[nelg]

According to Xbit, nV is to launch a 5600XT with 235/400 core/mem speeds. Maybe ATI should re-name the 9200 to 5960Ultra.

Edit: Removed link to unscrupulous site. 8)

[micron]

First thing I have to ask is, are these cards coming to the states? I certainly hope not, people are confused enough with the naming schemes manufacturers are using. So a 5600XT is slower then a 5200U, but faster then a 5200?....heh..

[micron]

Ohhh, put the link back up nelg

[nelg]

Originally Posted by micron

Ohhh, put the link back up nelg

I would but the lisine from all that Turkey I ate is making me tired.

[micron]

Canadians are funny

[micron]

There's a thread goin' on about this @ Futuremark, and they think the pics are photoshop chopped....

[Richthofen]

Originally Posted by nelg

According to Xbit, nV is to launch a 5600XT with 235/400 core/mem speeds. Maybe ATI should re-name the 9200 to 5960Ultra.

Edit: Removed link to unscrupulous site. 8)

why should they? They are confusing consumers already enough.
9000, 9100 and 9200 are not DX9 products.

9800SE is crap considering its performance and naming scheme and of course price. 9600pro is the better choice.

Really ATI does nothing different. In fact at this moment their product line is much more confusing then Nvidia's.
Stay with the facts.

[jjayb]

why should they? They are confusing consumers already enough.
9000, 9100 and 9200 are not DX9 products.

Imagine that. And you know what else, the 5200 5600 5800 and 5900 aren't just dx5 products either. Maybe it's a conspiricy?



Don't get me wrong, I agree that ATI's naming scheme sucks. But not for that reason. Why people insist that the 9 in the 9x00 products must mean dx9 is beyond me though.

[RussSchultz]

Originally Posted by jjayb

Don't get me wrong, I agree that ATI's naming scheme sucks. But not for that reason. Why people insist that the 9 in the 9x00 products must mean dx9 is beyond me though.

Maybe because ATI stated thats what the naming scheme meant at one point?

[SvP]

Maybe because ATI stated thats what the naming scheme meant at one point?

ATI stated the first number meant "technology" or "generation", but not "DirectX"

[RussSchultz]

Originally Posted by SvP

ATI stated the first number meant "technology" or "generation", but not "DirectX"

Never mind the co-incidence of the 7xxx all being DX7 and the 8xxx all being DX8, and the 9xxx models all being DX9, until the introduction of the 9000, then the renaming of the 8500 to the 9100, etc.

But anyways, this has been debated way too much in the past. No need to spend more time on it as it isn't going to change anything.

Personally, both companies need to get their asses kicked for coming up with such incomprehensible and inconsistant naming schemes. Its even more delightful that the little monikers on the end mean opposite things for the different companies.

[jjayb]

Hmm, was the gf3 around for ogl 1.3? The 4600 for ogl 1.4? The 5x00 for 1.5? Maybe we're on to something.

[ben6]

Actually, I had the chance to ask the Product Manager of the 9000 series that very question last year at San Francisco. His answer: The AIB partners wanted the name.

[Xmas]

Back to the topic...

[Malo]

hehe I had one of them, except mine was the "turbo"

[MrBond]

Originally Posted by Richthofen

why should they? They are confusing consumers already enough.
9000, 9100 and 9200 are not DX9 products.

9800SE is crap considering its performance and naming scheme and of course price. 9600pro is the better choice.

Really ATI does nothing different. In fact at this moment their product line is much more confusing then Nvidia's.
Stay with the facts.

Well, to their credit, ATI does not sell a BBA 9100 or 9800SE. The 9100 was ditching 8500LE cores and the 9800SE was done entirely by their OEMs I believe.

And when the 8500 was launched 8xxx=DX8 and 7xxx=DX7. Now it means generation. No big deal. SAT doesn't mean scholastic aptitude test either anymore

[Nappe1]

Originally Posted by RussSchultz

Never mind the co-incidence of the 7xxx all being DX7 and the 8xxx all being DX8, and the 9xxx models all being DX9, until the introduction of the 9000, then the renaming of the 8500 to the 9100, etc.

uhm... Radeon VE / Radeon 7000 didn't have HW T&L, which places it to DX6 more than DX7... and of course all 8xxx were DX8, because there really wasn't more than 8500 and it's AIW DV and AIW variant, am I right? (FireGL products excluded, which weren't Radeons anyways...)


In any case: both big companies have way too fast product name cycles. there's no way Honest John following which is which. I completely agree on that.

[Althornin]

Originally Posted by RussSchultz

Personally, both companies need to get their asses kicked for coming up with such incomprehensible and inconsistant naming schemes. Its even more delightful that the little monikers on the end mean opposite things for the different companies.

agreed.
I have to add this though - do you think there is any chance that the opposite usage of said monikers (SE/XT) is intentional?

[RussSchultz]

Originally Posted by Althornin

agreed.
I have to add this though - do you think there is any chance that the opposite usage of said monikers (SE/XT) is intentional?

It wouldn't suprise me if both companies felt the confusion generated was good for several reasons:

-getting consumers to purchase products that aren't as good as their big brothers. (people will ignore the letters or assume they mean better in general)
-dumbing down their competitors naming scheme. (people know that SE means less on product A, so the competitors SE must mean less, also)
-riding the coat tails of their competitors naming scheme.(OOH! SE means good on that product, it must mean good on this one too!)

[RussSchultz]

Originally Posted by Nappe1

uhm... Radeon VE / Radeon 7000 didn't have HW T&L, which places it to DX6 more than DX7... and of course all 8xxx were DX8, because there really wasn't more than 8500 and it's AIW DV and AIW variant, am I right? (FireGL products excluded, which weren't Radeons anyways...)

The 7000 supported DOT3, which was introduced in....DX7.

[Hyp-X]

Originally Posted by RussSchultz

The 7000 supported DOT3, which was introduced in....DX7.

7200 supports tweening which was introduced in ... DX8
GF3 supports occlusion queries which was introduced in ... DX9

Does it make them DX8/DX9 cards?

[RussSchultz]

The Verite 1000 was completely programmable. Does that make it DX10?

You can take any argument into the absurd.

Your two examples are technology outliers who's features, unsupported by DX, were evaluated through opengl (or XBOX) and included in a later version of the API because of their usefulness and popularity. Its all part of the marketting game to overshoot and hope your stuff is really important.

Its pretty obvious the RadeonVE/7000 was a reduced version of the Radeon/7500, where the reduction was pieces that could be emulated on the host without drastic reduction in capability from its target...DX7.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by jjayb

Don't get me wrong, I agree that ATI's naming scheme sucks. But not for that reason. Why people insist that the 9 in the 9x00 products must mean dx9 is beyond me though.

Because it would make so much sense. x000 for entry-level, x400 for mid-range, x800 for high-end, with some numbers left over for the semi-annual refresh. And I'd prefer seeing speed-refreshes named xy50 rather than x[y+1]00--again, more sensible, IMO.

[Nappe1]

Originally Posted by RussSchultz

The Verite 1000 was completely programmable. Does that make it DX10?

You can take any argument into the absurd.

Your two examples are technology outliers who's features, unsupported by DX, were evaluated through opengl (or XBOX) and included in a later version of the API because of their usefulness and popularity. Its all part of the marketting game to overshoot and hope your stuff is really important.

Its pretty obvious the RadeonVE/7000 was a reduced version of the Radeon/7500, where the reduction was pieces that could be emulated on the host without drastic reduction in capability from its target...DX7.

ahh... now I understand you... well, it is nice to know that Pyramid 3D actually was DX9 HW... (somewhere here is thread thta has link on it's hw spec guide in pdf format. it is pretty hefty doc, so I recomend you reserve more than few evenings for it, if you really want to check it's compliancy nowadays API's...)

Anyways, if DOT3 was so important feature in DX7, then Env bump mapping must have been at least as important in DX6, and that makes all pre-GeForce3 cards as pre-DX6 hw as well as GF4MX'es, right?

yeah, yeah, I got your point. hopefully you got mine.

PS. Radeon 7000 was reduced version of Radeon 7200 (aka. Radeon Classic, Radeon VIVO / AIW). 7500 had multimonitor stuff that came from VE / 7000, which was released earlier. 7200 never had multimonitor support. (except clone mode when using tv-out refresh rates on monitor as well.)