"R600 family has independent video processor"

[tuteja1986]

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/03/16...amily_has_independent_video_processor/

Last night, AMD announced that its upcoming R600 graphics processor family will feature dedicated universal video decoding hardware that works alongside Avivo.

Traditionally, even if the graphics card capable of decoding video, the video processing done by it will only amount to 50% of the work ? the rest is picked up by the CPU.

With AMD?s R600 family, the company?s engineers have designed a product that can almost completely negate the CPU in all video processing: colour, scaling and playback of common codecs will be handled by the GPU.

The problem with the Radeon R5xx line is that only the top end GPUs have enough horsepower to do 1080p. With the universal video decoding engine (UVD) now being separate from the 3D engine, means even the most basic R6xx is capable of handling full 1080p High-Definition playback.

AMD has also integrated an audio controller on its low and mid-range RV6xx range of graphics cards, as the GPUs natively support HDMI.

Since HDMI carries both video and audio streams over one cable, you might want to take advantage of this, especially in HTPCs. With an internal audio controller, this means the entire sound loop back process doesn?t require external cables and is synced up using graphics software before the frames are sent out.

This is a far superior way of doing things for two reasons: 1) no messy cables going out from your sound card, back in your case on your video card and 2) sync issues. Since graphics can take longer to process than audio, especially if you?re upscaling or doing a lot of post processing effects. Thus, you want the software to manage the audio and sync it with the processed video before it hits your screen.

This is some good news for dieing ATI fan... may bring some happy face but i still don't if this can help ATI in sales as Nvdia marketing team has completely convinced all the non high technical people that SLI is the way and Nvidia GPU are the best in every way.

 

[BernardP]

If ATI cards become finally able to properly scale less-than-native resolutions in the videocard instead of relying on the iffy performance of LCD displays in that regard, I will be looking at a R630 in addition to an NVidia 8600GT

It seems the new dedicated video chip should allow this. There is specific mention of scaling in the new feature's description.

I want to scale a 1680x1050 display at 1280x800, but no display can do this by itself, so NVidia is curently the only game in town (assuming that scaling is fixed on 8xxx and XP).

 

[Auric]

GPU scaling, or lack thereof, has only been aboot the drivers not the hardware. For whatever reason ATI has not been compelled to add what should be a standard feature to their desktop line, yet has for mobile. Which in a way makes it even more infuriating. Anyhoo, the UVD should not be directly related so don't get your hopes up that it will be the impetus for change. It is good news though. Clearly, a dedicated unit has proved the preferred method to relying upon shaders as ATI has simply not been at option at the low to mid range where any decode duties were required and thus totally lost the HTPC market.

 

[MrWizzard]

In other news this new feature will delay the release of the card to Q1 2008.....

They can add all the features they want but they do us no good until we can use the card.

 

[thegimp03]

Originally posted by: MrWizzard
In other news this new feature will delay the release of the card to Q1 2008.....

They can add all the features they want but they do us no good until we can use the card.

QFT. This only seems like marketing buzz.

I want to see how this will make a difference in real world benchmarks.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I think we'll find out in 2 weeks.

And you nVidiots will be choking on your words.

 

[Auric]

Originally posted by: thegimp03

Originally posted by: MrWizzard
In other news this new feature will delay the release of the card to Q1 2008.....

They can add all the features they want but they do us no good until we can use the card.

QFT. This only seems like marketing buzz.

I want to see how this will make a difference in real world benchmarks.

Why would it cause delay if simply part of the chip? I wouldn't count on it working right away since the drivers will have to catch up (even if the hardware isn't defective as with Nvidia PVP initially). As for marketing and benchmarks just look at 7300 vs X1300 AVC decoding -the former assists greatly and the latter barely. One would expect if touting simiarly functionality to PVP then it will have to at least match it in performance.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I think we'll find out in 2 weeks.

And you nVidiots will be choking on your words.

Yeah choking from astonishment because AMD actually released it.

Launch day will be an overview of R600 performance followed by the introduction of R680 slated for release 2 months later.

 

[Pugnate]

I am probably going to sell my 8800GTX in favor of this. I just think this generation one is better off holding a ATi card purely because of the amount of games that will be ported from the Xbox 360. Last time the Xbox was using a NVIDIA card and performance on ATi cards was horrible in ports.

This time it seems to be the reverse.

Also I am just not happy with the drivers.

 

[TanisHalfElven]

Originally posted by: Pugnate
I am probably going to sell my 8800GTX in favor of this. I just think this generation one is better off holding a ATi card purely because of the amount of games that will be ported from the Xbox 360. Last time the Xbox was using a NVIDIA card and performance on ATi cards was horrible in ports.

This time it seems to be the reverse.

Also I am just not happy with the drivers.

or you could buy a xbox 360 and not deal with late ports.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: tanishalfelven

Originally posted by: Pugnate
I am probably going to sell my 8800GTX in favor of this. I just think this generation one is better off holding a ATi card purely because of the amount of games that will be ported from the Xbox 360. Last time the Xbox was using a NVIDIA card and performance on ATi cards was horrible in ports.

This time it seems to be the reverse.

Also I am just not happy with the drivers.

or you could buy a xbox 360 and not deal with late ports.

Actually Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter runs very nicely on my 8800GTS.

I have a feeling that the R600's performance advantage will not be compelling enough to sell off an 8800GTX/GTS.

 

[apoppin]

let me give a big ...

too little, too late

[insert *yawn* emoticon]

where's the beef




nvidia will have it in their next card -next year - IF it turns out to be useful ... not sure if gamers give a crap ... or if 2 or 4 CPU cores will have any problem without the GPU processor.
[and it will add unnecessarily -imo- to the price of every card ... and you can expect vista-video *processing bugs galore* ... i won't be an early adopter ... you guys go right ahead and then give me the "all-clear"]

 

[Stumps]

I won't hold my breath waiting....as much as I like AMD/ATI products, I think my first PCI-E purchase will probably be a DX10 Nvidia part..





Unless.....a high end DX10 part shows up for AGP....

 

[TanisHalfElven]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: tanishalfelven

Originally posted by: Pugnate
I am probably going to sell my 8800GTX in favor of this. I just think this generation one is better off holding a ATi card purely because of the amount of games that will be ported from the Xbox 360. Last time the Xbox was using a NVIDIA card and performance on ATi cards was horrible in ports.

This time it seems to be the reverse.

Also I am just not happy with the drivers.

or you could buy a xbox 360 and not deal with late ports.

Actually Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter runs very nicely on my 8800GTS.

I have a feeling that the R600's performance advantage will not be compelling enough to sell off an 8800GTX/GTS.

i repeat or you could buy a 360.
point is if you wanna play consile game buy a console.
it is only when the modding scene takes over that console port become worthwile.

ps i am not saying anything against 8800. in fact my 8800gts is due to arrive tomorrow. and i will be playing a console port (oblivion ) on ti.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: Pugnate
I am probably going to sell my 8800GTX in favor of this. I just think this generation one is better off holding a ATi card purely because of the amount of games that will be ported from the Xbox 360. Last time the Xbox was using a NVIDIA card and performance on ATi cards was horrible in ports.

This time it seems to be the reverse.

Also I am just not happy with the drivers.

What on Earth makes you think that console ports are going to run better on AMD PC hardware than Nvidia PC hardware?

4 FPS advantage for ATI in R6: Las Vegas doesnt exactly back up your point.

Console ports will generally be crappy no matter what brand video card you have (assumming the cards are similar in performance).

It's about the code, not the fact that it was developed on an ATI GPU.

 

[BFG10K]

This is all well and good but ATi better deliver the goods soon, otherwise these features will become nothing more than hollow words.

 

[Ichigo]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: Pugnate
I am probably going to sell my 8800GTX in favor of this. I just think this generation one is better off holding a ATi card purely because of the amount of games that will be ported from the Xbox 360. Last time the Xbox was using a NVIDIA card and performance on ATi cards was horrible in ports.

This time it seems to be the reverse.

Also I am just not happy with the drivers.

What on Earth makes you think that console ports are going to run better on AMD PC hardware than Nvidia PC hardware?

4 FPS advantage for ATI in R6: Las Vegas doesnt exactly back up your point.

Console ports will generally be crappy no matter what brand video card you have (assumming the cards are similar in performance).

It's about the code, not the fact that it was developed on an ATI GPU.

Wait... it *does* back up his point.

 

[AVP]

ERRRRRRRRRRRRrr the train is about to derail:

In those benchies what does meadian low mean anyways? First quartile? Average of low fps spikes? How does one justify putting meadian low into an average fps graphic

Also the video processing does seem cool, but does it have any affect on quality? Or just help smoothen out 1080p

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: Ichigo

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: Pugnate
I am probably going to sell my 8800GTX in favor of this. I just think this generation one is better off holding a ATi card purely because of the amount of games that will be ported from the Xbox 360. Last time the Xbox was using a NVIDIA card and performance on ATi cards was horrible in ports.

This time it seems to be the reverse.

Also I am just not happy with the drivers.

What on Earth makes you think that console ports are going to run better on AMD PC hardware than Nvidia PC hardware?

4 FPS advantage for ATI in R6: Las Vegas doesnt exactly back up your point.

Console ports will generally be crappy no matter what brand video card you have (assumming the cards are similar in performance).

It's about the code, not the fact that it was developed on an ATI GPU.

Wait... it *does* back up his point.

No it really doesnt.

I think everyone here will agree that a X1950XTX is faster than a 7900GTX... agreed?

Rainbow Six: Las Vegas (Direct port from XBOX 360)
1600x1200 Quality options maxed

X1950XTX
Median Low - 17 fps
Median Average - 27.9 fps

7900GTX
Median low - 16 fps
Median Average - 23.2 fps

You're telling me that 4.7 fps difference in average fps and a 1 fps difference in minimum fps backs up his point that its smarter to have an ATI GPU because console ports will run better on ATI hardware?

A 4.7 fps difference for a card that is already faster in almost every game does not impress me at all.

Just for comparison, 8800GTX scores more than double that of X1950XTX scoring 57.6 fps average and 34 fps minimum.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: Pugnate
I am probably going to sell my 8800GTX in favor of this. I just think this generation one is better off holding a ATi card purely because of the amount of games that will be ported from the Xbox 360. Last time the Xbox was using a NVIDIA card and performance on ATi cards was horrible in ports.

This time it seems to be the reverse.

Also I am just not happy with the drivers.

What on Earth makes you think that console ports are going to run better on AMD PC hardware than Nvidia PC hardware?

4 FPS advantage for ATI in R6: Las Vegas doesnt exactly back up your point.

Console ports will generally be crappy no matter what brand video card you have (assumming the cards are similar in performance).

It's about the code, not the fact that it was developed on an ATI GPU.

That thing that many people says that "a game was developed on an ATi GPU, hence run faster" is not completely right. ATi doesn't tend to use specific vendor extensions like nVidia do, ATi just uses the default DX9 code with a high performance compiler, a few specific vendor code like 3dc etc can be used, but is not currently used. Todays games just uses DX9 and the Shader Model compiler for the card, which can be 2.0, 2._a, 2_b or 3.0. For some reason games created under The Way It Mean To Be Played tends to use a lot of high quality textures, normal maps and low amounts of polygons. Games released under the Get In The Game tends to have a high polygon count, lots of short shaders and not so high quality textures. That means that both programs take different approach to boost performance on their current strenghts, nVidia's 7900/8800GTX raw texture power and ATi's X1X00 raw shader power, but all of them still DX9, not some kind of CG thing. So the Console Ported games performance will vary depending on their approach, is not like ATi will have a huge performance advantage over nVidia's solution or otherwise. In OpenGL is a completely different story.