Radeon X1950 XTX gets new cooler

[Gamer X]

The Inquirer

ATI'S RADEON X1950 XTX and the Crossfire edition of that card are to get new cooler. Too many people were objecting about the noise of the cooler and ATI finally listened to them and redesigned the cooler.

Our first information indicates that the cooler will be very much like the Arctic cooling you can find on HIS Radeon X1900 cards.

This one is already more efficient than the current ATI one and we wrote about it back at Cebit. You can read that here. As a prototype, it cooled the chip to nine degrees Celsius below its rival.

Just to confirm, it is still a dual-slot cooler and the cards are expected in middle of next month, with GDDR 4 on board, of course. µ

 

[tuteja1986]

Amm , I think ATI needs to get some really strict employee that can make the whole the company do think fast. Why the hell even bother with a X1950 XTX release they should be worried about G80 which will come out soon and kill all the sales of ATI high end R580 card. Arr also steal more market share and making ATI have 3 strikes with late launch of its next gen GPU.

R4XX series = failed because of delay
R5XX series = failed because of horrible delays
R6XX series = looks as the same future

 

[Ika]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
Amm , I think ATI needs to get some really strict employee that can make the whole the company do think fast. Why the hell even bother with a X1950 XTX release they should be worried about G80 which will come out soon and kill all the sales of ATI high end R580 card. Arr also steal more market share and making ATI have 3 strikes with late launch of its next gen GPU.

R4XX series = failed because of delay
R5XX series = failed because of horrible delays
R6XX series = looks as the same future

R520 was horribly delayed (X1800 series), but R580 was not, because it was a separate project (X1900 series). Hopefully I got those model #s right.

Anyway... 1. inq link, 2. no pics??

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: Aflac

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
Amm , I think ATI needs to get some really strict employee that can make the whole the company do think fast. Why the hell even bother with a X1950 XTX release they should be worried about G80 which will come out soon and kill all the sales of ATI high end R580 card. Arr also steal more market share and making ATI have 3 strikes with late launch of its next gen GPU.

R4XX series = failed because of delay
R5XX series = failed because of horrible delays
R6XX series = looks as the same future

R520 was horribly delayed (X1800 series), but R580 was not, because it was a separate project (X1900 series). Hopefully I got those model #s right.

Anyway... 1. inq link, 2. no pics??

Yeah I get your point but i am trying to say that Nvidia may launch its G80 late next month. This would kill the sale of ATI X1950XT and ATI response wouldn't come untill late Q4 and by that time Nvidia would have sold craploads of its Graphic card.

 

[Wreckage]

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33127

Seven percent faster than an X1900XTX for around ?399

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33127

Seven percent faster than an X1900XTX for around ?399

wreckage ... Why can't you post without your dieing love for nvidia ;(

 

[redbox]

AArrrrrgggg enough of this INQ crap I want ROLLO back!!!! At least then we had a member that gave inside information. All the INQ does is crap in a hat call it an inkblot test and then ship it out to the masses.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: redbox
AArrrrrgggg enough of this INQ crap I want ROLLO back!!!! At least then we had a member that gave inside information. All the INQ does is crap in a hat call it an inkblot test and then ship it out to the masses.

All Rollo gave us was extremely slanted Pro-NV/anti-ATI BS and flame wars up the ying-yang. All the while collecting free hardware from AEG/Nvidia for doing so. Bring Rollo back? No thanks.

Originally posted by: Wreckage
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33127

Seven percent faster than an X1900XTX for around ?399

Why don't you finish off the quote, eh Wreckage?

It will still be slower than the doubled-up GX2 but we are sure that two X1950 XTXes will beat the single 7950 GX2. It may even give quad SLI to run for its money.

Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me.

 

[JBT]

Originally posted by: Creig

It will still be slower than the doubled-up GX2 but we are sure that two X1950 XTXes will beat the single 7950 GX2. It may even give quad SLI to run for its money.

Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me.

no kidding. Sounds a bit more than a 7% increase in speed to me...
I can't believe they have a dual slot cooler !!??!?! is this really that shocking?

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: Creig

Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me.

the two ATI cores also have more transistors than the 4 nvidia cores, take more power than the four nvidia cores, and produce more heat than the four nvidia cores.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Lol bullshit as always.. seven percent faster? HAHAHA thats soooooooooooooooo vague... i bet it will range 10-20% depending on how memory limited the game is, and it will excel at 2048++ and specially 2500x1600 with aa because of its GDDR4

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: Creig

Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me.

the two ATI cores also have more transistors than the 4 nvidia cores, take more power than the four nvidia cores, and produce more heat than the four nvidia cores.

This is relevant because?

 

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: Creig

Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me.

the two ATI cores also have more transistors than the 4 nvidia cores, take more power than the four nvidia cores, and produce more heat than the four nvidia cores.

This is relevant because?

This is relevent because most people don't have Kilowatt PSUs nor do most people want to buy a 5.25in bay PSU to power their videocards.

I do think putting putting a refresh to the 1900 series isn't a smart move. I think they'd be better off focusing resources on the R600 core.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: Creig

Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me.

the two ATI cores also have more transistors than the 4 nvidia cores, take more power than the four nvidia cores, and produce more heat than the four nvidia cores.

This is relevant because?

This is relevent because most people don't have Kilowatt PSUs nor do most people want to buy a 5.25in bay PSU to power their videocards.

I do think putting putting a refresh to the 1900 series isn't a smart move. I think they'd be better off focusing resources on the R600 core.

That actually still doesn't make it relevant. If two X1950XTX's outperform dual GX2's, as the INQ claims, then the type of PSU's most people have does not make it any more or less so.

 

[beggerking]

umm..if one 1950 can't beat 1 GX2, how does 2 1950s beat 2 GX2s?

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: beggerking
umm..if one 1950 can't beat 1 GX2, how does 2 1950s beat 2 GX2s?

I never said they could, and we don't know either way... My point was about the relevance of mentioning power consumption and heat disipation with regards to absolute performance... Even if it were true, It is simply not a relevant rebuttal with regards to performance. I also find it interesting that someone feels the need to begin doing damage control on something that has yet to be shown. Even more interesting is the idea that they would bring up other information (power requirements) that also isn't known to make an irrelevant argument.

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: Creig

Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me.

the two ATI cores also have more transistors than the 4 nvidia cores, take more power than the four nvidia cores, and produce more heat than the four nvidia cores.

I know my buying decision always comes down to which gpu solution has less transistors. :disgust:

Originally posted by: Bateluer

This is relevent because most people don't have Kilowatt PSUs nor do most people want to buy a 5.25in bay PSU to power their videocards.

I kinda see your point but do you really think someone who is willing to lay down $1200 for video cards is going to be worried about spending money on a PSU to power them?? Do you think the power requirements between two GX2s and two X1950XTXs would vary so much that the buyer could save tons of money going with a cheaper PSU if he bought the GX2s??

I'm glad ATI is redesigning the cooler as there will be a lot less arguing about how bad it is in the future. Although I'm probably wrong since we still see people bringing up the 5800U.

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: redbox
AArrrrrgggg enough of this INQ crap I want ROLLO back!!!! At least then we had a member that gave inside information. All the INQ does is crap in a hat call it an inkblot test and then ship it out to the masses.

All Rollo gave us was extremely slanted Pro-NV/anti-ATI BS and flame wars up the ying-yang. All the while collecting free hardware from AEG/Nvidia for doing so. Bring Rollo back? No thanks.

So lets see Rollo gave us extremely slanted Pro-NV BS and that is different now that he is gone right?

Rollo also gave us flame wars up the ying-yang right? Sit back and watch the direction this thread and just about any other thread involving ATI or Nvidia features go.

Getting rid of Rollo didn't solve anything around here. It just gave ATI fans some breathing room before the NV crazed bunch picked up his torch again.

Sure rollo spit out alot of ****** but not near as much as this INQ everyone quotes.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: beggerking
umm..if one 1950 can't beat 1 GX2, how does 2 1950s beat 2 GX2s?

I never said they could, and we don't know either way... My point was about the relevance of mentioning power consumption and heat disipation with regards to absolute performance... Even if it were true, It is simply not a relevant rebuttal with regards to performance. I also find it interesting that someone feels the need to begin doing damage control on something that has yet to be shown. Even more interesting is the idea that they would bring up other information (power requirements) that also isn't known to make an irrelevant argument.

I think we are talking about combined performance here..( raw performance, heat, price, power consumption, feature set) to determine the value of 1950xtx, not raw performance alone.

read Creig' post above
"Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me."

price/performance ratio. so schneiderguy's argument is relevant..heat and power is part of a videocard's "performance".

 

[Ichigo]

If you gave someone a choice of a free 7900GTX and a free X1900XTX, what would they choose? Heat is an issue, though a rather insignificant one to most people.

 

[beggerking]

heat = louder fan = noise.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: beggerking
umm..if one 1950 can't beat 1 GX2, how does 2 1950s beat 2 GX2s?

I never said they could, and we don't know either way... My point was about the relevance of mentioning power consumption and heat disipation with regards to absolute performance... Even if it were true, It is simply not a relevant rebuttal with regards to performance. I also find it interesting that someone feels the need to begin doing damage control on something that has yet to be shown. Even more interesting is the idea that they would bring up other information (power requirements) that also isn't known to make an irrelevant argument.

I think we are talking about combined performance here..( raw performance, heat, price, power consumption, feature set) to determine the value of 1950xtx, not raw performance alone.

read Creig' post above
"Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me."

price/performance ratio. so schneiderguy's argument is relevant..heat and power is part of a videocard's "performance".

I think you are confusing efficiency or value with performance... I have never heard of the performance crown being awarded to a slower card becase it has less transistors or consumes less power.

edit: you are also taking an idiom literally. "run for the money" doesn't have anything to do with purchasing and value.

http://www.answers.com/topic/run-for-one-s-money-a

run for one's money, a

A close contest or a strong competition, as in We may not win the game, but let's give them a run for their money. This term probably comes from horse racing, where one may get considerable pleasure from watching the race even if one does not win much. Its first recorded use was in 1874.

All he was saying is that even if the X1950XTX doesn't beat two GX2's, it would still be impressive if they came close.

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: beggerking
umm..if one 1950 can't beat 1 GX2, how does 2 1950s beat 2 GX2s?

I never said they could, and we don't know either way... My point was about the relevance of mentioning power consumption and heat disipation with regards to absolute performance... Even if it were true, It is simply not a relevant rebuttal with regards to performance. I also find it interesting that someone feels the need to begin doing damage control on something that has yet to be shown. Even more interesting is the idea that they would bring up other information (power requirements) that also isn't known to make an irrelevant argument.

I think we are talking about combined performance here..( raw performance, heat, price, power consumption, feature set) to determine the value of 1950xtx, not raw performance alone.

read Creig' post above
"Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me."

price/performance ratio. so schneiderguy's argument is relevant..heat and power is part of a videocard's "performance".

Lets go to that time honored test some people keep bringing up. "If you want the fastest you are going to have to pay for it", now if that means ATI installing a power brick, ATI redesigning their coolers, or even you having to upgrade your powersupply then thats all game. I haven't seen you pull the price/performance card out of the bag for a long time now. So I thought I just might play that game.

That being said I am not in that upper echelon, that upper crust. No, I look also for the price/performance ratio. When you start putting other features under the umbrella of "performance" then you blure the line. I could just as well put the advancements in IQ that ATI has over the NV parts under this "performance umbrella" as could you also shove the NV HDCP feature under there too. However, this makes the umbrella quite large and hard to handle. I perfer to keep the definition of performance just to FPS, that is a nice defined line that most sites bench. So do keep your heat and power issues on your mind, but keep them out of the performance equation.

 

[nitromullet]

So do keep your heat and power issues on your mind, but keep them out of the performance equation.

Well put.

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: Elfear

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: Creig

Two ATI cores giving four NV cores a run for its money? Sounds pretty fast to me.

the two ATI cores also have more transistors than the 4 nvidia cores, take more power than the four nvidia cores, and produce more heat than the four nvidia cores.

I know my buying decision always comes down to which gpu solution has less transistors. :disgust:

because more transistors = more heat and more power consumption?

im sure you'll love it when you get two of these things and it takes as much power as your refrigerator :roll: