• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Radeon HD 2900 XT has 102.4 GB/s bandwidth

JPB

JPB

Diamond Member
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=611&Itemid=34

___________________________

At 800 core / 1600 MHz memory

Radeon HD 2900 XT has much better memory bandwidth then any card before including G80GTX. With it 512 bit memory interface and 1600 MHz GDDR3 memory it can score 102.4 GB/s. Nvidia's G80 with its odd 384 bit memory controller scores 86.4 GB/s.

The new R600XTX with GDDR 4 clocked at 2200 MHz as originally planned can score the cunning 140.8 GB/s. Both cards have twice or close to twice more memory bandwidth from its Radeon X1950XTX card. This card was limited to now modest 64GB/s.

So with 102.4 GB/second you wont get much performance penalty at least on some FSAA settings and lower resolutions. The R600XT can work out 518GFlops and that is only with the Shader units.

________________________________________

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=606&Itemid=34


__________________

Radeon HD 2900 XTX still didn't get its face. That's why AMD told everyone that they will go for a unified product launch, so the R600 XT part only. TBD part always means to be discussed and you can see it often in a future plans.


The big European resellers got a word that there won't be any Radeon HD 2900 XTX part anytime soon. The launch involves Radeon HD 2900 XT as the high end part at ?434 price tag that might sunk down to ?399 at final launch.


It is still unknown when the GDDR 4 XTX version comes out and if it comes out at all. I guess that this depends of how good is R600XT and how good is Geforce 8800 Ultra.
 
The only thing I might not trust is the price (seems too good to be true), and possibly the GPU core speed/performance. As far as the bandwidth is concerned, it doesn't take much to come to that conclusion on your own. We've known for some time of the 512-bit memory and you can calculate possible bandwidths from there

1.6GHz memory * 512bit (64 byte) = 102.4GB/sec
 
Nice...

After a slow start, Fudzilla.com by Fuad Abazovic, formerly from The Inquirer, is shaping up to be an interesting web site. Lots of info on just-released and upcoming products.
 
Its a good move for AMD/ATI to have a price war with NVIDIA.

AMD cant compete price wise/manufacturing with Intel but they can with NVIDIA since NVIDIA doesnt have manufacturing/chip plants.

AMD will effectively do what Intel does to AMD.
If they can knock NVIDIA down a few notches ATI/AMD stand to gain more market share and a hurting NVIDIA means they are not competition. Limiting thier budget to produce future products.

Add in NVIDIA losing ground to Intel on the low end of the graphics scale and NVIDIA might find themselves in a bad place.

I dont like it so dont assume I am a fan. I personally hoped another graphics company would catch up because the days of competition seem short.

Remember S3, Matrox, 3DFX, Kyro, St Mirco, etc.
 
An AMD/ATi patent application being discussed @ B3D would appear to suggest R600 may be capable of higher level filtering by combining bilinear results (not real sure what the purpose actually is but it would appaerntly allow for bicubic texture filtering to be implemented, something I would welcome -- as I've said before 11 years into consumer 3d accelerated graphics and we are *still* using bilinear filtering). This would likely require significant bandwidth and along with the rumored 24x AA may help explain why R600 apparently needs so much bandwidth.
 
This is far less bandwidth than we originally thought there was going to be. This will probably bring the R600 much closer to G80 performance rather than exceeding G80 performance.

This does however make the $399-$450 price seem a bit more plausible. 512mb of 1600mhz GDDR3 shaves a lot of price off compared to 1GB 2000mhz GDDR4.
 
Originally posted by: Mitch101
Its a good move for AMD/ATI to have a price war with NVIDIA.

AMD cant compete price wise/manufacturing with Intel but they can with NVIDIA since NVIDIA doesnt have manufacturing/chip plants.

AMD will effectively do what Intel does to AMD.
If they can knock NVIDIA down a few notches ATI/AMD stand to gain more market share and a hurting NVIDIA means they are not competition. Limiting thier budget to produce future products.

Add in NVIDIA losing ground to Intel on the low end of the graphics scale and NVIDIA might find themselves in a bad place.

I dont like it so dont assume I am a fan. I personally hoped another graphics company would catch up because the days of competition seem short.

Remember S3, Matrox, 3DFX, Kyro, St Mirco, etc.
Click to expand...

I don't see how that is a good move. If you're bleeding money from one of your major divisions, why would it make sense to start a price war in the other major division also?

I don't believe AMD/ATI uses their plants to manufacture ATI GPUS, they outsource just like Nvidia.
 
Because AMD/ATI can leverage manufacturing costs where NVIDIA cannot because they have to outsource a lot more of the manufacturing.

Consider AMD can produce thier own GPU's because they have a chip foundries where NVIDIA does not. AMD is also going 65nm which means more chips per wafer. NVIDIA will do this also but must pay a premium to the chip manufacturing companies.

When AMD moves to 45nm ATI will be shortly behind or done at the same time. Intel die shrinks then 6 mos later AMD needs to. GPU's have been about a year out normally on CPU die shrinks. Not anymore since ATI can begin die shrinks much sooner than NVIDIA without the outsourcing costs.

This means ATI can do a price war with NVIDIA because ATI can produce chips cheaper than NVIDIA. They also have the experience of chip manufacturing of AMD engineers and IBM engineers on die shrinks where NVIDIA doesnt.

On the other end of the spectrum you have Intel and while Intel may have never had a real gaming GPU they are not idiots and will eventually have something even if it never takes the top spot if it takes the mid range and lower its a huge blow to everyone because mid range is the sweet spot and Intel has chip manufacturing out the wazoo. Will be interesting to see how they are at drivers.

There is probably good reason Intel hasnt just gobbled up NVIDIA and thats probably because they can develop a GPU that could compete. For the first time ever in the last year I am hearing everyone say get the Intel motherboards over the NVIDIA ones. This means NVIDIA could be in trouble on the Mobo front and bearlake is coming along with a few other Intel chipsets.

NVIDIA might just be in a world of hurt about this time next year to late 2008. Then Intel might be able to get them for a bargain.

NVIDIA needs to consider becomming a CPU company to survive. We know GPU's are much better at a lot of things than CPU's. It might be time they tried becomming a CPU company as well. I dont see them surviving with graphics and motherboards without some serious competition coming from both AMD and Intel.

Nobody saw 3DFX go from top to bottom so fast but it can happen.
 
Originally posted by: Mitch101
Because AMD/ATI can leverage manufacturing costs where NVIDIA cannot because they have to outsource a lot more of the manufacturing.

Consider AMD can produce thier own GPU's because they have a chip foundries where NVIDIA does not. AMD is also going 65nm which means more chips per wafer. NVIDIA will do this also but must pay a premium to the chip manufacturing companies.

When AMD moves to 45nm ATI will be shortly behind or done at the same time. Intel die shrinks then 6 mos later AMD needs to. GPU's have been about a year out normally on CPU die shrinks. Not anymore since ATI can begin die shrinks much sooner than NVIDIA without the outsourcing costs.

This means ATI can do a price war with NVIDIA because ATI can produce chips cheaper than NVIDIA. They also have the experience of chip manufacturing of AMD engineers and IBM engineers on die shrinks where NVIDIA doesnt.

On the other end of the spectrum you have Intel and while Intel may have never had a real gaming GPU they are not idiots and will eventually have something even if it never takes the top spot if it takes the mid range and lower its a huge blow to everyone because mid range is the sweet spot and Intel has chip manufacturing out the wazoo. Will be interesting to see how they are at drivers.

There is probably good reason Intel hasnt just gobbled up NVIDIA and thats probably because they can develop a GPU that could compete. For the first time ever in the last year I am hearing everyone say get the Intel motherboards over the NVIDIA ones. This means NVIDIA could be in trouble on the Mobo front and bearlake is coming along with a few other Intel chipsets.

NVIDIA might just be in a world of hurt about this time next year to late 2008. Then Intel might be able to get them for a bargain.

NVIDIA needs to consider becomming a CPU company to survive. We know GPU's are much better at a lot of things than CPU's. It might be time they tried becomming a CPU company as well. I dont see them surviving with graphics and motherboards without some serious competition coming from both AMD and Intel.

Nobody saw 3DFX go from top to bottom so fast but it can happen.
Click to expand...

AMD is making the GPUs though. ATI GPUs are still made by TSMC. The same company that makes Nvidia is it not?
 
Originally posted by: Matt2
Originally posted by: Mitch101
Because AMD/ATI can leverage manufacturing costs where NVIDIA cannot because they have to outsource a lot more of the manufacturing.

Consider AMD can produce thier own GPU's because they have a chip foundries where NVIDIA does not. AMD is also going 65nm which means more chips per wafer. NVIDIA will do this also but must pay a premium to the chip manufacturing companies.

When AMD moves to 45nm ATI will be shortly behind or done at the same time. Intel die shrinks then 6 mos later AMD needs to. GPU's have been about a year out normally on CPU die shrinks. Not anymore since ATI can begin die shrinks much sooner than NVIDIA without the outsourcing costs.

This means ATI can do a price war with NVIDIA because ATI can produce chips cheaper than NVIDIA. They also have the experience of chip manufacturing of AMD engineers and IBM engineers on die shrinks where NVIDIA doesnt.

On the other end of the spectrum you have Intel and while Intel may have never had a real gaming GPU they are not idiots and will eventually have something even if it never takes the top spot if it takes the mid range and lower its a huge blow to everyone because mid range is the sweet spot and Intel has chip manufacturing out the wazoo. Will be interesting to see how they are at drivers.

There is probably good reason Intel hasnt just gobbled up NVIDIA and thats probably because they can develop a GPU that could compete. For the first time ever in the last year I am hearing everyone say get the Intel motherboards over the NVIDIA ones. This means NVIDIA could be in trouble on the Mobo front and bearlake is coming along with a few other Intel chipsets.

NVIDIA might just be in a world of hurt about this time next year to late 2008. Then Intel might be able to get them for a bargain.

NVIDIA needs to consider becomming a CPU company to survive. We know GPU's are much better at a lot of things than CPU's. It might be time they tried becomming a CPU company as well. I dont see them surviving with graphics and motherboards without some serious competition coming from both AMD and Intel.

Nobody saw 3DFX go from top to bottom so fast but it can happen.
Click to expand...

AMD is making the GPUs though. ATI GPUs are still made by TSMC. The same company that makes Nvidia is it not?
Click to expand...

Correct on this round but consider ATI got to leverage the experience of AMD and IBM on how to produce 65nm chips. Its still a little early for the complete merge of the two so more wil happen at 45nm stage. Something NVIDIA has to outsource at a high cost. However AMD can produce ATI chips inhouse if needed. They can leverage plants that arent moving toward 45nm and when AMD retools a plant for 45nm ATI has the ability to do runs in the AMD plant and when happy outsource to TSMC. There are a lot of luxuries ATI has now with being a part of AMD/IBM.

Also consider the mergence as well on Motherboard chipset design from AMD and ATI something everyone is just about overlooking. Between the 2 teams they should be able to produce some kick arse motherboard chipsets and again leverage the AMD/IBM teams on producing them on 65nm.

When the shift goes to 45nm about this time next year thats when NVIDIA will run into some major trouble. I dont know where NVIDIA stands with 45nm but Intel is there and AMD will be there soon enough. NVIDIA will be in a lot of trouble around that time.
 
In a short NVIDIA has to move at die shrinks just as fast as INTEL and AMD and that something that will cost them since they dont own any foundries.

Intel will get into the graphics buisness and wont suck forever.

Intel is already producing thier best motherboards I have ever seen and even ones that will do 4xSLI soon enough.

While everyone is more concerned talking about AMD-NVIDIA battle on graphics its INTEL on the Mobo and Graphics area NVIDIA should be worried about more.
 
AMD doesn't have the resources Intel does to put up multi billion dollar fabs at a time. I highly doubt they would restrict their CPU production to start making GPUs in house.
 
Originally posted by: Mitch101
Originally posted by: Matt2
Originally posted by: Mitch101
Because AMD/ATI can leverage manufacturing costs where NVIDIA cannot because they have to outsource a lot more of the manufacturing.

Consider AMD can produce thier own GPU's because they have a chip foundries where NVIDIA does not. AMD is also going 65nm which means more chips per wafer. NVIDIA will do this also but must pay a premium to the chip manufacturing companies.

When AMD moves to 45nm ATI will be shortly behind or done at the same time. Intel die shrinks then 6 mos later AMD needs to. GPU's have been about a year out normally on CPU die shrinks. Not anymore since ATI can begin die shrinks much sooner than NVIDIA without the outsourcing costs.

This means ATI can do a price war with NVIDIA because ATI can produce chips cheaper than NVIDIA. They also have the experience of chip manufacturing of AMD engineers and IBM engineers on die shrinks where NVIDIA doesnt.

On the other end of the spectrum you have Intel and while Intel may have never had a real gaming GPU they are not idiots and will eventually have something even if it never takes the top spot if it takes the mid range and lower its a huge blow to everyone because mid range is the sweet spot and Intel has chip manufacturing out the wazoo. Will be interesting to see how they are at drivers.

There is probably good reason Intel hasnt just gobbled up NVIDIA and thats probably because they can develop a GPU that could compete. For the first time ever in the last year I am hearing everyone say get the Intel motherboards over the NVIDIA ones. This means NVIDIA could be in trouble on the Mobo front and bearlake is coming along with a few other Intel chipsets.

NVIDIA might just be in a world of hurt about this time next year to late 2008. Then Intel might be able to get them for a bargain.

NVIDIA needs to consider becomming a CPU company to survive. We know GPU's are much better at a lot of things than CPU's. It might be time they tried becomming a CPU company as well. I dont see them surviving with graphics and motherboards without some serious competition coming from both AMD and Intel.

Nobody saw 3DFX go from top to bottom so fast but it can happen.
Click to expand...

AMD is making the GPUs though. ATI GPUs are still made by TSMC. The same company that makes Nvidia is it not?
Click to expand...

Correct on this round but consider ATI got to leverage the experience of AMD and IBM on how to produce 65nm chips. Its still a little early for the complete merge of the two so more wil happen at 45nm stage. Something NVIDIA has to outsource at a high cost. However AMD can produce ATI chips inhouse if needed. They can leverage plants that arent moving toward 45nm and when AMD retools a plant for 45nm ATI has the ability to do runs in the AMD plant and when happy outsource to TSMC. There are a lot of luxuries ATI has now with being a part of AMD/IBM.

Also consider the mergence as well on Motherboard chipset design from AMD and ATI something everyone is just about overlooking. Between the 2 teams they should be able to produce some kick arse motherboard chipsets and again leverage the AMD/IBM teams on producing them on 65nm.

When the shift goes to 45nm about this time next year thats when NVIDIA will run into some major trouble. I dont know where NVIDIA stands with 45nm but Intel is there and AMD will be there soon enough. NVIDIA will be in a lot of trouble around that time.
Click to expand...

According to this article, AMD is going to begin outsourcing more if it's own CPU production, so I don't seem them manufacturing any GPUs for a long while. They simply don't have the capital to increase their manufacturing capacity at this point.

Can AMD dig itself out of a hole? ''AMD will look to lessen the capital needs of its models by outsourcing production and partnering up, though we believe this could take much longer than investors anticipate,'' said analyst Doug Freedman of American Technology Research.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: Matt2
This is far less bandwidth than we originally thought there was going to be. This will probably bring the R600 much closer to G80 performance rather than exceeding G80 performance.

This does however make the $399-$450 price seem a bit more plausible. 512mb of 1600mhz GDDR3 shaves a lot of price off compared to 1GB 2000mhz GDDR4.
Click to expand...

Wow, all you do is rag and whine about things, huh? Life must be tough. 🙁

I don't put any faith at all in the link, and questioning Fudzilla would be an appropriate response, but you don't do that - no you just take it as truth and try to still find a reason to moan.

That much negativity isn't healthy!
 
Originally posted by: yacoub
Originally posted by: Matt2
This is far less bandwidth than we originally thought there was going to be. This will probably bring the R600 much closer to G80 performance rather than exceeding G80 performance.

This does however make the $399-$450 price seem a bit more plausible. 512mb of 1600mhz GDDR3 shaves a lot of price off compared to 1GB 2000mhz GDDR4.
Click to expand...

Wow, all you do is rag and whine about things, huh? Life must be tough. 🙁

I don't put any faith at all in the link, and questioning Fudzilla would be an appropriate response, but you don't do that - no you just take it as truth and try to still find a reason to moan.

That much negativity isn't healthy!
Click to expand...

Why are you so optimistic, in that case?
 
Originally posted by: yacoub
Originally posted by: Matt2
This is far less bandwidth than we originally thought there was going to be. This will probably bring the R600 much closer to G80 performance rather than exceeding G80 performance.

This does however make the $399-$450 price seem a bit more plausible. 512mb of 1600mhz GDDR3 shaves a lot of price off compared to 1GB 2000mhz GDDR4.
Click to expand...

Wow, all you do is rag and whine about things, huh? Life must be tough. 🙁

I don't put any faith at all in the link, and questioning Fudzilla would be an appropriate response, but you don't do that - no you just take it as truth and try to still find a reason to moan.

That much negativity isn't healthy!
Click to expand...

Wow, all you do is follow me around trying to get on my nerves.

There's absolutely nothing negative about what I said. I just pointed out the facts.

All I said was this was less bandwidth than we thought there would be. Where is the negative in that? I didn't make up this story. I didnt make a thread and link to this story. I'm just going off what is being told.

I even said the price tag makes sense if this is true.

Go spread your FUD somewhere else yacoub.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top