R520 informanina, part II (E3, etc)

digitalwanderer said:
DaveBaumann said:
R520 isn't necessarily even the most important part for that either.
Are they planning low-end R520 parts or will they be using R42x for the low-end?

For the upcoming fall OEM cycle, it looks like X550 will replace X300 at the low end (same RV351 core, faster core clock). But otherwise, it's supposed to be 90nm R(V)5XX technology from top to bottom.
 
ERK said:
Umm... R580 at that time??
If that's the case I'd ignore all the FUD you're hearing and expect the R520 along within the month.

kemosabe said:
For the upcoming fall OEM cycle, it looks like X550 will replace X300 at the low end (same RV351 core, faster core clock). But otherwise, it's supposed to be 90nm R(V)5XX technology from top to bottom.
Thanks for the link Kemosabe, or can I just call ya "friend". ;)
 
The bragging rights are in the high end, but the real money's in the low/middle ground performance markets. I imagine ATI wants to have something new ready for the Dells of the world when back-to-school time comes round.
 
We are also going to be previewing, but not actually announcing, a lot of our ongoing 90nm development [at Computex Taipei 2005],â€￾

For obvious reasons everyone seems to focus on the top-end at such shows. Is there any evidence (I haven't seen any yet) that this is actually happening at Computex?
 
Damn, there go my "Wavey eyeblink" credentials. I thot he meant that two to three weeks would be much too early for G70 given the September cycle. . .
 
CJ said:
Just a wild guess... Couldn't Pixel Shader 3.0a be part of a DirectX9.0L or WFG1.0?
Why do people have to confuse say "core shader versions" for example: ps 2.0, ps 2.x, ps 3.0 with HLSL compiler updates for example ps_2_0, ps_2_a, ps_2_b, ps_2_sw, ps_3_0??
And does "a" or "b" tell you? Not much since ps_2_a has more features then ps_2_b... It might as well be called ps_2_nvidia and ps_2_ati.
 
Back
Top