What's up with ATi's R300 and their integrated motherboard?

[NFS4]

I remember Anand doing a preview of ATi's new integrated chipset a while back, but I've heard NOTHING ELSE about it since then. Also, where's R300 at?:Q

 

[AGodspeed]

<< I remember Anand doing a preview of ATi's new integrated chipset a while back, but I've heard NOTHING ELSE about it since then. Also, where's R300 at?:Q >>

Well ATi's motherboard chipsets aren't supposed to be available until this summer last I heard.

According to ATi, the R300 will be launched when MS launches DX9, which is supposed to happen during Q3 this year.

 

[Adul]

So is it done yet? If so are they just making sure the drivers are stable? What happeneed to the r250?

 

[unclejimbo]

The R300 (Radeon 9000 series), is supposedly going to come out in September.


-- unclejimbo

 

[Valinos]

And you guys wonder why ATI can't compete in nVidia's league.

They take over a year to bring out a fresh chipset, and no substanial upgrades happen between the next. 128MB Radeon 8500? Not enough of a reason to get me to buy one.

I don't mean to bash ATI, I'd love to see them actually develop something really cool, successful, and competitive. ATM, they are minor leagues though. I'm sorry guys, but I'm not paying the same price for the Radeon 8500 as the Geforce 3 (when they were both released). Nvidia is known for their stability, reliability, speed, and overall quality. They beat ATI in most benchmarks and I hear people bitch about buggy drivers very little of the time (mostly due to user error or old hardware).

I really hope the R300 destroys everything on the market right now, and I hope to see ATI bring out a SUBSTANTIAL upgrade to the chipset in 6 months. I also hope to see quality drivers, and tasty features. And if they really want people to start buying their cards, make it $100 cheaper than the competition's equivalent.

I want a war similar to the processor wars start up between nVidia and ATI. Maybe I'll be able to upgrade graphics cards every year instead of every two if the prices get cheap enough

I just think the livelihood of ATI is at stake with the R300. I haven't paid much attention to the market share they have now, but from what I hear nVidia is closing in on the OEM market and ATI is hurting. This card may make or break their future as a top dawg in the graphics market.

Blah, just my rant. I had to let it loose. I just tire of seeing no real competition in the graphics market. I own stock in ATI, which I bought two years ago with the launch of the first Radeon. I honestly thought that was gonna give them the boost they needed to dethrone Nvidia. Sadly, it wasn't enough to combat Nvidia's 6 month product refresh. Needless to say, despite owning stock, I have never bought an ATI product

I really look forward to seeing the R300 and I hope it is truely something great.

 

[BFG10K]

Forget the R300, where the heck is the R250?

Sorry ATi but I couldn't be bothered waiting around and I'm glad I didn't because my Ti4600 rocks.

 

[Athlon4all]

<< Forget the R300, where the heck is the R250? >>

Exactley. Where's the R8800? ATi is at the moment competing in the $100-200 because of the lack of GF4 Ti4200's, but still they've gotta want more. I dunno maybe they tested 8800's and it costed too much for the performance it provided against the Ti4400 and 4600 and they decided not to launch it.

Valinos, I think you are on the right track with ATi. But, its not that ATi is bad in getting stuff out and making good drivers, its simply that nVidia is soooo good at getting products out, they're sooooo goood at making great drivers, you know?

Will R300 be life or death for ATi, I don't think they will die with it if it doesn't compete with NV30 but they'll be one sted closer if it doesn't compete with NV30.

 

[Gstanfor]

<< its simply that nVidia is soooo good at getting products out >>


Precisely.

This is the prime reason why nVidia are where they are today. They have never lost sight of the fact that they are a business first and foremost. Never mind that their products may be better than the competition - good products will get you nowhere fast if you do not effectively market them (ironically ATI is the perfect example of this; good products poorly marketed).

Until ATI gets its business execution down pat they will always play second fiddle to nVidia.

Greg

 

[flexy]

* And you guys wonder why ATI can't compete in nVidia's league.

Ehrm..what ?



*They take over a year to bring out a fresh chipset, and no substanial upgrades happen between the next. 128MB Radeon 8500? Not enough of a reason to get me to buy *one.
*I don't mean to bash ATI, I'd love to see them actually develop something really cool, successful, and competitive.


Oh...and Nvidia's product cycles are better ? Actually....what you said applies to Nvidia times x10...in fact ATI was it coming out with a inovative product FIRST which introduced many new features (dx81, pixelshader1.4)...the first time de-throning Nvidia...a REAL new product when it came out...whilest the Geforce line of cards was NOTHING, nothing new for a very long time. from the gf2 to the gf3 and all so called "TI xxxx series" in between..the same old story....continued even now with their "glorious" Gf4MX etc. ect. We dont talk about the 'real" Gf4 now...this is a card a generation AFTER the Radeon, and even the Gf4 is not really a "new" product and ATI even has SOME features not even the GF4 has.

* ATM, they are minor leagues though. I'm sorry guys, but I'm not paying the same price for the Radeon 8500 as the Geforce 3 (when they were both released).

I wouldnt pay the same price either.... (And i didnt)..i payed 280 when the radeon retail was released...was like $50 or something cheaper than a gf3 ti 500
Better price...more features



* Nvidia is known for their stability, reliability, speed, and overall quality. They beat ATI in most benchmarks and I hear people bitch about buggy drivers very little of the
* time (mostly due to user error or old hardware).

Again...excluding gf4: Already forgot that the radeon was on #1 on 3dmarks list for a long time ? If ATI is/was good in anything than in benchmarks....i think you missed something....

Buggy drivers ? May be..Nvidia didnt start up with the perfect drivers either. ATI's drivers have improved CONSIDERABLY...hearing people now (still) complaining about "ATI's buggy dirvers" just shows to me that those people may either a) be too biased b) never had an ATI card anyway c) didnt follow the development
There is a sh*tload of retail drivers around....and the most recent ones are realy very good, even WHQL certified.

regadring "nvidia quality": There are zillions of 3rd party vendors who built cards w/ nvidia CHIPSETS...how can you speak of quality in general ? Which manufacturer ? What about 2D ? My impression is that ATI does very well when it comes to Quality

*I really hope the R300 destroys everything on the market right now, and I hope to see ATI bring out a SUBSTANTIAL upgrade to the chipset in 6 months. I also hope to *see quality drivers, and tasty features. And if they really want people to start buying their cards, make it $100 cheaper than the competition's equivalent.

*I want a war similar to the processor wars start up between nVidia and ATI. Maybe I'll be able to upgrade graphics cards every year instead of every two if the prices get *cheap enough

You dont have to make "people start buying their cards". R200 radeon 8500 still WAS and IS a huuuuuuge success.....cheaper, more bang for the buck.


*I just think the livelihood of ATI is at stake with the R300. I haven't paid much attention to the market share they have now, but from what I hear nVidia is closing in on *the OEM market and ATI is hurting. This card may make or break their future as a top dawg in the graphics market.

How do you know ? There are other cards coming up....of course NV30, ATI's R300, Matrox parhelia.

* Blah, just my rant. I had to let it loose. I just tire of seeing no real competition in the graphics market. I

Hmm..maybe open your eyes ???? The ONLY thing NVIDIA did which was kind of interesting (besides their endless and boring Geforce line of cards) was RECENTLY releasing the GF4 series, it's a tad faster than ATI's card in overall performance. STILL, the Geforce line is DEAD, even Nvidia admitted that. (NV30 will be...."totally different")... And guess why ? Mainly because of ATI, because ATI came out with something new and people rather got a R200 than "another" Gf3 card...NV just cant afford to go on like this...releasing higher clocked (but merely the same cards, giving them a new name "GF3, GF3 TI 300, GF3 TI 500", same with their "famous" GF4MX now....
Their customers would just run away as soon as they realize what's really going on....and seeing OTHER manfucturers coming along with cheaper products with more features....

 

[Sunner]

It's interesting to see people complaining about nVidia never innovating anything, while ATi supposedly did with the R200.

nVidia brought the first card with pixeel shaders with the GF3, and they did it 6+ months ahead of the competition.
Just like they did with T&L and the GF1.

ATi merely improved upon this with their Radeons.

Not to say I dont like ATi, I just think credit should be given where it's due.

 

[ElFenix]

<< if it doesn't compete with NV30. >>

that assumes nv30 is coming out this fall, and nvidia hasn't released a wholly new part less than a year after the release of the last wholly new part since the GF2. with DX9 coming out i could see them doing it, but thats not how they've been operating.

 

[nortexoid]

the content of this thread is a joke...

i won't even get into this, but all i will say is....at least ATI doesn't rehash the same product 6 different times under 6 different, but similar, names...and in the process, turning your mere 6 month old card into an "obsolete" piece of worthless junk that u paid FAR too much for at the time.

also...



<< I'm not paying the same price for the Radeon 8500 as the Geforce 3 (when they were both released >>


what?...why not? - they performed on a par (i'll ignore the fact that the 8500 beat the GF3 in numerous benchies, because the counter could be claimed as well) while the 8500 provides better features and better image quality (arguable, but even if only 2d quality)...and don't tell me nvidia hasn't had their share of driver issues...they both have...no biggie. they're all weeded out for the most part.

 

[flexy]

<< It's interesting to see people complaining about nVidia never innovating anything, while ATi supposedly did with the R200.

nVidia brought the first card with pixeel shaders with the GF3, and they did it 6+ months ahead of the competition.
Just like they did with T&L and the GF1.

ATi merely improved upon this with their Radeons.

Not to say I dont like ATi, I just think credit should be given where it's due. >>



NONONONO..i didn't say NVidia never innovated anything..i was merely talking about the geforce line of cards

Btw...Nvidia innovated a LOT....i remember when i first read about the Riva128 coming out...better than any 3dfx cards....cool 2d AND 3d on ONE card...and affordable !

This was quite a revolution ! But NV sat just too long on their monopolist's butts...slowly going away from innovations and instead always repeating the same procedure over and over...add some more mhz here and there....give it a new name...etc...etc..... If someone doesnt see that they must be blind...

 

[ElFenix]

<< don't tell me nvidia hasn't had their share of driver issues >>

i have screenshots of dark age of camelot that look like an acid trip in a disco club due to nvidia drivers.

 

[NFS4]

<< i won't even get into this, but all i will say is....at least ATI doesn't rehash the same product 6 different times under 6 different, but similar, names...and in the process, turning your mere 6 month old card into an "obsolete" piece of worthless junk that u paid FAR too much for at the time. >>


Obsolete? Where do you get that from? My GeForce3 Ti200 is FAR from obsolete and it handles all of my games just fine. Just b/c a newer, better card comes out doen't mean that you now hold a piece of crap. What gives you that idea? It's no different than ATi replacing the Rage Pro with the Radeon and replacing the Radeon with the Radeon 7500 and 8500.

At least NVIDIA gives you the option to upgrade your card every so often if you want to. ATi hasn't had an answer to the GF4 series and that's a shame IMHO.

SO WHAT if NVIDIA revamps their model lineup more often than ATI, that's what they do to stay to keep ahead of the game. They are doing a GREAT business b/c of it and they command a HUGE share of the market because of it. As far as the different names, similar architecture, please get off your high horse That "old" GeForce technology is still kicking butt from here to timbuktu. So what if it's old, it still works!!! As long as they update the core to stay atop of the game, I don't see what the big deal is.

Oh, so I guess we should also trash Intel for the Pentium Pro -> Pentium II --> Pentium III --> Tualatin or AMD for the original Athlon --> K75 core --> Thunderbird --> Palomino --> Thoroughbred --> Barton.

Give me a break!

 

[nortexoid]

NFS4, i suppose u missed the SCARE QUOTES around obsolete...i suppose.

my point was really this: u buy a Geforce for a whopping amount of money when it's first released, 6 months later the thing is retailing for half the price, and u're able to pawn it off for like 1/4 what u paid for it when it's still, or at least seems, new.

it reminds me of the days when they'd release "new" CPUs in 33mhz increments when they were at the 900mhz+ mark...it was ridiculous....u don't see them doing that with server processors...why? - because people get pissed off at that sh1t and don't want it...

u think it's a good thing that nvidia gives u a large plethora of choices when it comes to rehashed geforce products - really it's only a good thing for nvidia, not u...u're the one w/ the urge to upgrade every 6 months when the same product u have comes out w/ a different name for a cheaper price than what u paid for yoru current card...

it's really all so clear.

 

[NFS4]

<< u think it's a good thing that nvidia gives u a large plethora of choices when it comes to rehashed geforce products - really it's only a good thing for nvidia, not u...u're the one w/ the urge to upgrade every 6 months when the same product u have comes out w/ a different name for a cheaper price than what u paid for yoru current card... >>


Do you think that I am going to get upset if NVIDIA comes out with a new card that is faster than mine? No. You shouldn't either. If you have a GeForce3 Ti500, it's going to play all of your current games just fine. Just b/c a newer model comes out doesn't mean that you are in the dog house now. Technology moves at a blistering pace and you should know that

Hell, I bought a Duron last year for $90. Three months later the same chip cost $50. Did I complain? No, b/c I had a fast chip that met my needs.

 

[flexy]

<< ATi hasn't had an answer to the GF4 series and that's a shame IMHO.
>>



Ok..to be honest...they did a little bit (more psychologically, tho)...they updated the retail 8500 and gave it 128MB ram.

I don't know what's up with RV250 - not that i am interested in that card (R300 looks more interesting)...but of course it would be nice seeing them to release the RV250.....but strangely, it's quiet in that area, i agree. What about the upcoming E3 ? Maybe we'll see something in a few weeks ?

I think it's not always intelligent to 'blame' companies that their product cycles are 'out of sync'....meaning...it's of course not the case that company X always *immediately* releases a rival product the next day after company Y released a new product Keep in mind that eg. the 4200 is not available either....

And...you say it already...a card does not get obsolete the same moment a somewhat faster card comes out - a card becomes obsolete if a majority of games is being released which *demand* specs which a current, older card just does not have. This is ridiculous if you look at 99% of all game releases and see how they're all downward compatible and coded rather to run properly with a GF2 instead of really using potential of existing h/w.

Personally i think people who already have gf3 and/or radeon 8500s are fine at the moment..especially with a lot of upcoming other hardware ahead which might look far more interesting than grabbing the "next best faster" card which is slightly superior in one certain aspect. (Eg. for me there is no real big point in getting a gf4 now over a r8500).

 

[Eug]

I've been apprehensive to buy nVidia cards because of the hit and miss 2D. (I spend most of my time in 2D not 3D.) The few recent nVidia cards I've seen have pretty mediocre 2D at high resolutions.

People always say brand A is good while brand B is mediocre but it's hard to spend $200+ on a card knowing that if you have to return it you might be hit with a 20% restocking charge. (If you go to a place with no restocking charge they price their stuff at 20% higher anyway quite often.) It's too bad that most stores don't have their multiple brands of nVidia cards on display with good monitors.

The reason so far I've stuck with ATI (or Matrox for computers at work) is because of the 2D. You're always guaranteed very good 2D. The problem with ATI though is limited screen resolutions with certain setups. My screen resolution of choice on a 19" monitor is actually 1400x1050, not 1600x1200, and definitely not the wonky 1280x1024.

 

[nortexoid]

i get, and that's not completely what i'm complaining about, but it is partly...

sometimes the performance increase between product cycles is insignificant to warrant the release of that new product...all it does it devalue the previous product that tons of peopel by now own (and owuld likely want to resale eventually, but will get crap for it in comparison to what they paid for it only 6 months ago), and give people the upgrade itch or image of something new and exciting...(and hence upgrade itch).

it's really a pain in the butt...

 

[flexy]

what's your problem with ATI and screen resolutions ?

I have a 19" and 1600x1200 is definetly a bit high, and 1240x1024 is NOT 4:3, but 5:4. What did i do ?

I got powerstrip from entech, and i still have to find ONE custom made resolution which does NOT work with my setup ! I can chose the 'oddest' custom resolution..and they all work fine !

My current favourite desktop/work resolution is 1368x1026 (4:3 aspect) btw.

 

[Eug]

<< what's your problem with ATI and screen resolutions ?

I have a 19" and 1600x1200 is definetly a bit high, and 1240x1024 is NOT 4:3, but 5:4. What did i do ?

I got powerstrip from entech, and i still have to find ONE custom made resolution which does NOT work with my setup ! I can chose the 'oddest' custom resolution..and they all work fine !

My current favourite desktop/work resolution is 1368x1026 (4:3 aspect) btw. >>


Powerstrip doesn't work under NT completely, and for some reason I cannot get it to work with my XP box either (with a RadeonLE). When I was running 2000 it didn't work either. However, I shouldn't have to hack my registry etc. just to get a simple screen resolution. Maybe I'll try again - it's been a few months since I've tried.

 

[AmdInside]

<< NV just cant afford to go on like this...releasing higher clocked (but merely the same cards, giving them a new name "GF3, GF3 TI 300, GF3 TI 500", same with their "famous" GF4MX now....
Their customers would just run away as soon as they realize what's really going on....and seeing OTHER manfucturers coming along with cheaper products with more features.... >>



Visiontek Continues to Dominate Retail Sales

I think NVIDIA chips are doing pretty well with their video chips if Visiontek is #1 in retail sales. Not only that, NVIDIA also is dominating in OEM. Try to find an OEM machine at your local best buy Fry's with an ATI card inside.

And I am getting tired of some people complaing about the 6 month product cycle. Your card is still as fast as it was when you bought it. There are also several people who want the fasest cards you can buy. They don't want to wait for a faster card simply because you just bought a high end card 3 months ago. I just bought an Geforce 4 ti 4400 last month and I really hope NVIDIA and ATI come out with their DX9 card this fall.

As for the naming convention NVIDIA used, I think this is some of 3dfx's influence showing itself. Remember how 3dfx named their cards? 3dfx Voodoo 4 4500, Vooodoo 5 5500, Voodoo 6 6000? NVIDIA Geforce 4 Ti 4200, NVIDIA Geforce 4 Ti 4400, NVIDIA GEforce 4 Ti 4600. The Geforce 4 MX vs. Geforce 4 Ti is stupid I think. The MX series is designed for mainstream. The Ti for high end computer enthusiests and gamers. Its not to complicated. Most PC users do not play games on their PC so why do they need a Geforce 4 Ti card? Or an ATI Radeon 8500. They would be just as happy saving some money and picking up a Geforce 4 MX or ATI Radeon 7500.

 

[AGodspeed]

Again...excluding gf4: Already forgot that the radeon was on #1 on 3dmarks list for a long time ? If ATI is/was good in anything than in benchmarks....i think you missed something....

Since when did 3DMark become a valuable measure of gaming performance? I think...never!

Oh...and Nvidia's product cycles are better ? Actually....what you said applies to Nvidia times x10...in fact ATI was it coming out with a inovative product FIRST which introduced many new features (dx81, pixelshader1.4)...the first time de-throning Nvidia...a REAL new product when it came out...whilest the Geforce line of cards was NOTHING, nothing new for a very long time. from the gf2 to the gf3 and all so called "TI xxxx series" in between..the same old story....continued even now with their "glorious" Gf4MX etc. ect. We dont talk about the 'real" Gf4 now...this is a card a generation AFTER the Radeon, and even the Gf4 is not really a "new" product and ATI even has SOME features not even the GF4 has.

Flexy, you're creating a double standard here. First you say that the Radeon 8500 brought some new "features" to the table (ps 1.4, etc.) that nVidia couldn't match with their best product at the time (GeF3 Ti500). This is a reasonable statement. However a couple sentences later you say that even though the GeForce4 Ti series brings new features to the table it doesn't "count" because ATi is still using the Radeon 8500. That's a double standard. The best ATi has to offer is the Radeon 8500, period. The best nVidia has to offer is the GeForce4 Ti4600, period. Compare those features and performance numbers of those two cards.

The GeF4 brought plenty of new features to the table whereas ATi is still riding the Radeon 8500 from last year. Not that it's a bad thing, but clearly the GeF4 line dwarfs anything ATi has in terms of gaming performance, and certainly it's features are competitive with ATi's features.

On another topic...

Who the hell complains about fast paced technology? If Intel released a 3GHz Northwood tomorrow would you really start getting pissed because of the extra money you paid for a slower product a few months ago? Good lord, it's called competition and innovation, the way most technology companies work.

 

[nortexoid]

oh my god...people just aint getting it.

the pace at which technology progresses is NOT the issue...

say we have a processor at 10ghz now, and it'll reach 14ghz in exactly ONE year irrespective of anything. Would it seem right to introduce 8 new processors in 50mhz increments from here until next year, while with each incremental release, the value of your processor plummets into the ground? Or would it seem more reasonable to release, say, two 200mhz increments, one half way through the year and the other at the end of the year, while preserving the value of your processor...

the latter is what the server market is about...the former is what nvidia's about...except they'd release 400 new processors each year in 1mhz increments.