R520 Definitely 16 Pipes, Confirmed at AnandTech

[johnnqq]

well last time anandtech had this kind of information, the cards came out a week later...

 

[JBT]

isn't the MSRP for the 7800 GTX still 599?
if so whos to say we can't get the X1800XT for the same prices the 7800GTX's are going for online?

 

[xtknight]

So was the Inq speculation in line with what the AT article says?

Why do they have HDCP support on all X1300/X1600 cards and not on the two lower-end X1800 ones? That's lame IMO.

 

[KristopherKubicki]

Interestingly enough the cards on ATI's internal roadmap were named after characters from The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and not after Japanese Bodhi dieties, oddly.

You tell me.

Kristopher

 

[n7]

Hmm, i forgot about the 512 MB RAM thing.

This could be quite interesting, actually

 

[ddogg]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: KristopherKubicki
OK, so now I guess it's "confirmed":

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2532

Kristopher

At this point, I am still "meh" though I have the feeling R580 is right on the heels of R520, making it even lesser of a value at $599.

If launch is really October 5, we've still a long time to wait for benches!

Edit: And even if the XT debuts at only 10% faster than the the 7800GTX, nVidia only has to put a nail in the coffin with a $50-100 price reduction. Or release an Ultra version. Or release a .90mu version with a higher clock. Or release a new driver to get that 10%.

Once again, R520 is ATi's 6-month-overdue disappointment. Mark my words.

this card is not going to blow the GTX. the max we can see this card outperforming the GTX is by 10-15% which is not great at all considering its so many months late. the GTX can be found for about $500 or less now so i dont think the extra $100 will warrant a 10% increase.

 

[xtknight]

It says the reference design for the X1800 PRO contains no HDCP support. Does this mean vendors can add it at their choice?

 

[malG]

However, one clear dissadvantage of the lower fill rate is that ultra-high resolutions that are easily supported on GeForce 7800GTX will not fit in the frame buffer of the X1800 series.

I guess you can't use the R520 with Dell 2405FP or Apple 23"/30" Cinema LCD with game details cranked up. This is disappointing, people who buy $600 video cards don't game @ 1280 x1024 :thumbsdown:

 

[JBT]

I don't think 1920x1200 really counts as a ultra high resolution. Its just barely past 1600x1200...

 

[KristopherKubicki]

MalG: JBT has it right - we are talking about resolutions at the 2560x1600 range...

Kristopher

 

[James3shin]

dayum the 7800's can get into the 2560's?

 

[Insomniak]

I'm not calling it until I see benches, but ATi has the odds stacked against 'em here.

 

[jonny13]

Originally posted by: JBT
isn't the MSRP for the 7800 GTX still 599?
if so whos to say we can't get the X1800XT for the same prices the 7800GTX's are going for online?

For one thing, the GTX has been out for 6 months. I can't see the x1800 XT coming out at $100-140 below retail price right off the bat to compare to the GTX's. If they can actually provide some volume this time, they will certainly be below retail, but not that much.

Just my .02.

Jonny

 

[GTaudiophile]

Does anyone think ATi is SO STUPID as to release a GPU that is not only 6 months late, but costs as much or more than the competition, knowing that it will barely outperform the competition...if at all?

 

[compgeek89]

Well its been out for 3 months..., not 6

 

[shabby]

Nice prices for the 512meg cards, im surprised. I guess nvidia will have to follow suit.
And wtf is the point of the x1800 pro? For 50 bucks more you get a faster xl with twice the ram.

 

[ICBM]

I was hoping there would be some news of whether we can expect any R5xx series on agp or not. I remember some earlier roadmaps, from like may saying they were being designed for both PCIe and AGP, but after Nvidia decided to drop support for AGP, I have been worried ATI may do the same.

 

[sisq0kidd]

Originally posted by: James3shin
motherfvcker look at his avatar...you think he works for UPS or somethign?

ROFL :thumbsup:

:crossesfingers that it performs better/on par with 7800gtx;

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: johnnqq
thanks for the link

HOLY CRAP!
X1600 XT 12 600MHz 700MHz 60W
X1600 Pro 12 500MHz 400MHz 40W

how does that compare to mobile parts?

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: malG
However, one clear dissadvantage of the lower fill rate is that ultra-high resolutions that are easily supported on GeForce 7800GTX will not fit in the frame buffer of the X1800 series.

I guess you can't use the R520 with Dell 2405FP or Apple 23"/30" Cinema LCD with game details cranked up. This is disappointing, people who buy $600 video cards don't game @ 1280 x1024 :thumbsdown:

Why would the fillrate affect the size of the frame buffer? Care to enlighten me?

What I see is that even though the 7800gtx has 24 pipes, it still only has 16 ROP's. So, all those pipes are mostly meant for running pixel shaders. Now what if Ati could design more efficient pixel shaders? Then the pipe deficit wouldnt really matter, would it? For example, would you rather have a 24 pipe 5800u or a 16 pipe 9700p? Nobody said that the design of the 7-series could not be improved, so it's possible that the r520 has more efficient pipes for running dx9 code.

Also, last generation, Ati usually had a performance advantage when you enabled AA + AF. That could turn out the same with the r520 also, especially with more bandwidth, so dont dismiss the r520 as a slower card before we see some benches.

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Does anyone think ATi is SO STUPID as to release a GPU that is not only 6 months late, but costs as much or more than the competition, knowing that it will barely outperform the competition...if at all?

:shrug:

Nvidia did it with the 5800 Ultra

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: malG
However, one clear dissadvantage of the lower fill rate is that ultra-high resolutions that are easily supported on GeForce 7800GTX will not fit in the frame buffer of the X1800 series.

I guess you can't use the R520 with Dell 2405FP or Apple 23"/30" Cinema LCD with game details cranked up. This is disappointing, people who buy $600 video cards don't game @ 1280 x1024 :thumbsdown:

Why would the fillrate affect the size of the frame buffer? Care to enlighten me?

What I see is that even though the 7800gtx has 24 pipes, it still only has 16 ROP's. So, all those pipes are mostly meant for running pixel shaders. Now what if Ati could design more efficient pixel shaders? Then the pipe deficit wouldnt really matter, would it? For example, would you rather have a 24 pipe 5800u or a 16 pipe 9700p? Nobody said that the design of the 7-series could not be improved, so it's possible that the r520 has more efficient pipes for running dx9 code.

Also, last generation, Ati usually had a performance advantage when you enabled AA + AF. That could turn out the same with the r520 also, especially with more bandwidth, so dont dismiss the r520 as a slower card before we see some benches.

This has been addressed before. The ROP's usually are idle waiting for one of the 24 piplines to finish shading/processing pixels. There is no 1 to 1 ratio for piplines to ROP's. Those 16 ROP's are not yet near saturation from 24 pipes and is said to be sufficient up to 32 pipes if need be. This is a common misconception.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
This has been addressed before. The ROP's usually are idle waiting for one of the 24 piplines to finish shading/processing pixels. There is no 1 to 1 ratio for piplines to ROP's. Those 16 ROP's are not yet near saturation from 24 pipes and is said to be sufficient up to 32 pipes if need be. This is a common misconception.

I heard that too from the AT article, but why? They will never be saturated even under the most technically demanding situations? Doesn't the NV40 have equal pipelines and ROPs? And what about the vertex pipelines? They don't use the ROPs or you were just using 24 pipes (pixel) as an example?

 

[BFG10K]

The ROP's usually are idle waiting for one of the 24 piplines to finish shading/processing pixels. There is no 1 to 1 ratio for piplines to ROP's. Those 16 ROP's are not yet near saturation from 24 pipes and is said to be sufficient up to 32 pipes if need be. This is a common misconception.

That doesn't answer the question at all. The framebuffer can be as big as it likes (up to the physical limit of the card of course) and has nothing at all to do with the fillrate, ROPs or pipelines.

I personally can't see the logic behind the original claim.

 

[tvdang7]

so will have less pipes affect anything ? cuz of course more sounds better.