Radeon X1800XT is now dead

[otispunkmeyer]

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/04/27/x1800xt_end_of_life/

We now know the reason why we couldn't get a Radeon X1800XT 256MB to compare to the two GeForce 7900 GTs yesterday, as ATI has decided to end the Radeon X1800XTs life in readiness for the launch of a new product coming soon.

The Inquirer believes that ATI is moving all of its high-end products to R580 with the launch of a new part called the Radeon X1900GT. They say that the Radeon X1900GT is designed to steal some of NVIDIA's GeForce 7900 GT sales.

so ati are ceasing to produce the X1800, in readiness for something new.... cool

(click the link for the rest of the news)

 

[golem]

From the preliminary review that someone linked last nite, the 1900gt is slower than a x1800xt and slower than the 7900gt too.

 

[v8envy]

Originally posted by: golem
From the preliminary review that someone linked last nite, the 1900gt is slower than a x1800xt and slower than the 7900gt too.

Not shocking news. It's 3/4 of a 1900XT, which in most cases wasn't that much faster than an X1800XT in the first place.

The X1800XT barely edged out the 7800GTX, which is roughly the speed of a 7900GT. Factory overclcoked 7900GTs are even faster.

So yeah, very believable, if disappointing. The last thing ATI needs is a slow&pricey enthusiast card. Looks like NV partners are starting to meet demand, sub-$280 7900GTs are starting to appear fairly frequently. By the time the X1900GT hits the shelves the price difference between it and the 7900GT will be $50-$100.

 

[golem]

Not shocking news. It's 3/4 of a 1900XT, which in most cases wasn't that much faster than an X1800XT in the first place.

The X1800XT barely edged out the 7800GTX, which is roughly the speed of a 7900GT. Factory overclcoked 7900GTs are even faster.

So yeah, very believable, if disappointing. The last thing ATI needs is a slow&pricey enthusiast card. Looks like NV partners are starting to meet demand, sub-$280 7900GTs are starting to appear fairly frequently. By the time the X1900GT hits the shelves the price difference between it and the 7900GT will be $50-$100.

Well it all depends on how much it cost for the x1900gt cores. If they are much cheaper to make than the x1800xt cores, even if they sell less, it might end up being better for ATI's bottom line. Tho. marketshare might suffer

 

[Genx87]

Hey this completes the circle of reference to the NV30 for the X1800.

btw I have a feeling they are probably getting some R580 dies that can be used for this product. This is most likely a cost cutting measure.

 

[Ackmed]

You can easily get a X1800XT, and have been able to for month. It would be foolish to say otherwise.

12 in stock (+3 more refurbs), 256&512MB at newegg, http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi...ption=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

Wow, its so hard to get one...

 

[Munky]

What preliminary review? And what are the clocks on the new card? If they clock it at a conservative 500mhz, then no doubt it will lose to the 7900gt. If they run it at 625+, then I'd be skeptical of any claims of it being slower.

Anyway, none of this is a surprise. I expected all along Ati to transition its midrange cards to the r580 architecure. Now, someone bring out the 24ps+8tu x1700xt.

 

[DeathReborn]

Originally posted by: golem

Not shocking news. It's 3/4 of a 1900XT, which in most cases wasn't that much faster than an X1800XT in the first place.

The X1800XT barely edged out the 7800GTX, which is roughly the speed of a 7900GT. Factory overclcoked 7900GTs are even faster.

So yeah, very believable, if disappointing. The last thing ATI needs is a slow&pricey enthusiast card. Looks like NV partners are starting to meet demand, sub-$280 7900GTs are starting to appear fairly frequently. By the time the X1900GT hits the shelves the price difference between it and the 7900GT will be $50-$100.

Well it all depends on how much it cost for the x1900gt cores. If they are much cheaper to make than the x1800xt cores, even if they sell less, it might end up being better for ATI's bottom line. Tho. marketshare might suffer

They are R580 cores and ATI buy them from the manufacturer either on a per wafer (good & bad cores) or per good core (no bad ones). Either way they cost TSMC etc the same to make but per wafer they get paid more, per die the bad cores may sell for less.

Here is a guesstimate on R520, R580 & G71 yields: http://www.penstarsys.com/editor/so3d/2006_04/so3d_2006_6.htm

The article was posted on AT before and it is a good read. First page of article

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: DeathReborn

Originally posted by: golem

Not shocking news. It's 3/4 of a 1900XT, which in most cases wasn't that much faster than an X1800XT in the first place.

The X1800XT barely edged out the 7800GTX, which is roughly the speed of a 7900GT. Factory overclcoked 7900GTs are even faster.

So yeah, very believable, if disappointing. The last thing ATI needs is a slow&pricey enthusiast card. Looks like NV partners are starting to meet demand, sub-$280 7900GTs are starting to appear fairly frequently. By the time the X1900GT hits the shelves the price difference between it and the 7900GT will be $50-$100.

Well it all depends on how much it cost for the x1900gt cores. If they are much cheaper to make than the x1800xt cores, even if they sell less, it might end up being better for ATI's bottom line. Tho. marketshare might suffer

They are R580 cores and ATI buy them from the manufacturer either on a per wafer (good & bad cores) or per good core (no bad ones). Either way they cost TSMC etc the same to make but per wafer they get paid more, per die the bad cores may sell for less.

Here is a guesstimate on R520, R580 & G71 yields: http://www.penstarsys.com/editor/so3d/2006_04/so3d_2006_6.htm

The article was posted on AT before and it is a good read. First page of article

After reading that article, I get the impression that Ati might as well spend less money on R&D, while spending more money on marketing and they'd still come out looking just as good or better in terms of profit and market share.

 

[golem]

Ackmed: I'm sorry, who are you replying to? I don't see anyone saying you can't get an x1800xt. Just that it will be replaced soon.

Munky: It may have been more a sneak peak than a prelim. review. But it was from that site in Hong Kong, hkpec or something like that. There was a link to the article in another thread in this forum, but search doesn't bring it up anymore.

DeathReborn: I was just wondering if the core for the x1900gt is cheaper to produce than a core for a x1800xt because it's smaller.

Edit. I don't know for a fact that it's smaller or not. Just wondering if this was the reason they were replacing the x1800xt with a seemingly slower part.

 

[hemmy]

You guys have to realize that it costs ATI more to make their current GPUs (R520, R580 and low/mainstream as well) than it does nvidia to make G71, G73. Plus, in the case of the X1800XT they had the 256 versions <300 where they were likely making very little profit off of each sale

 

[Bull Dog]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Hey this completes the circle of reference to the NV30 for the X1800.

Not quite. The R520, unlike the NV30, actually offered decent performance.

Edit: Added a comma.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Bull Dog

Originally posted by: Genx87
Hey this completes the circle of reference to the NV30 for the X1800.

Not quite. The R520, unlike the NV30, actually offered decent performance.

Edit: Added a comma.

The NV30 offered "decent" performance.

 

[imported_Questar]

Here is a guesstimate on R520, R580 & G71 yields: http://www.penstarsys.com/editor/so3d/2006_04/so3d_2006_6.htm

There's absolutly no data to backup those numbers. At those yeilds ATI would be paying $500 a chip for R580.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Bull Dog

Originally posted by: Genx87
Hey this completes the circle of reference to the NV30 for the X1800.

Not quite. The R520, unlike the NV30, actually offered decent performance.

Edit: Added a comma.

The NV30 offered "decent" performance.

Compared to what? It was slower than the r300, but that wasnt its only problem. The whole architecture was flawed, from a 128-bit memory bus to horrible DX9 performance. The r520 had only these similarities to the nv30:
1. Late to market
2. Short lifespan
3. Louder cooler than the competition
The actual design of the gpu was superior to what the competition had at the time. The same can't be said about the nv30.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Bull Dog

Originally posted by: Genx87
Hey this completes the circle of reference to the NV30 for the X1800.

Not quite. The R520, unlike the NV30, actually offered decent performance.

Edit: Added a comma.

The NV30 offered "decent" performance.

Compared to what? It was slower than the r300, but that wasnt its only problem. The whole architecture was flawed, from a 128-bit memory bus to horrible DX9 performance. The r520 had only these similarities to the nv30:
1. Late to market
2. Short lifespan
3. Louder cooler than the competition
The actual design of the gpu was superior to what the competition had at the time. The same can't be said about the nv30.

Please the NV30 had "decent" performance for the time and dont give me this DX9 crap. Try Oblivion or the Unreal 3 engine on an R300 and tell me how DX9 performs in all of its glory.

And dont forget the economic impact of the NV30, ATI hasnt exactly been tearing it up since its flop with the X1800.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Bull Dog

Originally posted by: Genx87
Hey this completes the circle of reference to the NV30 for the X1800.

Not quite. The R520, unlike the NV30, actually offered decent performance.

Edit: Added a comma.

The NV30 offered "decent" performance.

Compared to what? It was slower than the r300, but that wasnt its only problem. The whole architecture was flawed, from a 128-bit memory bus to horrible DX9 performance. The r520 had only these similarities to the nv30:
1. Late to market
2. Short lifespan
3. Louder cooler than the competition
The actual design of the gpu was superior to what the competition had at the time. The same can't be said about the nv30.

Please the NV30 had "decent" performance for the time and dont give me this DX9 crap. Try Oblivion or the Unreal 3 engine on an R300 and tell me how DX9 performs in all of its glory.

And dont forget the economic impact of the NV30, ATI hasnt exactly been tearing it up since its flop with the X1800.

Might as well try Oblivion on a 6800gt, and also tell me how it performs in all its SM3, HDR, and soft shadows glory. DX9 was only one of many problems of the nv30, but it was a problem nevertheless.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
You can easily get a X1800XT, and have been able to for month. It would be foolish to say otherwise.

12 in stock (+3 more refurbs), 256&512MB at newegg, http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi...ption=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

Wow, its so hard to get one...

bit-tech is not american, it is in the Uk and they source their stuff from the uk, though having said that

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_X1800_Series_705.html

they are in stock here, even in CF form

but i guess that they dont actually buy the parts, and instead try get em for free from some one, and if theres non being made now, there wont be any to give since the last products off the line will already be at retailers.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: golem
Ackmed: I'm sorry, who are you replying to? I don't see anyone saying you can't get an x1800xt. Just that it will be replaced soon.

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/04/27/x1800xt_end_of_life/

We now know the reason why we couldn't get a Radeon X1800XT 256MB to compare to the two GeForce 7900 GTs yesterday, as ATI has decided to end the Radeon X1800XTs life in readiness for the launch of a new product coming soon.

Obviously, they didnt even try. As they are in stock in the states, and in the UK. And very available.

Originally posted by: Genx87

Please the NV30 had "decent" performance for the time and dont give me this DX9 crap. Try Oblivion or the Unreal 3 engine on an R300 and tell me how DX9 performs in all of its glory.

And dont forget the economic impact of the NV30, ATI hasnt exactly been tearing it up since its flop with the X1800.

Try Farcry on a 9700 and 5800, and see which is better. Trying to play a new demanding game, on a 4 year old card is never going to be a good idea. The simple fact is, the 9700 was and is a much better card than the 5800U.

The X1800 a flop? Hardly. The XT is cheaper, faster, and has better IQ than he 7900GT. Seems like a pretty good card to me.

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/04/27/x1800xt_end_of_life/

We now know the reason why we couldn't get a Radeon X1800XT 256MB to compare to the two GeForce 7900 GTs yesterday, as ATI has decided to end the Radeon X1800XTs life in readiness for the launch of a new product coming soon.

Obviously, they didnt even try. As they are in stock in the states, and in the UK. And very available.

Sorry, I thought you were replying to a post. I must have missed it in the article itself.
Thanks for clarifying.

 

[the Chase]

Even though I'm not going to go crossfire or SLI, it still bugs me that both companies don't support either. If you are going to sell the idea of SLI or crossfire and one reason to buy in to it is so you can buy one card now and add one later as your wallet allows, then make the **** things for a couple of years after they come out. If you don't want to support the cards for at least 2 years- stop selling SLI and crossfire mobos/vid cards.

 

[nlpro]

A link to an x-bit article about it

{ATI Preps Radeon X1900 GT for OEMs.
ATI?s Radeon X1900 GT to Succeed Radeon X800 SE

Category: Video

by Anton Shilov

[ 04/10/2006 | 10:04 PM ]


ATI Technologies, a leading supplier of graphics processors, is intending to introduce a special graphics product for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and system integrators (SIs) that will have Radeon X1900 brand-name, but a bit lowered performance. The part will be available in relatively low quantities and will hardly make it to the retail, sources close to the company said.

The Radeon X1900 GT will sport a cut-down version of the Radeon X1900 graphics processor with 36 pixel processors and 12 texture units. While some of the Radeon X1900 GT parts will sport ?fallout? R580 chips that do not have 48 pixel processors fully-functional, quite a lot of such products will feature fully-fledged R580 chips with some of execution units halted.

ATI and its arch-rival Nvidia Corp. are known for releasing special editions of their products to OEMs and SIs. For instance, back in 2004 ATI introduced Radeon X800 SE product targeting system builders and very few of such boards leaked to the retail market eventually. The Radeon X1900 GT is also likely to have similar destiny: there will be only 25 thousand units available to computer makers worldwide only.

For mass performance-mainstream market the company will offer its code-named RV570 graphics chip with 36 pixel shader processors, 12 texture units and 256-bit memory bus later during the year. The product will be branded as the Radeon X1900 GTO and will be targeted at below $299 segment. The RV570 is planned to be released commercially for back-to-school season, in the meantime, users seeking for graphics cards priced at about $300 or below should pay attention to the Radeon X1800 XT 256MB, Radeon X1800 XL 256MB and Radeon X1800 GTO. }


so it looks like only OEM peopel will be able to get x1900gt cards but we will get an x1900gto later this year

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: the Chase
Even though I'm not going to go crossfire or SLI, it still bugs me that both companies don't support either. If you are going to sell the idea of SLI or crossfire and one reason to buy in to it is so you can buy one card now and add one later as your wallet allows, then make the **** things for a couple of years after they come out. If you don't want to support the cards for at least 2 years- stop selling SLI and crossfire mobos/vid cards.

nv has a considerable leg up in that area. heck if you want to sli an nv40, it still easy to find one. just get any used one and drop it in there.

ati is a defferent matter. how many x1800xt "crossfire edition" cards are, or will be floating around?

 

[golem]

Found the link to some benchmarks

http://www.hkepc.com/hwdb/x1900gt-3.htm

Seems to be basically even with with the 7900GT. Within 3 to 5 fps in the 5 games they tested. Didn't test Oblivion tho.

So if the numbers don't improve at release due to driver improvements, it's a step back from x1800xt.

 

[Nirach]

Pfft.


You expected it to live long? It was poorly launched, delayed to hell, and shortly repalced with the 1900's as top dog. Not that it ever was top dog.