ATI R600 with 720M transistors + 512-bit bus set to thrash G80~GF8800 ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Radeon350
  • Start date Start date
R

Radeon350

http://tinyurl.com/y3w4uz


"R600 is the 积电 80nm craft manufacture, the core area is 428mm2,
has 720 million transistors"

we already know R600 will have a 512-bit bus.



the top-end G80~GF 8800 has a 384-bit bus and 680~691M transistors

ATI's architectures have tended to out-perform Nvidia's given a level
playing field on shader-generation.

Nvidia was ahead for awhile with shader 3.0 GPUs while ATI only had
shader 2.0 GPUs
(GeForce 6 and 7 series vs ATI X800 and X850, a few years ago) but
once ATI caught up with shader generations with the X1800 and X1900,
ATI took back the performance crown. of course Nvidia is on top right
now because they've released the GeForce 8 series while ATI has yet to
release the next-gen Radeon, but when it does, looks like ATI (ahem
AMD) will be back on top.


yes, it is true that transistor count alone does not ensure top
performance. the 107M transistor ATI R300 trashed the 125M transistor
Nvidia NV30 in 2002-2003, but ATI has shown that it can beat Nvidia
with fewer transistors because their architectures are superior. now
with ATI likely to have more transistors, Nvidia could be in for an
even bigger thrashing. the 512-bit memory bus is actually the bigger
deal. however the MOST important thing is, the architecture of the
GPUs, the inner workings. Nvidia's 128 stream processors vs ATI's
64 (or more) unified shader ALUs.

will be interesting to watch.
 
http://tinyurl.com/y3w4uz


"R600 is the ?? 80nm craft manufacture, the core area is 428mm2,
has 720 million transistors"

we already know R600 will have a 512-bit bus.



the top-end G80~GF 8800 has a 384-bit bus and 680~691M transistors

ATI's architectures have tended to out-perform Nvidia's given a level
playing field on shader-generation.

Nvidia was ahead for awhile with shader 3.0 GPUs while ATI only had
shader 2.0 GPUs
(GeForce 6 and 7 series vs ATI X800 and X850, a few years ago) but
once ATI caught up with shader generations with the X1800 and X1900,
ATI took back the performance crown. of course Nvidia is on top right
now because they've released the GeForce 8 series while ATI has yet to
release the next-gen Radeon, but when it does, looks like ATI (ahem
AMD) will be back on top.


yes, it is true that transistor count alone does not ensure top
performance. the 107M transistor ATI R300 trashed the 125M transistor
Nvidia NV30 in 2002-2003, but ATI has shown that it can beat Nvidia
with fewer transistors because their architectures are superior. now
with ATI likely to have more transistors, Nvidia could be in for an
even bigger thrashing. the 512-bit memory bus is actually the bigger
deal. however the MOST important thing is, the architecture of the
GPUs, the inner workings. Nvidia's 128 stream processors vs ATI's
64 (or more) unified shader ALUs.

will be interesting to watch.


If only ATI could write a driver that wasn't crap.
 
That... used to be a valid reason for sticking with nVidia cards. No doubt
you have used the latest nVidia control panel app, along with nTune? How
about that "Direct Access" feature in 84.xx drivers that promptly damaged a
few models of monitors?
 
First said:
That... used to be a valid reason for sticking with nVidia cards. No doubt
you have used the latest nVidia control panel app, along with nTune? How
about that "Direct Access" feature in 84.xx drivers that promptly damaged a
few models of monitors?
Click to expand...
And there also seems to be the dark video replay bugs!
 
Will this ATI has "crap drivers" stigma never die?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm convinced people *want* to believe ATI still has terrible drivers. Keeps
things simple for them... only one graphics chipset company they ever have
to consider then.
 
If they could fix the situation with Triple Head 2 go support, I might give
ATI a look... sticking with nVidia for now.
 
My card history goes: GeForce2 GTX, ATI 9700 Pro, GeForce 6800 GT.

You may think that it is time for another ATI, but no, not only no, hell no!
ATI is still short-sighted when it comes to real 3D. nVidia has been
supplying FREE 3D stereo drivers for its CONSUMER cards, whereas ATI simply
refuses to do so. Unless ATI starts releasing 3D Stereo drivers for its
consumer cards as descent as nVidia's, my next card will be an nVidia once
again.

I know that Stereo-3D is not much of a concern for many users, but every
single person that I showed the 3D-Stereo projection system said "wow!" so
far :)
Moreover, market is continously developing for consumer stereoscopic
displays, let them be lenticular LCDs or HMDs. The R&D on a new stereoscopic
TV broadcasting standard is another indication that people are interested in
real 3D.

Performance alone is not a sole reason to get a card. Features are as much
important, if not more so at least in some cases.

GT
 
My card history goes: GeForce2 GTX, ATI 9700 Pro, GeForce 6800 GT.

You may think that it is time for another ATI, but no, not only no, hell no!
ATI is still short-sighted when it comes to real 3D. nVidia has been
supplying FREE 3D stereo drivers for its CONSUMER cards, whereas ATI simply
refuses to do so.
Click to expand...

Too busy still trying to straighten out their OpenGL support after
umpteen years.

John Lewis
 
Tony DiMarzio said:
Will this ATI has "crap drivers" stigma never die?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm convinced people *want* to believe ATI still has terrible drivers.
Keeps things simple for them... only one graphics chipset company they
ever have to consider then.
Click to expand...
I don't know. I had used Nvidia for years, but recently when my 6600 died, I
replaced it was a 1600 Pro. A major step backwards, both in performance, and
in reliability. Plus, that Catalyst Control Center seems to be a major
resource hog. I just bit the bullet this week and am replacing it with a
7800 GS, even though the 1600 is only a couple of months old.
 
But it is NOT crap. They're unreliable, huge and clumsy. I have a lot of
interesting hardware and NONE gives me as much trouble as the ATI drivers.

I have a whole drawer full of ATI video cards that I've just flat given up
on.

And don't get me started on my ATI TV Wonder 650 I bought the day they came
out.
 
Less demand for ATi cards -> lower prices for the rest of us... X1950XTs are
going for $250 at Newegg. You can build an uber-powerful Crossfire setup for
$500. Let things be. :-)
 
Your in the wrong newsgroup...The Noobvidia folder is.alt.comp......

If you dislike ATI, then don't read about their products....
 
If you dislike the ATI products, why do you keep buying their products....


Another Noobvidia noob... How about you go buy one of those SUPER POWERFUL
7100GS cards that Nvidia just released....
 
Go buy Noobvidias latest offering...the SUPER POWERFUL 7100GS..... What a
waste of space this card is...good on ya Nvidia....Talk about going
backwards....
 
Go buy Noobvidias latest offering...the SUPER POWERFUL 7100GS..... What a
waste of space this card is...good on ya Nvidia....Talk about going
backwards....
Click to expand...

Umm... You do realize that a 7100GS, I haven't seen one yet,
is not supposed to be a performance card. It's aimed at the lowend
market. Much like ATI's X1100, X1300, & everything in between. They
are all only good for email, and websurfing. I'm sorry you thought
your new 7100GS was gona allow you to play new games above 800x600,
but you should have at least went with a 7600GT, or 7900GS.
 
Larry Roberts said:
Umm... You do realize that a 7100GS, I haven't seen one yet,
is not supposed to be a performance card. It's aimed at the lowend
market. Much like ATI's X1100, X1300, & everything in between. They
are all only good for email, and websurfing. I'm sorry you thought
your new 7100GS was gona allow you to play new games above 800x600,
but you should have at least went with a 7600GT, or 7900GS.
Click to expand...


I didin't actually buy one(i wouldn't waste my $) especially after my last
card (256Mb 7300), i always seem to have hassles with the last 2 Nvidia
cards i've owned, although my old 9250 went strong and my new 1950Pro runs
perfectly...I'll stick with ATI for now.

I was just banging shit on these Nvidia noobs that always bag ATI for no
reason.... It's like Intel Vs AMD...Personal choice! Get over it people!
 
I still have a 9700 Pro in my system, and during the whole time i've had
this card i can only remember having two problems. One was a crash in COD at
a certain point, which was fixed in a later driver release, and flickering
stairs in a couple of areas in medal of honor. other than that, this thing
still runs like a gem, and so have the drivers. i have to express distaste
in control center, BUT there is the option of finding a version of the
drivers in old school style with control panel, like i do. maybe you should
too..

i've never had major problems with either brand of card, and i've been using
both for many years. if you have had major problems, then either you are
just one unlucky sob, or the fault lay within the operating system or some
other shit you have running in the background. get over the nvidia shits on
ati debate already.
 
I'm not going to get into a battle of anecdotal slings, so here I go anyway
:)

Suffice it to say, I've had:

3 x 3dfx cards
4 x NVidia cards
5 x ATI cards

In my experience, the quality of the drivers from ATI is currently, if
anything, at least on par with other vendors' drivers, and in all
likelyness, better. The notion that ATI drivers are "crap" just makes so
sense to me in the context of my experiences.

That said, I believe that the drivers/applications for the AIW versions of
ATI's cards leave much to be desired. Personally, I don't use/buy them. My
9800 pro, X1800XT, and X1900XTX have given me no driver headaches. They
work, work fast, and have great image quality. Also, I look forward to a
consistent monthly driver update from the Catalyst team.

The only time I've *ever* run into much driver difficulty and frustration
has been in Linux. But that has been with both ATI and NVidia.

Tony
 
Back
Top