View Full Version : new 256bit 1600xt
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28339
The chip is 256-bit internally, but the memory interface is 128-bit.
Jawed
Mariner
14-Dec-2005, 11:58
The chip is 256-bit internally, but the memory interface is 128-bit.
Jawed
Surely you're not insinuating that The Inq is showing their ignorance (again)! :wink:
Sounds like the average L'Inq story alright.
The 'old' X1600XT also had a 256-bit internal ring bus for memory reads. Nothing new here. It's still using a 128-bit 4 channel DDR/DDR2/GDDR3 memory interface.
Wouldn't changing the X1600XT to a full 256-bit 8 channel memory interface require a completely new core?
Surely you're not insinuating that The Inq is showing their ignorance (again)! :wink:
Have you seen the buffoonery about NVidia's 3:2 ALU:TEX ratio :grin: :
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28341
16 TMUs :grin: :grin:
Jawed
all I can say is awww pooo :(
Mariner
14-Dec-2005, 12:57
all I can say is awww pooo :(
From various bits of speculation in other threads, I gather we're expecting a new mainstream chip with a 256-bit memory interface some time after the release of R580. Possibly RV560 with a pipeline layout of 8-1-3-2 (possibly). That's unless the release of GDDR4 means it's better to have 128-bit with superfast memory speeds.
Yes, everything I wrote in the paragraph above is entirely speculation. :smile:
Mariner
14-Dec-2005, 13:00
Have you seen the buffoonery about NVidia's 3:2 ALU:TEX ratio :grin: :
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28341
16 TMUs :grin:
Jawed
:roll: :grin:
Pressure
14-Dec-2005, 13:36
They need to read a single review about the X1x00 architecture. What a joke.
So folks, if you have bought the 128-bit Radeon X1600 product, you're free to yank like a donkey. Altough, this scenario is exactly what we have written several times ever since the introduction of X1600.
SynapticSignal
14-Dec-2005, 15:30
They need to read a single review about the X1x00 architecture. What a joke.
the inq is more uneducated time by time... :roll:
{Sniping}Waste
14-Dec-2005, 15:43
Correct me if im wronge but is the Ring bus mem controler 2 buses? The R520 is a ring bus of 512bit but uses 2 256 mem buses so the the RV530 256bit is 2 128bit mem buses.
Yeah, contra-rotating rings, each half width.
Jawed
It's like a little two-lane roundabout, and everyone's invited!
Wait, no, that last part's to the party in my mouth. /Simpsons
FrameBuffer
14-Dec-2005, 21:52
Does B3D plan on or have intention to look at the X1600 XT or even the 1300 XT particularly in crossfire mode ? The 1600 XT really seems to suffer in performance due to its lack of traditional rendering pipelines, however I'm sure as applications and games become more shader dependent the 1600 XT will scale better as opposed to its current market competitors. Currently the 1600 XT performance is decent however given its position in the market due to pricing is rather unappealing particularly when ATI's previous generation products namely the x800 (GT's, GTO's, GTO2 and Pros etc.) have flooded the market and driven prices downward to where the 1600 XT remains uncompetitive pricewise.
I'm sure is the X800 supply dries up and the RV 530 production becomes more mature the 1600 XT will find his place. The one area where ATI really seems to lost focus on is the AGP area, even though ATI is left this area open to third parties through the use of the Rialto chip. AGP still has a large installed base even with ATI's desire to move to PCI express. ATI originally mentioned that the R520 would be available in AGP however recently it seems as though ATI has changed their mind and excluded the 1800 series for use in AGP. However all this remains an entire different issue.
The RV 530 architecture is seemingly where ATI plans to go with future with multiple shader units per rendering pipeline ., the supposed upcoming R580 architecture being based on the RV 530 would seemingly have the same drawbacks as the RV 530. If such a beast were to come as a 16 pipeline GPU it would seem ATI would remain second for the performance crown until games and applications come out that can make use of the extra shading power. For the meantime most all this is conjecture and at most all us the Joe common man can do is to offer our best estimation based on current offerings. I think this is where a 1600 XT crossfire set up could offer some foresight. Such a setup may not be financially practical given the cost of two $200 video cards in addition to $150-$200 motherboard. The 1300 series offers much in features but very little in performance, i.e. it can talk the talk but it can't walk the walk. The only foreseeable areas where the 1300 and 1600 series may be able to find a niche would be in home theater configurations i.e. HTPC or perhaps in ventures third-party willing to gamble on a multi-GPU set up much like the ones by ASUS and Gigabyte.
trinibwoy
14-Dec-2005, 22:01
They need to read a single review about the X1x00 architecture. What a joke.
It's beyond me how they can be so completely uninformed about something that they are reporting on for the world to see.
trinibwoy
14-Dec-2005, 22:08
The RV 530 architecture is seemingly where ATI plans to go with future with multiple shader units per rendering pipeline ., the supposed upcoming R580 architecture being based on the RV 530 would seemingly have the same drawbacks as the RV 530. If such a beast were to come as a 16 pipeline GPU it would seem ATI would remain second for the performance crown until games and applications come out that can make use of the extra shading power.
Not necessarily. Even if ATi has misjudged the dependence on shader throughput for the near future, they can still win the AA performance race and take the crown there.
http://nullnetwork.com/screenshots/X1600XT/X1600XT.jpg
...apart from the above, it is just plain 128-bit
The 1600 XT really seems to suffer in performance due to its lack of traditional rendering pipelines, however I'm sure as applications and games become more shader dependent the 1600 XT will scale better as opposed to its current market competitors. Currently the 1600 XT performance is decent however given its position in the market due to pricing is rather unappealing particularly when ATI's previous generation products namely the x800 (GT's, GTO's, GTO2 and Pros etc.) have flooded the market and driven prices downward to where the 1600 XT remains uncompetitive pricewise.
It's priced and architected to replace X700Pro, which it does without difficulty. It's usually the same performance as an X800GTO according to XBit, except in AOE3 and Q4 where it's notably slower.
ATI was clearly mad to price it at $250 on launch.
Jawed
ATI was clearly mad to price it at $250 on launch.
Jawed
And yet $250 is a nice price point. So what's that product?
That's one of the things I'd like to ask both Orton and Jen-Hsun. For the moment it appears they are shuffling the clearance sale thru there, but that doesn't feel like a long-term strategy. Yet if prices at the top have made a permenant move up, there are now at least two and maybe as many as four more price points to hit.
AlphaWolf
14-Dec-2005, 22:56
And yet $250 is a nice price point. So what's that product?
That's one of the things I'd like to ask both Orton and Jen-Hsun. For the moment it appears they are shuffling the clearance sale thru there, but that doesn't feel like a long-term strategy. Yet if prices at the top have made a permenant move up, there are now at least two and maybe as many as four more price points to hit.
Obviously they are clearing out x800 parts atm, once that is done, they are either faced with lowering the price of x1800xl, introducing another x1800 sku (pro), or waiting for the introduction of the x1700.
If the x800 parts are moving ok, I doubt they have a problem waiting, if the 6800GS is killing them I expect we will see another product to fill that gap before too long or more aggressively priced XLs.
And yet $250 is a nice price point. So what's that product?
That's one of the things I'd like to ask both Orton and Jen-Hsun. For the moment it appears they are shuffling the clearance sale thru there, but that doesn't feel like a long-term strategy. Yet if prices at the top have made a permenant move up, there are now at least two and maybe as many as four more price points to hit.
It's ATI playing silly buggers all over again. Look how long it took for X800XL to appear, the rightful $300 part. Huge glaring hole in the product range when X800 launched. Then X700 - gawd.
NVidia doesn't need to shift - it still has a product (6800GS) that's perceived to be the same as the 7 series (TrAA is the only feature missing, in theory) so why bother to rush something new in there?
Sure, NVidia didn't have 6600 for quite a few months after the release of the 6 series, and that hurt NVidia a lot as 9800Pros (or lower) sold in their gazillions a year ago+
Ah well, the R520 balls-up and ramifications gives us something to talk about, still.
Jawed
It'll be interesting to see what happens - street-price guesses for Jan-Feb once R580 releases:
$? - RV505?
$75 X1300Pro
$150 X1600XT (RV540 X1650XT at some point?)
$250 X1700XT (8-1-3-2?)
$300 X1800XL
$400 X1800XT
$500 X1900XL
$650 X1900XTJawed
Does B3D plan on or have intention to look at the X1600 XT or even the 1300 XT particularly in crossfire mode ? The 1600 XT really seems to suffer in performance due to its lack of traditional rendering pipelines, however I'm sure as applications and games become more shader dependent the 1600 XT will scale better as opposed to its current market competitors. Currently the 1600 XT performance is decent however given its position in the market due to pricing is rather unappealing particularly when ATI's previous generation products namely the x800 (GT's, GTO's, GTO2 and Pros etc.) have flooded the market and driven prices downward to where the 1600 XT remains uncompetitive pricewise.
You surely remember hearing something like the following.
It will scale better, the 1600 will get 10fps at minimum settings and the 6800gs will get 5fps that is how it works. Mid/Low end cards don't scale they just fade away ;)
It'll be interesting to see what happens - street-price guesses for Jan-Feb once R580 releases:
$? - RV505?
$75 X1300Pro
$150 X1600XT (RV540 X1650XT at some point?)
$250 X1700XT (8-1-3-2?)
$300 X1800XL
$400 X1800XT
$500 X1900XL
$650 X1900XTJawed
I doubt there will be an X1900 XL and I also doubt the X1800 XT will drop in price.
AlphaWolf
14-Dec-2005, 23:52
I doubt there will be an X1900 XL and I also doubt the X1800 XT will drop in price.
He said street prices. The x1800xt is already available for under $500, no reason to think that won't continue to some degree.
I doubt there will be an X1900 XL and I also doubt the X1800 XT will drop in price.
I think 80nm R590 could be used as cheaper replacement for X1800XT(-PE). In the same way as 110nm X800XL replaced X800PRO.
I think 80nm R590 could be used as cheaper replacement for X1800XT(-PE). In the same way as 110nm X800XL replaced X800PRO.
That is very possible, but I was specifically referring to the initial launch. I don't think ATI is going to abandon the R520 considering its short life span.
It'll be interesting to see what happens - street-price guesses for Jan-Feb once R580 releases:What makes you think we'll see the RV505 and RV540 shrinks appearing as new models, rather than silently phased in like RV351 or NV42?
Mid/Low end cards don't scale they just fade away ;)I'm still quite content on a 9600XT, and I do play games. I can't see myself in the same situation if I'd bought a 5700U.
What makes you think we'll see the RV505 and RV540 shrinks appearing as new models, rather than silently phased in like RV351 or NV42?
Nothing.
RV515/505 is peculiar because of the lower (not higher) number - why didn't we get RV505 first?
RV540 looks like it would, indeed, be a drop-in hidden replacement for RV530. It's a question of whether there's any marketing advantage in renaming it. "New, improved." Faster and cheaper? (And that's it.)
Jawed
Okay, was just curious. :)
Surely you're not insinuating that The Inq is showing their ignorance (again)! :wink:
ATI probably helped them getting confused about the bus size
http://users.skynet.be/bk377321/x1600vs6600.jpg
Mariner
17-Dec-2005, 12:16
ATI probably helped them getting confused about the bus size
Isn't PR a wonderful thing? :roll:
I wonder what it's like having a job where you deliberately attempt to mislead your customers?
I suppose the lesson to be learned is that a memory controller is not an off-GPU memory interface.
Jawed
FrameBuffer
17-Dec-2005, 13:29
Isn't PR a wonderful thing? :roll:
I wonder what it's like having a job where you deliberately attempt to mislead your customers?
could be worse I guess,.. they could pay others to lie for them .. err I mean "monitor forums and respond" ;p
Comparing X1K to NV4x ? Nice! ...not
AlphaWolf
17-Dec-2005, 15:55
Comparing X1K to NV4x ? Nice! ...not
What product should they compare it with?
What product should they compare it with?
And think of the pricepoint.. With X1600XT's available at 174 Euros.. (http://www.obcs.nl//redir.cgi?page=index2.html&what=ice.cgi&by=ice.cgi?a_ssrp=1&d_word=Sapphire%2011072-00)
Is the 6600GT really a competitor?
And think of the pricepoint.. With X1600XT's available at 174 Euros.. (http://www.obcs.nl//redir.cgi?page=index2.html&what=ice.cgi&by=ice.cgi?a_ssrp=1&d_word=Sapphire%2011072-00)
Is the 6600GT really a competitor?
Do you mean 128MB GT or 256MB GT?
AlphaWolf
19-Dec-2005, 18:18
And think of the pricepoint.. With X1600XT's available at 174 Euros.. (http://www.obcs.nl//redir.cgi?page=index2.html&what=ice.cgi&by=ice.cgi?a_ssrp=1&d_word=Sapphire%2011072-00)
Is the 6600GT really a competitor?
Ok is this (http://prf.icecat.biz/index.cgi?product_id=326860;mi=start;smi=product;s hopname=obcs;) a competitor? Or perhaps this (http://www.obcs.nl//ice.cgi?template=pro_templ1.html&levprodid=N350102) one?
I don't know I can't read any of the info at that site so I am not sure if the featureset is similar, but a lot of people seem to want to compare the 128mb 6600GT to the 256mb x1600xt.
The 6800GS is the competitor, but it's still a good $50 more expensive..
I think people were displeased at the launch of the 1600XT, at some points it was even beaten by a 6600GT but in retrospect, that was all driver maturity. If i want a competitor for a 6600, I'd buy a 9800 for 100 dollars.
bloodbob
20-Dec-2005, 11:22
Can I ask what ATI previous generation of SM3.0 parts was? seeing as their up to their 2nd generation already. ( And still don't have any vertex texture filtering man can you imagine what the 1st gen hardware was like ).
Can I ask what ATI previous generation of SM3.0 parts was? seeing as their up to their 2nd generation already. ( And still don't have any vertex texture filtering man can you imagine what the 1st gen hardware was like ).
There wasn't. This is part of the claim "SM3.0 done right" regarding the branching etc.
AlphaWolf
20-Dec-2005, 19:27
The 6800GS is the competitor, but it's still a good $50 more expensive..
:roll: No the 6800gs is competing with the x1800xl, but it's still a good $100 more expensive...
Whether you like it or not the 256mb x1600xt is competitively priced with 256mb 6600gt parts. That's the range it was designed to compete with, I doubt the 6800GS will be closing that $50 gap anytime soon.
The X1800 XL competes with the 7800 GT. The 6800 GS is nowhere near its level.
trinibwoy
20-Dec-2005, 23:28
The X1800 XL competes with the 7800 GT. The 6800 GS is nowhere near its level.
I think he meant the X800XL.
AlphaWolf
21-Dec-2005, 00:28
No I meant what I said, its as valid a comment as neliz's comment, which is not really at all. When your starting point is $160, $50 more is a lot. When you start at $250, $100 more is a lot.
Sarcasm is a subtle art.
And I'm surprised how the X1600XT went from being beaten by the 6600GT and 6800 in initial reviews to beating the 6800 in Xbit's latest megareview. The price drop is equally pleasant, both for ATI and for people shopping in that bracket.
Sarcasm is a subtle art. it gives me headaches
And I'm surprised how the X1600XT went from being beaten by the 6600GT and 6800 in initial reviews to beating the 6800 in Xbit's latest megareview. The price drop is equally pleasant, both for ATI and for people shopping in that bracket.
Well, in general two x1600xt's are now cheaper than a 1800xl and offer more performance. Now I don't know if it would be wiser to invest in a single 7800GT for that money but methinks nV has to do something about their pricing scheme, they're simply getting clobbered by ati this christmas.
Nobody is going (or can) buy the gtx512 and all enthousiasts now know about the 700mhz bios.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.