[_xxx_]

Originally Posted by SugarCoat

its all going to come down to superior features in my opinion when determining the best card.

So what features would that be that we don't already have (besides maybe higher levels of AA, which is hardly a new feature, just more horsepower needed)? Really, I keep hearing about some "great new features" all the time and have no idea what you people are expecting.

[Razor1]

Originally Posted by CJ

R650 should be well on it's way by now, just like R580 was nicely on track eventhough R520 got delayed. A few months ago the "next generation R600" was scheduled for release in Q3 just like RV670.

Don't know about it being on track but if the midrange is delayed till June then it might not be so much on track.

[ANova]

Despite being late it's still a good card having GTX performance for much less and I think the R650 at 900+ MHz with 1 GB of GDDR4 should put them in good competition with anything nvidia has to throw there way.

[IbaneZ]

Originally Posted by Shtal

http://www.ocworkbench.com/2006/nvid...8800GTX/b2.htm

Pretty old article though, Nov 9. I'm not sure how much faster the newer drivers are in 3dmark-06, but they should be faster after 6 months.

Brand loyalty is a bitch sometimes. Must be exhausting..

Promise us you won't jump off a bridge if g80 actually beats R600 in a few benchies.

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

Originally Posted by Razor1

Don't know about it being on track but if the midrange is delayed till June then it might not be so much on track.

I think if the XT is going to be in a lower price bracket and not a whole lot faster the the G80, then that leaves AMD with a gap at the top end, it terms of both performance and addressing that market segment. I think they'll be eager to get a 65nm XTX with 1 gb of DDR4 and higher clocks as soon as possible.

I wonder if midrange has been delayed because AMD are using some of that fab capacity for R650?

[Rebel44]

I dont care about mainstream I want 2900XTX 1GB GDDR4

[_xxx_]

Originally Posted by ANova

and I think the R650 at 900+ MHz with 1 GB of GDDR4 should put them in good competition with anything nvidia has to throw there way.

I sincerely severely doubt that. I'm quite confident that nV already could start churning out G9x (or whatver it will be called) in a matter of weeks if needed. Same thing I told numerous times since R520 debacle, obviously my predictions were spot-on as pretty much always. And I'm only using my common sense, since I have no insider info whatsoever, just lots of experince in the SW/HW industry.

This delay was another christmass present for nV, they can happily try stuff out and develop new tech while ATI has to struggle with getting stuff done. That's a priceless advantage every CEO or investor drools over in his wet dreams.

I'd be very surprised if the (high-end gfx) ATI part of AMD still exists in 2009/2010 timeframe. Unless some miracle happens and R650 turns out to be a real killer, but I'll believe it when I see it on the shelves and not before that.


Oh, and guys please stop parroting that "OMG, much lower prices for R6xx parts" fairy tale, it's not even funny anymore. Wake up and turn your brains on, really. First, nV doesn't even need to compete with prices, having the lead they have now and they could go even lower than ATI easily without making losses, if so needed.


EDIT: and before someone calls me nV fan, I'm not. But I'm a huge fan of their management, I'd give them a paycheck with blank space for filling in their wished payment for themselves if I was the "big boss".

[Rangers]

Originally Posted by _xxx_

I sincerely severely doubt that. I'm quite confident that nV already could start churning out G9x (or whatver it will be called) in a matter of weeks if needed. Same thing I told numerous times since R520 debacle, obviously my predictions were spot-on as pretty much always. And I'm only using my common sense, since I have no insider info whatsoever, just lots of experince in the SW/HW industry.

This delay was another christmass present for nV, they can happily try stuff out and develop new tech while ATI has to struggle with getting stuff done. That's a priceless advantage every CEO or investor drools over in his wet dreams.

I'd be very surprised if the (high-end gfx) ATI part of AMD still exists in 2009/2010 timeframe. Unless some miracle happens and R650 turns out to be a real killer, but I'll believe it when I see it on the shelves and not before that.


Oh, and please stop parroting that "OMG, much lower prices for R6xx parts" fairy tale, it's not even funny anymore. Wake up and turn your brains on, really. First, nV doesn't even need to compete with prices, having the lead they have now and they could go even lower than ATI easily without making losses, if so needed.


EDIT: and before someone calls me nV fan, I'm not. But I'm a huge fan of their management, I'd give them a paycheck with blank space for filling in their wished payment for themselves if I was the "big boss".

Their managment isn't stellar from what I see, they just have an inept competitor. 8600GTS, a poor part really, is just another new example, along with their driver messes and poor SLI support and on and on. If Nvidia is raking in the cash and growing bigger and bigger in employee numbers as we're led to believe, these driver problems are rather baffling, unless they're just not run all that efficiently. Nvidia imo has been focused on profits rather than performance lately far too much imo, they're just lucky they dont have a competitor to make them pay. You can bet Intel will.

The high end of Nvidia wont be around in 2009/10 either I wager. The one company that's going to be left is Intel, not Nvidia. Intel's process shrink lead continues to grow, they are playing around on 45nm while Nvidia isn't on 80 yet. If Intel had a GPU it would be three times as big as Nvidia's. And you can bet Intel engineers will make it count.

This is all OT, but since the whole AMD goes out of business OT constantly infects this thread anyway, why not.

[AlexV]

They have a stellar management because they`re getting the big money in nV`s pocket and have had spotless execution save for NV30. This is looking at it from an economics perspective, not internet-tech junkie that gets a hard on for extra precision bits, sooper dooper AA, unified shaders etc. Their management does what it`s meant to do in a great way, IMHO.

[_xxx_]

Originally Posted by Morgoth the Dark Enemy

This is looking at it from an economics perspective, not internet-tech junkie that gets a hard on for extra precision bits, sooper dooper AA, unified shaders etc.

Yeah, that's exactly how I'm looking at it above.

[jamis]

While I have no doubt the R600XT 512MB will be a very competitive part indeed I'm begining to wonder whether it's going to be the only competetive part they are going to get out of the R6x0 series.

[_xxx_]

Originally Posted by Rangers

Their managment isn't stellar from what I see, they just have an inept competitor. 8600GTS, a poor part really, is just another new example, along with their driver messes and poor SLI support and on and on.

How is the 8600 a poor part? It's slightly slower than the X1950Pro and has about 1/3 as many transistors and costs less than 30% to produce.

As for drivers troubles, let's first see what ATI brings to the table, shall we? Everyone and his grandpa seems to believe that ATI drivers for the R6xx series will be perfect out of the box - I call nonsense.

The one company that's going to be left is Intel, not Nvidia. Intel's process shrink lead continues to grow, they are playing around on 45nm while Nvidia isn't on 80 yet. If Intel had a GPU it would be three times as big as Nvidia's. And you can bet Intel engineers will make it count.

This song I've been hearing since 1997 or so, over and over with each new gen of gfx chips. "Intel will crush them all, they're just soooo much biggerer, OMG!"

Again, I'll believe it when I see it.

[Razor1]

Originally Posted by Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.

I think if the XT is going to be in a lower price bracket and not a whole lot faster the the G80, then that leaves AMD with a gap at the top end, it terms of both performance and addressing that market segment. I think they'll be eager to get a 65nm XTX with 1 gb of DDR4 and higher clocks as soon as possible.

I wonder if midrange has been delayed because AMD are using some of that fab capacity for R650?

Oh I'm sure they want the an xtx or r650 out now as soon as possible, just hope the the 65nm node isn't giving problems (I think we know by now at 80nm ATi did have some kind of technical issues, what ever it may be, perfromance or manufacturing), but they are sacrificing alot with the mid range delay, if they are going to release numbers and not release these cards nV's apparrent weakness might become a strength.

[jamis]

Originally Posted by _xxx_

It's slightly slower than the X1950Pro and has about 1/3 as many transistors and costs less than 30% to produce.

LOL, it's actually around 12% smaller in transistor count.

[Sound_Card]

Originally Posted by _xxx_

How is the 8600 a poor part? It's slightly slower than the X1950Pro and has about 1/3 as many transistors and costs less than 30% to produce.

Again, I'll believe it when I see it.

Slightly slower? Even more slower when you put on some AA/AF.

Might want to check your transistor count too. The 8600GTS has 298m transistors while the x1950pro has 330m.

[Silent_Buddha]

Originally Posted by Morgoth the Dark Enemy

They have a stellar management because they`re getting the big money in nV`s pocket and have had spotless execution save for NV30. This is looking at it from an economics perspective, not internet-tech junkie that gets a hard on for extra precision bits, sooper dooper AA, unified shaders etc. Their management does what it`s meant to do in a great way, IMHO.

And if rumors are to be believed Nvidia Managements inability to get decent stable Vista Drivers is costing them millions from OEMs jumping ship to ATI.

As someone else said, Nvidia's management right not isn't so much the fact that they are good, it's that ATI's has been pretty dismal the past couple years.

Had ATI launched R520 and R600 "on time" then Nvidia wouldn't be looking nearly as good right now. Which is entirely ATI's fault and has nothing to do with how well (or not well) Nvidia is managed.

In fact, I'd argue that Nvidia's management this past year has been far worse than it has been in previous years. Driver issues is just the most noticeable effect of this. And I'm going to guess that it's mostly because they've become lazy expecting ATI to do their job for them by constantly missing target dates for their products.

It's sort of like when you see a skinny girl standing next to a fat girl at the club. The skinny chick always looks hot, but that's only because the fat chic looks so blah. Now, stand that exact same skinny girl next to a really hot girl that doesn't need a fat girl to make her look good and suddenly that skinny girl is looking pretty nasty.

Heck, if early reports are to be believed, ATI (X1K series) may actually have across the board better OGL performance under Vista than Nvidia with the new 7.4 drivers. Something that would have been unheard of when Nvidia was run well.

Also, I'd have to agree that 65nm R650 might be delayed by delays in RV610 and RV630. As it appears, according to some rumors that ATI is targetting 100 million shipments for those chips for this year. It also appears that ATI is having greater than expected demand for RV610 and RV630 from OEMs which might help explain the delays. Which means capacity at 65nm might be a little tight IF true.

Regards,
SB

[Razor1]

Really gotta bury the hatchet with huge OEM BS from AMD for thier midrange products, Dell just picked up the 8600's for thier computers. As I said before, I didn't think Dell picked up AMD midrange, there were no hints of this.

[INKster]

Originally Posted by Sound_Card

Slightly slower? Even more slower when you put on some AA/AF.

Might want to check your transistor count too. The 8600GTS has 298m transistors while the x1950pro has 330m.

Actually, it's 289. DX10 mandatory support for FP32 precision, SM 4.0, the new VP2/BSP's, etc, consume a large part of this.
Also, the tests prove that the G84's performance scales better when the software requires complex shading.
Might not be enough to beat X1950 Pro, but it is an interesting trend nevertheless.

[trinibwoy]

All these 8600GTS comparisons will be for nought once RV630 hit. That's where the true comparison lies because all the last generation parts are not hindered by DX10/VP logic. If HD 2600XT is significantly faster then the 8600GTS will look poor in comparison and I'd be confused if it isn't given the considerable cooling it seems to require.

[_xxx_]

Originally Posted by jamis

LOL, it's actually around 12% smaller in transistor count.

Really? You surely mean only the _active_ transistors? We may as well go with die area, if it fits you better. Or power consumption and cooling as well.

But ok, I exaggerated with the transistor count, I give you that

[_xxx_]

Originally Posted by Silent_Buddha

ATI is targetting 100 million shipments for those chips for this year

One hundred million chips? *boggle*

Get out!

[jamis]

Originally Posted by _xxx_

We may as well go with die area, if it fits you better. Or power consumption and cooling as well.

Why not, it's on smaller process so the die is er.. smaller, the real life power consumption seems to be pretty much the same as with X1950Pro.

As it's clocked so high it does better in situations needing shader performance, most of the time it's slightly slower than X1950Pro quite often dropping to GT level or below, in some rare situations it seem to go all the way down to previous generation 128-bit card levels.
So on and all there's nothing really outstanding about it, the word is it's not actually flying out of the shelves which is not surprising considering the price/perf. ratio.
But it's not really that bad a card just the price is definetly wrong.

[vertex_shader]

Originally Posted by _xxx_

One hundred million chips? *boggle*

Get out!

Its not impossible Link

[trinibwoy]

Originally Posted by Silent_Buddha

It's sort of like when you see a skinny girl standing next to a fat girl at the club. The skinny chick always looks hot, but that's only because the fat chic looks so blah.

Heh, I guess you've never seen a cute fat girl standing next to an ugly skinny one

And I agree with razor, attempts to criticize what Nvidia is doing while using imaginary numbers for what ATI could be doing aren't really worth much. I'm sure ATI wishes that the world runs on "ifs" but that's not how it is.

[_xxx_]

jamis: I call that pretty impressive considering the laughably low count of shader units in the 8600 (although they're clocked so high).

Add the same improvements to the current 8800 and there is your R600 killer already (not that I think they'll be doing anything like that, but for the sake of argument).

Where I was going is the margins. Thus nV could easily sell 8600 for half the price without losing money on them, while ATI can do nothing like that with any of their offerings.