R520...?

[monster64]

Originally posted by: prosser13
Something you missed - not only is he using a X950, he's using an FX57. It's clocked at 2.8Ghz.

Whats wrong with using an FX-57?

Also if the memory is at 900 mhz, that means that it is it its effective speed. My 6800 GT isnt marked as 500 mhz on the memory in 3Dmark 05, its marked at 1000 mhz. That means its definately fake, as why would the r520 only be at 900mhz on the memory (450 ddr3.)

 

[FlasHBurN]

It is complete bullsh!t. First, the 8.10 driver would be 8 months old. Second, there is no 'Marketing name' in the driver yet.

 

[kylebisme]

I'm sorry, I should have clarified. It is really old, and really fake. Here is a thread over the same pic back in february:
http://www.3dchipset.com/forum/showthread.php?t=211&goto=nextoldest

 

[BigfootKevin]

I heard the R520 is going to be more powerful than two 7800GTX's combined.





















j/k But that'd be pretty cool though

 

[munchow2]

lol BigFootKevin, I started rolling my eyes until I saw your last line hahaha.

Yes indeed it would be cool but I somehow doubt ATI has a miracle card to get rid of all their financial woes.

 

[Unkno]

i'd say it's bs...btw check this Link, power of 3 releasing tomorrow, countdown: 0 days, 2 hours, 57mins

 

[hans030390]

oh sweet, i should wait until it announces whatever!

 

[Shamrock]

You guys and your LCD's....on my CRT, I can CLEARLY see the little blue "boxing" around the letters. Someone has chopped letters and numbers from a real post and pasted them in, you can visibly see the box "look" to the colors on the characters. The only clear jpg degradation that is REAL, is on the headers (bold type face) such as "CPU Info" and "Texture Formats" all bold. Oh, and of course the "3DMARK" logo. But yet, the watermark in the upper right hand corner is SUPERBLY clear!?!?

I dont have 3dmark05, but if someone wants me to chop them one up, in 30 minutes I can have you owning an Athlon128 @12000Mhz, and an NVidia 9800GTX-P running at 1000/4000Mhz

 

[BigfootKevin]

Just call it the 9800GTP(supercharged) just like my car

 

[Intelia]

Originally posted by: Shamrock
You guys and your LCD's....on my CRT, I can CLEARLY see the little blue "boxing" around the letters. Someone has chopped letters and numbers from a real post and pasted them in, you can visibly see the box "look" to the colors on the characters. The only clear jpg degradation that is REAL, is on the headers (bold type face) such as "CPU Info" and "Texture Formats" all bold. Oh, and of course the "3DMARK" logo. But yet, the watermark in the upper right hand corner is SUPERBLY clear!?!?

I dont have 3dmark05, but if someone wants me to chop them one up, in 30 minutes I can have you owning an Athlon128 @12000Mhz, and an NVidia 9800GTX-P running at 1000/4000Mhz

My LCD see it just fine . Its a fake but there are some real facts core speed is right on the money. As for memory In PCmark 5 My x800xt pe is listed as 560 so whats your problem with 900.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Intelia
Its a fake but there are some real facts core speed is right on the money. As for memory In PCmark 5 My x800xt pe is listed as 560 so whats your problem with 900.

Well, the core speed is POSSIBLE as various sources of info have leaked that it would be 600+ MHz but I know I didn't expect 750 Mhz. Seems doubtful.

And as far as the 900 MHz memory, that would translate to 1800 MHz effective memory speed which would require 1.1ns rated memory chips. As both the X850XT PE and 7800GTX both use 1.6ns rated chips, I would consider that to be an EXTREME jump in performance and seems very unlikely. I might believe 1.4 ns (1400 MHz) but not 1.1 ns (1800 MHz) unless Samsung or some other manufacturer has pulled a MAJOR rabbit out of their hat.

 

[ZobarStyl]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Intelia
Its a fake but there are some real facts core speed is right on the money. As for memory In PCmark 5 My x800xt pe is listed as 560 so whats your problem with 900.

Well, the core speed is POSSIBLE as various sources of info have leaked that it would be 600+ MHz but I know I didn't expect 750 Mhz. Seems doubtful.

And as far as the 900 MHz memory, that would translate to 1800 MHz effective memory speed which would require 1.1ns rated memory chips. As both the X850XT PE and 7800GTX both use 1.6ns rated chips, I would consider that to be an EXTREME jump in performance and seems very unlikely. I might believe 1.4 ns (1400 MHz) but not 1.1 ns (1800 MHz) unless Samsung or some other manufacturer has pulled a MAJOR rabbit out of their hat.

QFT

Although leaps and bounds are made by nV and ATi each time with core performance, they still don't make the RAM that goes on it and are limited by what the memory people have come up with. Like Creig said, you think they (the mem companies) have some magic rabbit that they aren't selling to nVidia?

 

[Intelia]

That does seem high but along time ago I heard Ati was going to use this . If you look at the date I think 900 is a maybe And I am sure 800 is going to be used

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/memory/display/20040213210313.html

 

[Creig]

Holy crap!! Maybe I missed mention of this previously, but I just found this:

SAMSUNG Electronics Announces Advanced Graphics Memory for High-end Multimedia Applications

Seoul, Korea, June 21 , 2005 ? Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., the leader in advanced s emiconductor technology, today announced that it has developed the industry's fastest 2.0 gigabit per second (Gbps) 90 nanometer (nm) 512Mb graphics double data rate 3 (GDDR3) dynamic random access memory (DRAM).

Samsung's new 2.0Gbps high-speed graphics solution runs at up to 8.0GigaBytes per second (GBps), which is 70 percent faster than the conventional 1.2Gbps device, making it ideal for high-quality images and fast animation in PCs, workstations and high-end game consoles.
Samsung also initiated mass production of its 1.6Gbps 512Mb GDDR3, which was developed in December 2004. Generating 6.4GBps transmission rates, the 1.6Gbps GDDR3 is available in graphic cards with a maximum density of 1GB by combining sixteen monolithic 512Mb GDDR3s together. The new GDDR3 incorporates a JEDEC standard 136-ball package.

512Mb GDDR3 is expected to support the faster data transmission rate for higher resolution images in next generation game consoles.

Samsung's technology diversification strategy is reflected in its comprehensive graphics memory line up. Since introducing the industry's first 1.0Gbps 128Mbit GDDR1/GDDR2 in 2002, Samsung has now become the first to secure a full line up of GDDR memory technology.

Market research firm, Mercury Research, predicts that the global graphics DRAM market will increase 43 percent to $1.5 billion ( US ) in 2005 and exceed $2 billion ( US ) in 2006.

Samsung's 1.6Gbps 90nm 512Mb GDDR3 DRAMs are available now in volume production worldwide.

Picture


Samsung Graphics Chip Codebook PDF

Those BJ1A chips are rated at 1.0ns! I guess it's entirely possible that those R520 specs are accurate.


Amazing!

 

[FlasHBurN]

Originally posted by: Creig

Those BJ1A chips are rated at 1.0ns! I guess it's entirely possible that those R520 specs are accurate.


Amazing!

They aren't.

 

[Ronin]

The image was taken on 7/11/05, according to the link..and yet there's a driver version there that's dated 8/2, with a driver version that's not possible, considering the version #'s now. I call bs.

I emailed ATi with a link to the image anyway. Should be interesting to see the answer (I'm expecting something along the lines of ROFLOLOLOL).

 

[FlasHBurN]

Originally posted by: Ronin
The image was taken on 7/11/05, according to the link..and yet there's a driver version there that's dated 8/2, with a driver version that's not possible, considering the version #'s now. I call bs.

That isn't true. ATI uses a different version # for their internal drivers.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: FlasHBurN

Originally posted by: Creig

Those BJ1A chips are rated at 1.0ns! I guess it's entirely possible that those R520 specs are accurate.


Amazing!

They aren't.

What aren't? The chips aren't rated at 1.0ns or the R520 specs aren't accurate? The new Samsung GDDR3 chips ARE rated at 1.0ns. The R520 specs can't be proved/disproved yet. I was quite a bit more skeptical until I saw that Samsung press release.

 

[Ronin]

Originally posted by: FlasHBurN

Originally posted by: Ronin
The image was taken on 7/11/05, according to the link..and yet there's a driver version there that's dated 8/2, with a driver version that's not possible, considering the version #'s now. I call bs.

That isn't true. ATI uses a different version # for their internal drivers.

Really? I think not, since I have access to their internal drivers. Thanks, though. Like nVidia, their internal drive schemes go upwards from release to keep track.

 

[FlasHBurN]

Originally posted by: Ronin

Originally posted by: FlasHBurN

Originally posted by: Ronin
The image was taken on 7/11/05, according to the link..and yet there's a driver version there that's dated 8/2, with a driver version that's not possible, considering the version #'s now. I call bs.

That isn't true. ATI uses a different version # for their internal drivers.

Really? I think not, since I have access to their internal drivers. Thanks, though. Like nVidia, their internal drive schemes go upwards from release to keep track.

Haha, ok sure, and you would know better than me.

The releases go up once per month, but they don't match the released drivers build number.

 

[cbehnken]

Originally posted by: Shamrock
You guys and your LCD's....on my CRT, I can CLEARLY see the little blue "boxing" around the letters. Someone has chopped letters and numbers from a real post and pasted them in, you can visibly see the box "look" to the colors on the characters. The only clear jpg degradation that is REAL, is on the headers (bold type face) such as "CPU Info" and "Texture Formats" all bold. Oh, and of course the "3DMARK" logo. But yet, the watermark in the upper right hand corner is SUPERBLY clear!?!?

I dont have 3dmark05, but if someone wants me to chop them one up, in 30 minutes I can have you owning an Athlon128 @12000Mhz, and an NVidia 9800GTX-P running at 1000/4000Mhz

You've never actually seen an LCD made after 1986 have you?

The boxing is CLEARY visible on this POS LCD I have at work that is made in 2001.

Anyway, sorry to get off topic. This is cleary fake because of the memory speed issue. Depending on how it's being rated in this shoot it's either way to high or way too low.

 

[Intelia]

Ronin you say you have access to their internal drivers but there are people in the world Ronin that have access to much more than that.

 

[Intelia]

Nice work Creig. I say nay can't be . No way! They ain't ! ARE THEY??????

Here is a real ? why is ATI being so slow to bring the programmable R520 with the new X chip Tech to market. Some say its yeild problems. Could it be that ATI wants to bring SLI performance to the masses in a single Card formate. Is that possiable? Some would say yes it is .

Here is another ? why haven't we heard the Xbox R500 chip is having no problems with yields. This chip is even more advanced than the R520.

You know what cell has shaken ATI and their going to come out with a show stopper GPU .

In the rumor meal I have heard Ati maybe adding the PPU chip to their R580 . Well that may have changed and we may see it on the R520. That would explain the Redesign of the card and the time required to make the changes.

One more ? wouldyou pay $1000 for the top of the line ATI card that outperforms 2 nvidia 7800 in sli. That would mean no upgrade to present PCI-E . And if 2 cards working together from ati in the cheaper segment would perform almost as good as their top of the line card and still have the coolness of 2 cards that would be cool also.

It seems to me Ati is touching all the bases.

 

[Intelia]

FlasBurn no one knows who you are. You it would seem .Work for ATI tell us more.

 

[Ronin]

Originally posted by: Intelia
Ronin you say you have access to their internal drivers but there are people in the world Ronin that have access to much more than that.

What was your point? There's nobody here, save Anand and his crew, that have the access that I do to either nVidia or ATi related items (cards, drivers, motherboards, etc).