I would have thought moving from 12 to 16 pipes would be more of a core deisgn thing, and not a memory bandwidth issue alone. ATi is claiming to have hidden this in the core initially... Why would they hide it in the first place? Wouldn't they want the max. performance right out the door? Are we looking at yield issues here?
I would have thought moving from 12 to 16 pipes would be more of a core deisgn thing, and not a memory bandwidth issue alone. ATi is claiming to have hidden this in the core initially... Why would they hide it in the first place? Wouldn't they want the max. performance right out the door? Are we looking at yield issues here?
and give people one more cable to worry about? I wonder what would happen if this power brick got disconnected when the comp. was on....
Think of it like the NV2x compared to the NV3x core. The NV2x was core earned itself a very strong reputation as it was a solid part that offered best in class performance and had offerings that made it the core to buy for multiple refresh generations(GF3, GF3Ti, GF4Ti). The NV3x core was pretty much slammed across the board- yet it still obliterates any NV2X core for the high end parts. A new generation of parts and it was ~twice as fast or faster as the prior generation- and that was only enough to be heavily criticized. Expecting the new core to best the old core shouldn't be any surprise, it should be a given. Obviously ATi has done some major modifications to the old core to help keep it competitive, but I think that feature support(besides PS 3.0) and performance numbers when they start coming out will display the advantages of a new core based on everything I have seen to date.
It could be ATi is playing a big trick and they actually do have a killer part, but that is looking increasingly doubtful.
This has suddenly turned into a heck of a race. Like 3 - 3 in the third period and they haven't even released the cards or really confirmed anything. With the quality of hype coming from these two companies, I am half convinced that far cry will quit running on my system come May. Many nice story lines, is it the power hungry dustbuster, or the old tech radeon. Lot at stake for Nvidia here, a major consumer flop would really hurt. :beer:
apoppin
Lifer
From the article:
Remember the 9500pro that could be flashed to a 9700pro?
Ati has a history of doing this . . . but i don't believe it will be 'enough' this time . .. look for a possible 'price war'. Evidently ATI is REALLY worried about NV40
(or the date for the X800XT wouldn't be pushed up a few months to steal "thunder" away from the nVidia GPU)
[of course I could be wrong]
EDIT: So what's the Radeon gonna be called???? After 9800 . . . 10800 . . . ????
apoppin
Lifer
You got another choice?Originally posted by: Excelsior
Originally posted by: XBoxLPU
I am going to be sticking with my 9700 pro for now
it seems foolish to get a 9800XT at their ridiculously high prices (or worse a GeForce 5950 Ultra) NOW.
And I am STUCK with my 8500 . . . for now.
The choice seems simple enough: 1) read the reviews and see if it is worth $500 for the latest and greatest; 2) keep your old card if it's a 9700 or better OR upgrade to a cheap 9800Pro to hold you till R500 or nV50
(did I miss another choice?)
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
Originally posted by: apoppin
damn, we're discussing who "wins" even before the reviews are here.
nVidia marketing traditionally aimed for the FPS fiend while ati shot for 'image quality'. . . . nowadays the image quality is pretty darn (subjectively) equal with quibbling about AA/AF executions.
10-15% is a HUGE difference and (usually) more than 1-2 fps (take QIII for eg) . . . I am hoping the difference won't be so large . . .
and as usual, I will likely skip r500 as THESE new cards (NV40/R420) will be playing the entire crop of new games (deep into 2006 when Unreal Engine 3.0 games debut - edit and will likely run THOSE games pretty well).
Even if the ati card is 10+% slower you can be sure ati will play it's price/performance card (which has allowed it to survive pre9700 days); even IF ati "loses" this round, it will not be out of the game and continue as a potent competitor to nVidia.
10-15% is huge? That's why a human cannot perceive anything under or equal to 10% difference right? So lets about about 15% then shall we....if a game plays at 40FPS, 15% less is 34, making both of these games utterly slow and making no difference. Let's consider somewhere in the middle say 60 frames, thus 15% less is 51, fairly hard to notice by any means. Let's consider upper range 180FPS and 153FPS respectively? Hmmm....I'd buy you the new card if you noticed it in the upper ranges. If your logic made sense ppl would upgrade as soon as something that was 15% faster came out. Therefore no one is rushing to upgrade there 9700Pro to a 9800Pro or to a 9800xt because they only give 15% performance. Yes it makes a difference for which card to buy if you havnet decided yet and that is huge from that sense because if they cost the same and one is faster why not buy it?....... but it is NOT by any means HUGE.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
Maybe I should 'upgrade' my R9800Pro because with everything maxed it only gives me decent framerates @800x600 running FarCry(with no AA/AF). I know I can kill high quality shadows, and lose one of the best features of the rendering engine, and run higher settings but I want it all. And I would appreciate it at decent framerates running 2048x1536
Have you ever tried running the game at 1280x1024 with medium settings instead of everything at high with 800x600, because I bet it looks a lot better even at medium settings. I sure think a high jump in resolution makes up for the lack of high detail unless you play at the lowest detail settings then I would agree. My Radeon 8500 is definately playable at 1024x768 on Medium settings...so I am sure you can sacrifice that VERY HIGH detail for higher resolution and see the rewards. Even the reviews show that 9800's easily handle this resolution and at a much faster frame rate. So you are telling me your card cant run above 800x600? If you find that playing under 85 frames is unacceptable then I will cease my opinion.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
With it having 16 pipelines? You think NV40 will be that much faster? you think 13 days is a lot in the business world? You can come out with a product line 1 month after your competitor and ensure good sales if your product is very good. So ATI isn't gonna fret any time soon trust me.
apoppin
Lifer
Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Originally posted by: apoppin
damn, we're discussing who "wins" even before the reviews are here.
nVidia marketing traditionally aimed for the FPS fiend while ati shot for 'image quality'. . . . nowadays the image quality is pretty darn (subjectively) equal with quibbling about AA/AF executions.
10-15% is a HUGE difference and (usually) more than 1-2 fps (take QIII for eg) . . . I am hoping the difference won't be so large . . .
and as usual, I will likely skip r500 as THESE new cards (NV40/R420) will be playing the entire crop of new games (deep into 2006 when Unreal Engine 3.0 games debut - edit and will likely run THOSE games pretty well).
Even if the ati card is 10+% slower you can be sure ati will play it's price/performance card (which has allowed it to survive pre9700 days); even IF ati "loses" this round, it will not be out of the game and continue as a potent competitor to nVidia.
10-15% is huge? That's why a human cannot perceive anything under or equal to 10% difference right? So lets about about 15% then shall we....if a game plays at 40FPS, 15% less is 34, making both of these games utterly slow and making no difference. Let's consider somewhere in the middle say 60 frames, thus 15% less is 51, fairly hard to notice by any means. Let's consider upper range 180FPS and 153FPS respectively? Hmmm....I'd buy you the new card if you noticed it in the upper ranges. If your logic made sense ppl would upgrade as soon as something that was 15% faster came out. Therefore no one is rushing to upgrade there 9700Pro to a 9800Pro or to a 9800xt because they only give 15% performance. Yes it makes a difference for which card to buy if you havnet decided yet and that is huge from that sense because if they cost the same and one is faster why not buy it?....... but it is NOT by any means HUGE.
Then let me rephrase my comment so you can argue with what I really mean: "10-15% is a HUGE difference to reviewers and buyers of new video cards."
That "15%" will make the difference in sales and especially in which company is PERCEIVED as the TECH LEADER.
EDIT: AND ati IS fretting right now - or else they wouldn't have enabled the other 8 pipelines. They are AFRAID.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
Hey apoppin I did mention exactly what you said right here:
"Yes it makes a difference for which card to buy if you havnet decided yet and that is huge from that sense because if they cost the same and one is faster why not buy it?......." So I do agree with you just not 100 %
Anyways just wanted to let you know the name of ATI's card is X800 I believe with X as a part of the name.
Who wants to see 10800500200303 lol There is enough numbers in there to scare a mathematician. Anyways, lets look on the bright side: If ATI is significantly slower the X800 will cost probably $100 less than X800XT (which i presume could be equal to NV40 hence the earlier release like everyone says, but who knows) In that case it will be an amazing buy because it will probably pummel 9800 xt into the ground while costing about $399 I presume with x800xt at $499. See the consumer wins! Now if Nvidia is slower, we also win because then the 2 cards will be unbelievably fast considering the hype around NV40 alone. We win again. But you know who wins the most? The guys who can buy either card at a corporate discount which is what like 50%? I dont think they care at this point if either card is 20% slower even when you can buy it at half the cost :Q
"Yes it makes a difference for which card to buy if you havnet decided yet and that is huge from that sense because if they cost the same and one is faster why not buy it?......." So I do agree with you just not 100 %
Anyways just wanted to let you know the name of ATI's card is X800 I believe with X as a part of the name.
Who wants to see 10800500200303 lol There is enough numbers in there to scare a mathematician. Anyways, lets look on the bright side: If ATI is significantly slower the X800 will cost probably $100 less than X800XT (which i presume could be equal to NV40 hence the earlier release like everyone says, but who knows) In that case it will be an amazing buy because it will probably pummel 9800 xt into the ground while costing about $399 I presume with x800xt at $499. See the consumer wins! Now if Nvidia is slower, we also win because then the 2 cards will be unbelievably fast considering the hype around NV40 alone. We win again. But you know who wins the most? The guys who can buy either card at a corporate discount which is what like 50%? I dont think they care at this point if either card is 20% slower even when you can buy it at half the cost :Q
Stunt
Diamond Member
- Jul 17, 2002
- 9,717
- 2
- 0
The reason for the X is that ati initially introduced the 7xxx, 8xxx, 9xxx to represent the direct x number it supports, minus a few discrepancies ie. 9000-9200.
So i do believe we will see a 10xxx, but only when the card supports dx10. also seeing how long it takes developers to implement new tech, PS3.0 is not a big deal at all imo. We'll see though, nvidia has everything to prove at this point, after a year or so of crap. As long as ati is close, they are fine. 9700 series has proved to the general pubic that ati exsits and is a viable competitor, doesnt matter if they hold the crown or not. Just depends on the price point they can achieve. How many ppl honestly buy these cards? If they do and 15% more speed with the price a lot more, who cares!
So i do believe we will see a 10xxx, but only when the card supports dx10. also seeing how long it takes developers to implement new tech, PS3.0 is not a big deal at all imo. We'll see though, nvidia has everything to prove at this point, after a year or so of crap. As long as ati is close, they are fine. 9700 series has proved to the general pubic that ati exsits and is a viable competitor, doesnt matter if they hold the crown or not. Just depends on the price point they can achieve. How many ppl honestly buy these cards? If they do and 15% more speed with the price a lot more, who cares!
Im still hoping for tile based rendering to be implemented to save on bandwidth....
I know its not going to happen though.
I know its not going to happen though.
apoppin
Lifer
I'd have called it the RX800 just to p.o. mazda.Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Hey apoppin I did mention exactly what you said right here:
"Yes it makes a difference for which card to buy if you havnet decided yet and that is huge from that sense because if they cost the same and one is faster why not buy it?......." So I do agree with you just not 100 %
Anyways just wanted to let you know the name of ATI's card is X800 I believe with X as a part of the name.
Who wants to see 10800500200303 lol There is enough numbers in there to scare a mathematician. Anyways, lets look on the bright side: If ATI is significantly slower the X800 will cost probably $100 less than X800XT (which i presume could be equal to NV40 hence the earlier release like everyone says, but who knows) In that case it will be an amazing buy because it will probably pummel 9800 xt into the ground while costing about $399 I presume with x800xt at $499. See the consumer wins! Now if Nvidia is slower, we also win because then the 2 cards will be unbelievably fast considering the hype around NV40 alone. We win again. But you know who wins the most? The guys who can buy either card at a corporate discount which is what like 50%? I dont think they care at this point if either card is 20% slower even when you can buy it at half the cost :Q
i DID see your "qualifier" regarding purchasing a new card and decided to make what i stated as clear as possible - from my context, it is apparent that i am saying a +10-15% faster GPU by nVidia than ATI's would be a HUGE difference in swaying even the most diehard fanATIc (me) to the 'other guy'.
i ALSO did say IF the ATI card were "that slow" there would (likely) be a price war.
So - considering this - it's kinda hard to DISagree.
flexy
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2001
- 8,464
- 155
- 106
the longer i think about it the more confusing the whole story gets...
a) there was never a question that there will be higher and lower end versions with the lower end versions LESS pipes.
(At least from the rumors)
b) All the NUMBERS (eg 12 pipes) where rumors anyway. None SAID: "WILL HAVE 12 pipes....and the lower end card 8"
c) now they talk about 're-deciding to boost' and 'boom!" we're talking 16 pipes two weeks before release
So - they always HAD 16 pipes - and the lower end cards (SE) some of them disabled. But why aer they talking about 'boosting' performance, like it's the surprise of the century ? Just counter the rumors of 12 pipes and get some on track again in this "war" of rumors before the cards are even out ?
Its not that ATI planned to release their HIGH(!) end card with 12 pipes and leave 4 of them unused...why should they do that ?
IF it HAD 16 pipes (some of them unused depending on card version) then the chip *had* 16 pipes by design. Period.
Wy this childish talk about 'we boost performance' two weeks before launch ?
So what did they re-decide regarding perfomance what was not there in the beginning already ?
Kinda bizarre.....
Edit2: I think its really only a very simple marketing 'gag' to boost confidence in ATI again..they wouldnt do that if they would NOT introduce R420 *after* NV40.. they were just scared that some of the negative rumors would hurt sales a bit (people running over to NV) in the weeks after NV40 is released....simple as that...
a) there was never a question that there will be higher and lower end versions with the lower end versions LESS pipes.
(At least from the rumors)
b) All the NUMBERS (eg 12 pipes) where rumors anyway. None SAID: "WILL HAVE 12 pipes....and the lower end card 8"
c) now they talk about 're-deciding to boost' and 'boom!" we're talking 16 pipes two weeks before release
So - they always HAD 16 pipes - and the lower end cards (SE) some of them disabled. But why aer they talking about 'boosting' performance, like it's the surprise of the century ? Just counter the rumors of 12 pipes and get some on track again in this "war" of rumors before the cards are even out ?
Its not that ATI planned to release their HIGH(!) end card with 12 pipes and leave 4 of them unused...why should they do that ?
IF it HAD 16 pipes (some of them unused depending on card version) then the chip *had* 16 pipes by design. Period.
Wy this childish talk about 'we boost performance' two weeks before launch ?
So what did they re-decide regarding perfomance what was not there in the beginning already ?
Kinda bizarre.....
Edit2: I think its really only a very simple marketing 'gag' to boost confidence in ATI again..they wouldnt do that if they would NOT introduce R420 *after* NV40.. they were just scared that some of the negative rumors would hurt sales a bit (people running over to NV) in the weeks after NV40 is released....simple as that...
Originally posted by: Chadder007
Im betting that the pro is 8 pipelines and the XT version has the 16 pipelines.
If they are using the same chip, they will be flashable
although i would think it would be 12pipes for pro and 16 for XT, as GDDR3 + 8 pipes would be overkill on the mem bandwidth.
flexy
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2001
- 8,464
- 155
- 106
>>>
If they are using the same chip, they will be flashable
>>>
well might be a gamble like with the 9800 SEs...some additional pipes might be possible to activate....some are just "bad" and cant be activated.
I wouldnt give the general advice to flash to get the pipes....the general understanding (at least with the 9800SE) is you have a 50/50 chance in getting one with good (hidden) pipes.
If they are using the same chip, they will be flashable
>>>
well might be a gamble like with the 9800 SEs...some additional pipes might be possible to activate....some are just "bad" and cant be activated.
I wouldnt give the general advice to flash to get the pipes....the general understanding (at least with the 9800SE) is you have a 50/50 chance in getting one with good (hidden) pipes.
apoppin
Lifer
X-actly.
It generates EXcitement. Look at US.
ATI has gotten very "smart". They are Pre-Countering nVidia and preparing for the reviews. After all, I think THEY already have their hands on each other's samples and know pretty much what to expect.
My guess is that nVidia will beat ati's best offering when the reviews are out and comparisons begin. HOWEVER, ati is prepared to ANNOUNCE an EVEN faster card when nVidia cards begin to sell to keep their loyal customers from jumping ship.
And of course nvidia will counter and it will be 'on again'. And FLAMEwars on the forums again . . . I get tired of just hearing about AMD and Intel.
They both have the 1.6ghz GDDR3 card to play in this game as well
ATi is also talking about going 512MB, although i dont see any need for that anytime soon.
ATi is also talking about going 512MB, although i dont see any need for that anytime soon.
Yeah.. Far Cry. Good game, but I'm much more excited about Stalker... the graphics for that game look to be even more exceptional than Doom 3 or Half-Life 2. I'm a little worried that my 9700 will have trouble at anything over 1024x768...
You are running it on a 8500 and making this comment, heh. Try it out on something a bit more up to date and get back to me.
And get that 1999 feel to the game in terms of the graphics engine? No thanks. I'll take the 'next gen' visuals and give up a bit of resolution.
What reviews? Check this one out. Now those are 9600XT and 5900XT scores, but none of them have any settings on Very High(all high or lower) they are only running 1024x768 and they see min framerates in the teens. I'd like to keep my framerates over 85, but under 30 is unacceptable and under 20, not a chance.
And yes, I'm telling you my board will not run the game above 800x600 running Very High detail settings if I want to avoid sub 30FPS drops with any of the driver/patch combinations I've tried to date.
Originally posted by: Chadder007
Im betting that the pro is 8 pipelines and the XT version has the 16 pipelines.
Looks like I was pretty Close on my bet! W00T!
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter