[trinibwoy]

Originally Posted by karlotta

Why do say that? you have one?

Nearly every review has commented negatively about the noise in comparison to Nvidia's solutions. But it depends on your setup, if it's already noisy you probably won't notice.

[SugarCoat]

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Nearly every review has commented negatively about the noise in comparison to Nvidia's solutions. But it depends on your setup, if it's already noisy you probably won't notice.

7800GT is balls for fan sound, im sorry to tell you. The GTXs may be a different story, but "solutions" is way too broad a word. And i have been using an X1800XT for about 2 weeks now, not a single complaint from me for sound in or out of 3D. It melds in with the CPU HSF and PSU fan already running on my computer, so i cant hear it.

[wireframe]

Originally Posted by SugarCoat

And i have been using an X1800XT for about 2 weeks now, not a single complaint from me for sound in or out of 3D. It melds in with the CPU HSF and PSU fan already running on my computer, so i cant hear it.

Would you consider the rest of your computer noisy? What fans are we talking about here? I am very curious as to how loud this thing actually is. I try to keep my main workstation as silent as possible, but that is becoming increasingly harder to do. The problem is, you switch out some fans to better, more silent ones, then you hear the others and you repeat the cycle. Next thing you know you buy a new piece of hardware and there goes the whole project. heh.

PS. Seeing as this is a thread about R5xx hardware (), I hope ATI addresses this with the R580. If anything, it will be need more cooling so if they can at least keep it to R520 levels concerning noise it will be much appreciated. I love that ejection system so much, but I have this thing about whining fans. I'd rather listen to a big woosh than a little, piecing "weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"

[karlotta]

well you will hear the fan in 3d, its just not a whiney sound. Its a nice pitch. The box it is in has a Zalman9500(sweet hsf) set to lowest (1400rpm) And four very quiet coolmaster 80mm(900prm) at there lowest. The loud Raptor seeks are louder than the fans. My NEC dvdr is realy the loudset device i have in 2d when it spins... would not recomend it. The nec can almost drown out the 3dfan(2000rpm) of the 1800xt.
But the 1800xt fan is the loudest fan in 3d but its a swooosh, and with headphones..bla bla. It is not a shop vac, i know i have 3 shopvacsthey are loud. I will need to go H2O if i want slilent and bleeding edge. Ok after running the fan manualy, @ 40% or above the damm fan is noisy. At 100% it is a lil shopvac. Tho when i use the auto setting it never seems to go over 27% which is a ok fan sound.

[ANova]

Originally Posted by hkultala

GF6600GT's performance is not no very far from RV530.

if G71 is "Only G70 with two extra quads and higher clocks" it will be like 4 times GF6600GT PLUS
50% higher clock speed
much more capable ALU's in shaders ( GF6800 vs GF7800 difference )

so it should be something like 6-8 times as fast as GF6600GT.

and R580 will be just like 4 times RV530
MINUS
extra z-/stencil units ( just 1 / pipeline )

so the performance will not be more than 4 x RV530, unless clock speed is raised a lot.

these calculation would put 750 MHz 32-pipeline G71 easily ahead of R580 on current software.
(shaders where dynamic branching is used will be faster with R580 though)

G71 - 600-650 MHz, 32 ALUs, 16 ROPs, ?? TMUs, ?? Zs, 900 MHz GDDR3
R580 - 650-700 MHz, 48 ALUs, 16 ROPs, 16 TMUs, 16 Zs, 900 MHz GDDR3

Considering the R520 has two quads less of ALUs and yet keeps up with or beats the GTX (as well as the Ultra at 700 MHz), I fail to see how the G71 with less ALUs and lower clocks will kill anything. At most I see them being close, with the R580 edging out, but that's best case scenario for the G71.

[MulciberXP]

i thought the g71 was suppose to have 64 ALUs

[ANova]

Originally Posted by MulciberXP

i thought the g71 was suppose to have 64 ALUs

Yes the G70 has two full ALUs capable of ADD/MULL/MADD but the R520 also has one full ALU and one mini ALU capable of just ADD.

[Jawed]

Don't forget the dedicated texture address calculation ALUs in all R3xx...R4xx...R5xx GPUs.

Jawed

[kemosabe]

Originally Posted by ANova

G71 - 600-650 MHz, 32 ALUs, 16 ROPs, ?? TMUs, ?? Zs, 900 MHz GDDR3
R580 - 650-700 MHz, 48 ALUs, 16 ROPs, 16 TMUs, 16 Zs, 900 MHz GDDR3

Considering the R520 has two quads less of ALUs and yet keeps up with or beats the GTX (as well as the Ultra at 700 MHz), I fail to see how the G71 with less ALUs and lower clocks will kill anything. At most I see them being close, with the R580 edging out, but that's best case scenario for the G71.

Well that's the angle I was seeing things from myself. We already have a situation where ATI is competing with less shader units and holding its own very well. R580 is theoretically going to gain more shader power relative to R520 than G71 relative to G70. I suppose if G71 squeezes as much clock speed from 0.09u as G70 squeezed from a more mature 0.11u, ATI will have its work cut out for it. I still don't quite understand why the red team's engineers got plenty of juice out of 0.15u and 0.13u and yet couldn't hold a candle to the green guys when it came to 0.11u.

[Chalnoth]

Originally Posted by kemosabe

We already have a situation where ATI is competing with less shader units and holding its own very well.

Er, at much higher clockspeeds. So the shader rates are roughly equivalent between the stock 256MB GTX and the X1800 XT.

With 32 pipelines and higher clockspeeds, the competition between the G71 and R580 may still be quite close.

[Chalnoth]

Originally Posted by SugarCoat

7800GT is balls for fan sound, im sorry to tell you. The GTXs may be a different story, but "solutions" is way too broad a word. And i have been using an X1800XT for about 2 weeks now, not a single complaint from me for sound in or out of 3D. It melds in with the CPU HSF and PSU fan already running on my computer, so i cant hear it.

Sure, but at least closing the case nearly eliminates the sound. I know it does in my case, at least (and I have two GT's). With a dual-slot cooler this is not an option, and every review I've read notes that the 7800 GTX 512MB is quieter. And it's a better cooler.

[Skrying]

Originally Posted by kemosabe

Well that's the angle I was seeing things from myself. We already have a situation where ATI is competing with less shader units and holding its own very well. R580 is theoretically going to gain more shader power relative to R520 than G71 relative to G70. I suppose if G71 squeezes as much clock speed from 0.09u as G70 squeezed from a more mature 0.11u, ATI will have its work cut out for it. I still don't quite understand why the red team's engineers got plenty of juice out of 0.15u and 0.13u and yet couldn't hold a candle to the green guys when it came to 0.11u.

ATi didnt put nearly the amount of effort into 0.11u so I dont know how you could really compare it to Nv in that respect. I think ATi did jump the gun a little with 90nm, but oh well. I think the second time around we'll see them get a lot out of it.

[DegustatoR]

Originally Posted by Skrying

ATi didnt put nearly the amount of effort into 0.11u so I dont know how you could really compare it to Nv in that respect. I think ATi did jump the gun a little with 90nm, but oh well. I think the second time around we'll see them get a lot out of it.

That doesn't mean that NV won't get a lot out of it right for the first time

I still think that there won't be any "killings" until DX10 hardware -- DX9 is too thouroughly known at the moment for any vendor to make some stupid architectural mistake (like NV3x). So there won't be much difference in quality and speed between G7-whatever and R5-whatever-0.

I'm waiting for any G80 information. That's where all the bells and whistles are.

[trinibwoy]

Originally Posted by SugarCoat

7800GT is balls for fan sound, im sorry to tell you. The GTXs may be a different story, but "solutions" is way too broad a word. And i have been using an X1800XT for about 2 weeks now, not a single complaint from me for sound in or out of 3D. It melds in with the CPU HSF and PSU fan already running on my computer, so i cant hear it.

While you're bringing the single-slot cooled 7800GT into it, why not bring up the even louder X1600XT? I was just reporting what reviewers have said, YMMV.

[trinibwoy]

Originally Posted by ANova

Considering the R520 has two quads less of ALUs and yet keeps up with or beats the GTX (as well as the Ultra at 700 MHz), I fail to see how the G71 with less ALUs and lower clocks will kill anything. At most I see them being close, with the R580 edging out, but that's best case scenario for the G71.

Is there any game where the XT pulls away from the GTX256 without AA? I did a quick check of the bigger sites but couldnt find any. It seems people are letting AA numbers color their impression of the XT's shading prowess vs the GTX.

Originally Posted by Chalnoth

Er, at much higher clockspeeds. So the shader rates are roughly equivalent between the stock 256MB GTX and the X1800 XT.

With 32 pipelines and higher clockspeeds, the competition between the G71 and R580 may still be quite close.

How, so? I think the odds are in ATi's favor there if you're talking 32x650 vs 48x650. Right now, without AA the 256GTX and the XT are neck-and-neck in line with their theoretical parity. All irrelevant anyway as it's going to come down to AA and bandwidth because that's where most of the bottleneck is.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

It seems people are letting AA numbers color their impression of the XT's shading prowess vs the GTX.

DriverHeaven's article should settle that, then. Clock for clock, NV's fragment shaders were more capable, IIRC--at least, in the tests DH used. On that note, it may be that the games tested are coloring our impressions of either card's shader prowess.

I think the odds are in ATi's favor there if you're talking 32x650 vs 48x650.

Well, that doesn't take into account the different capabilities of each shader unit, as well as ATI's separated texture units (which, though they be only 16, may prove sufficient if newer titles are as shader-heavy as everyone says). Actually, 48:16 is exactly the 3:1 ratio both NV and ATI have publicly anticipated.

Edit: Duh-urr, I just repeated the pts that two other ppl made on this very page. I go now.

[Chalnoth]

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

How, so? I think the odds are in ATi's favor there if you're talking 32x650 vs 48x650. Right now, without AA the 256GTX and the XT are neck-and-neck in line with their theoretical parity.

Ah, but the R580 only increases one aspect of its architecture's performance, so you just won't see all of those new math units used all the time.

[ToxicTaZ]

I gess Nvidia will show off all there new 90nm GPUs here?

http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_26082.html

Catch NVIDIA at the Consumer Electronics Show 2006!

CES 2006: January 5-8 in Las Vegas, Nevada

Stop by the NVIDIA booth (#36200) located on the upper level of the Las Vegas Convention Center, South Hall. This year NVIDIA will showcase the latest technologies which enable users to experience an unparalleled High Definition experience – in PC games, video, and DVD playback.


More info on the G71

G71/RSX, G72, G73

and there new driver too!

Forceware 90xx

[Razor1]

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Is there any game where the XT pulls away from the GTX256 without AA? I did a quick check of the bigger sites but couldnt find any. It seems people are letting AA numbers color their impression of the XT's shading prowess vs the GTX.



How, so? I think the odds are in ATi's favor there if you're talking 32x650 vs 48x650. Right now, without AA the 256GTX and the XT are neck-and-neck in line with their theoretical parity. All irrelevant anyway as it's going to come down to AA and bandwidth because that's where most of the bottleneck is.

Well isn't it more like 32x2x650 vs 16x3x650? But there is a possibility the g71 only has 24 pipes so 24x2x650, which will be the same as ATi's 16x3x650, so I'm guessing its going to go in favor of ATi, but not by much, if nV stays at 24 pipes and goes infavor to nV if they move up to 32 pipes.

[Dave Baumann]

The "3" would refer to parallel pixel pipelines, each of which are still both "2" (although the second is only ADD/Modifer capable).

[Dave Baumann]

Originally Posted by Chalnoth

Ah, but the R580 only increases one aspect of its architecture's performance, so you just won't see all of those new math units used all the time.

Although, anytime the current architecture is bottlenecked by the shaders means that other elements will be underutilised, so those dynamics will likely change as well.

[Shadowmage]

Originally Posted by ToxicTaZ

I gess Nvidia will show off all there new 90nm GPUs here?

http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_26082.html

Catch NVIDIA at the Consumer Electronics Show 2006!

CES 2006: January 5-8 in Las Vegas, Nevada

Stop by the NVIDIA booth (#36200) located on the upper level of the Las Vegas Convention Center, South Hall. This year NVIDIA will showcase the latest technologies which enable users to experience an unparalleled High Definition experience – in PC games, video, and DVD playback.


More info on the G71

G71/RSX, G72, G73

and there new driver too!

Forceware 90xx

I'll be sure to find out when I'm there, thanks for the heads up

----

I heard rumors of G71 being 700mhz+ core speeds. Any truth in those, or complete bull?

[_xxx_]

Originally Posted by Shadowmage

I'll be sure to find out when I'm there and post it here imediately, thanks for the heads up

Corrected

[Bad_Boy]

Originally Posted by ToxicTaZ

More info on the G71

G71/RSX, G72, G73

So the RSX is based off the G71 and not the G70? nice

[trinibwoy]

Originally Posted by Razor1

Well isn't it more like 32x2x650 vs 16x3x650? But there is a possibility the g71 only has 24 pipes so 24x2x650, which will be the same as ATi's 16x3x650, so I'm guessing its going to go in favor of ATi, but not by much, if nV stays at 24 pipes and goes infavor to nV if they move up to 32 pipes.

Well like Dave said it's more like 32x2x650 vs 16x3x1.5x650. I don't think you can equate two ALU's per shader with two individual shaders with 1.5 ALU's each. I think you'll get better utilization out of the latter, especially with one ALU being borrowed for texture lookup duties on G7x.