[Geo]

I'm not a big Gibbo guy. Can someone confirm my memory that the R520 launch showed him to be full of. . .err. . .hot air?

[Gelanin]

Well, if what Giddo says is more or less correct, and what he has is a XT, then i'd say its looking fairly good for AMD/ATI.

[Geo]

Ah yes, a little looking around finds Gibbo reporting in July of 2005 that he had just had a meeting with ATI and they told him that R520 was 24 pipelines and a 520mhz core. That's what I was remembering. . .

[Razor1]

hehe I remember that also, there was another thing about the 7900 he mentioned can't remember exactly what but it sounded more like a sales spin.

[trinibwoy]

Originally Posted by Geo

Ah yes, a little looking around finds Gibbo reporting in July of 2005 that he had just had a meeting with ATI and they told him that R520 was 24 pipelines and a 520mhz core. That's what I was remembering. . .

Geo 1 : Gibbo 0

[IbaneZ]

I dunno you guys. The performance is very similar to GTX in benchmark and games but I think thats the most I can really say

Agreed, the GTX is fantastic and I doubt people will get the ATI card already have a GTX unless they really dislike the driver/vista issues. However for people who have waited then the R600 will no doubt prove to be a very good alternative to NV's offering.

I guess NV better better hurry up with new vista drivers, or we'll see a lot of 8800's on ebay.
Gibbo seems to like the new ATI drivers/CCC.

I'll probably get the R600 Pro/XL or whatever the little brother will be called.

[Unknown Soldier]

The thing is that the GDDR4 card is expected to be a little bit later than the initial X2800XT 512MB, at least that's what I remember. So if the XT goes for around 12500(as stated by sites lately) and is cheap($500) then I'd say AMD have a winner.

US

[vertex_shader]

I dunno you guys. The performance is very similar to GTX in benchmark and games but I think thats the most I can really say

The real twist is he is using factory OC'ed 8800gtx in the tests against the r600xt

[Cuthalu]

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier

The thing is that the GDDR4 card is expected to be a little bit later than the initial X2800XT 512MB, at least that's what I remember. So if the XT goes for around 12500(as stated by sites lately) and is cheap($500) then I'd say AMD have a winner.

US

But this is GDDR4 card, and XT costing 500 is not cheap, however not expensive either. But how expensive is XTX going to be? :E

EDIT: Gibbo has again something to say:

Its now ran 3D Mark 2005 and 2006, I am pleased with the results.

[nicolasb]

Originally Posted by Geo

Ah yes, a little looking around finds Gibbo reporting in July of 2005 that he had just had a meeting with ATI and they told him that R520 was 24 pipelines and a 520mhz core. That's what I was remembering. . .

Maybe ATI did actually tell him that? It could have been ATI lying to Gibbo rather than Gibbo lying to us about the conversation....

[Razor1]

3dmark 06 question on a scale to 1-10; 5 being around the 8800 gtx question Gibbo says 5-6.

[Arnold Beckenbauer]

Originally Posted by Xmas

It works because HDMI is backwards compatible to DVI, and the graphics card can query device capabillities. So the link will start in "DVI compatibility mode", and when a HDMI capable device is detected the graphics card will add audio output (which is interleaved in the digital stream, so no additional pins are required).

Using a DVI-I connector on the card is the best choice because it can drive DVI single and dual link, HDMI single and dual link, and analog VGA.

Thanks. But dual link HDMI is not possible, it's always single link.

[Kaotik]

Originally Posted by Arnold Beckenbauer

Thanks. But dual link HDMI is not possible, it's always single link.

Actually there is "Type B HDMI" which is dual-link, but it's not generally used at all, yet, it's for the future with again higher resolution displays etc.

[Unknown Soldier]

Originally Posted by Cuthalu

But this is GDDR4 card, and XT costing 500 is not cheap, however not expensive either. But how expensive is XTX going to be? :E

EDIT: Gibbo has again something to say:

No it's not, it's the XT card which is only 512MB DDR3.

I expect the R600 to cost $600.

US

[Arnold Beckenbauer]

Originally Posted by Kaotik

Actually there is "Type B HDMI" which is dual-link, but it's not generally used at all, yet, it's for the future with again higher resolution displays etc.

Never heard about Type B. Thanks.

[Sound_Card]

Considering the possibilty of K10 and R600 co-launch, I would have to point this out...

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38888

[Unknown Soldier]

Ye. saw that 10 minutes ago but still have to wonder if it will be that good.

US

[Razor1]

I wouldn't be suprised clock for clock in certain circumstances (most general usable) barcelona will be faster.

[Evildeus]

Well according to HFR:
- the X2900 XT 512 MB is priced 399$
- the X2900 XTX is still not a sure product
- the R600 is a little late mid may vs early may
- the RV630 and RV610 are late: available in june

So the simultaneous launch/availability seems quite compromise.

http://www.hardware.fr/news/lire/12-04-2007/

[Kaotik]

There actually was some (SPEC) benchmarks of Barcelona a while back, and in those it was indeed faster than Core2's on most cases at least.
Of course, how that translates to realworld performance is yet to be seen

[Galduta]

Fudo . The r600 demo is ...Call of Juarez

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...d=455&Itemid=1

[trinibwoy]

Originally Posted by Evildeus

Well according to HFR:
- the X2900 XT 512 MB is priced 399$

Hmmm I hope this isn't just the same rumour making the rounds. But if it is coming from multiple independent sources then it's probably true. I just don't understand how they are going to scale performance down from $400. There isn't a lot of room there.

[3dilettante]

Originally Posted by Kaotik

There actually was some (SPEC) benchmarks of Barcelona a while back, and in those it was indeed faster than Core2's on most cases at least.
Of course, how that translates to realworld performance is yet to be seen

AMD's been very non-specific about what numbers and what tests they actually ran.

The only (kind of) hard numbers are SPEC rates, which are more measures of scalability. With a platform designed for quad-core, this is not much of a surprise.

What it means for gamers who have apps that don't really do two threads all that well is a good question.

[jimmyjames123]

I could see an X2900 with 512MB RAM having a list price of around $400. After all, an 8800 GTS with 640MB RAM had a list price of $449, and is now selling for probably $100 lower than that. Especially at that price, it would be a really great value.

One advantage that ATI has in going with the 512bit bus is that they can save money on RAM while still having massive bandwith. It won't be easy for NV to counter until they move up to a 512bit bus, unless they have some other trick up their sleeve.

[Evildeus]

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Hmmm I hope this isn't just the same rumour making the rounds. But if it is coming for multiple independent sources then it's probably true. I just don't understand how they are going to scale performance down from $400. There isn't a lot of room there.

Independant and reliable source as stated in the news. Well, i don't know, perhaps being late means being quite agressive in terms of price....