line is that it matters more how a card performs and how it is to game on it than what it is made of. If R700 provides higher performance and a good gaming experience (no micro stutter, good scaling) then it will be better than GT200, even if R700 were a bunch of RV610 cores thrown together.

 

[Warren21]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: airhendrix13
Whether it holds true or not, I think AMD has to come up with a better strategy than the recently popular "lets just throw more at it" strategy. I would like to see something from AMD that uses a single card solution to take on Nvidia. Sure putting 2 cards together, calling it one product, and calling it a day works, but it isn't that progressive.

At this point in time I would agree with the majority of this board in that I would prefer a single-GPU solution over a multi-GPU one. Certainly from the end-user perspective, a single-die R700 with 1600 SP, 64 TMU, and 32 ROP would be better than a dual RV770 card.

But I think that AMD's way of doing things will eventually win out. HD 3870 X2 was a slightly better multi-GPU solution than 9800 GX2 / 7950 GX2 IMO. It integrated everything on to one PCB and, according to reviewers, appeared and acted like a single-GPU card for the most part. R700, HD 4870 X2, will hopefully make more strides in the direction of improving multi-GPU solutions such as possibly a pool of memory shared by the two GPUs. Certainly R800 and on would be expected to improve further. The bottom line is that it matters more how a card performs and how it is to game on it than what it is made of. If R700 provides higher performance and a good gaming experience (no micro stutter, good scaling) then it will be better than GT200, even if R700 were a bunch of RV610 cores thrown together.

QFT. This is exactly what I was trying to say.

If AMD can achieve this level of scaling/stability all the while saving money from better yields, it's a win-win. Their saved money = better R&D = even better MGPU performance, etc.

 

[airhendrix13]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: airhendrix13
Whether it holds true or not, I think AMD has to come up with a better strategy than the recently popular "lets just throw more at it" strategy. I would like to see something from AMD that uses a single card solution to take on Nvidia. Sure putting 2 cards together, calling it one product, and calling it a day works, but it isn't that progressive.

At this point in time I would agree with the majority of this board in that I would prefer a single-GPU solution over a multi-GPU one. Certainly from the end-user perspective, a single-die R700 with 1600 SP, 64 TMU, and 32 ROP would be better than a dual RV770 card.

But I think that AMD's way of doing things will eventually win out. HD 3870 X2 was a slightly better multi-GPU solution than 9800 GX2 / 7950 GX2 IMO. It integrated everything on to one PCB and, according to reviewers, appeared and acted like a single-GPU card for the most part. R700, HD 4870 X2, will hopefully make more strides in the direction of improving multi-GPU solutions such as possibly a pool of memory shared by the two GPUs. Certainly R800 and on would be expected to improve further. The bottom line is that it matters more how a card performs and how it is to game on it than what it is made of. If R700 provides higher performance and a good gaming experience (no micro stutter, good scaling) then it will be better than GT200, even if R700 were a bunch of RV610 cores thrown together.

Yeah, I suppose what works, works. I just hope the "more is better" trend doesn't continue, because thats more of a temporary solution to me.

 

[airhendrix13]

Originally posted by: happy medium
So right now the best bang for the buck (high end) is 2-8800gts's in sli for 300.00$?
It seems faster then a gtx280 and will smoke a 4870 right?

I say see what happens with the 4870. If it is as great as the article says than it would be an excellent solution. You'll have a better idea what to do after its release.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: airhendrix13

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: airhendrix13
Whether it holds true or not, I think AMD has to come up with a better strategy than the recently popular "lets just throw more at it" strategy. I would like to see something from AMD that uses a single card solution to take on Nvidia. Sure putting 2 cards together, calling it one product, and calling it a day works, but it isn't that progressive.

At this point in time I would agree with the majority of this board in that I would prefer a single-GPU solution over a multi-GPU one. Certainly from the end-user perspective, a single-die R700 with 1600 SP, 64 TMU, and 32 ROP would be better than a dual RV770 card.

But I think that AMD's way of doing things will eventually win out. HD 3870 X2 was a slightly better multi-GPU solution than 9800 GX2 / 7950 GX2 IMO. It integrated everything on to one PCB and, according to reviewers, appeared and acted like a single-GPU card for the most part. R700, HD 4870 X2, will hopefully make more strides in the direction of improving multi-GPU solutions such as possibly a pool of memory shared by the two GPUs. Certainly R800 and on would be expected to improve further. The bottom line is that it matters more how a card performs and how it is to game on it than what it is made of. If R700 provides higher performance and a good gaming experience (no micro stutter, good scaling) then it will be better than GT200, even if R700 were a bunch of RV610 cores thrown together.

Yeah, I suppose what works, works. I just hope the "more is better" trend doesn't continue, because thats more of a temporary solution to me.

"More is better" is just what graphics is like. Everything keeps increasing in the graphics world..... pixel pipes went from 4 -> 8 with R300, then to 16 with NV40/R420, then to 24 with G70.... now cards have hundreds of SPs for performing shader operations and 80 TMUs for texture.

To sustain that growth it is just easier to spilt things up into two die.