512MB GeForce 7800 GTX

http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=M&Product_Code=190348

http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=M&Product_Code=190492

256-bit GeForce 7800 GTX (550MHz clock)
512MB 256-bit 1.1ns (8x32) GDDR3 Memory (850MHz clock - 1.7 effective)
PCI Express x16 Compatibility
Integrated nVidia TV Encoder
Integrated nVidia VIVO
Dual DVI-I Connectors
54.4 Gb per second memory bandwidth

 

It kinda sucks they are selling them before launch. That means when the launch happens stocks will not be built up and everyone will whine about limited availability

 

Why? It's the same early-adpoters who are buying the cards. Surely these early sales don't just vanish into some bottomless void.

 

Let's be completely honest here. Do we really care if everyone can get one or just if you can get a hold of one? I suspect those who worry about everyone, as altruistic as it may sound, may not be buying the hardware as much as stock certificates with NVDA written on them.

PS. I am beginning to think that this early availability, before official launch, is planned and is being done to take the the Nvidia battalion to a psychological high-ground. Nothing wrong with that. Just saying. "Fire at will!"

 

this was the only way for nVidia to out-do themselves after several successful hard launches. soon they'll be selling products a month or more before they're announced and the NDAs expire.

 

In order to call this x1800 XT launch or any other launch from ATI successful, they need to have AVAILABILITY. Until I see availability at brick and mortar retail by ATI this is yet another poorly executed launch. The fact that the product was delayed by 6 months is bad enough but to compound that with now launch + 4 days poor availability is inexcusable. If any launch from ATI HAD to go well with immediate availability it was this...the flagship of R520. I just don't get it. NVDA can do it with the EXACT same type of AIB partners and fabs, why can't ATI? At some point the only logical conclusion is ineffective management and poor execution. If NVDA were doing the same with their launches I wouldn't have an issue with ATI's launches...but they are NOT.

November 9, 2005
"ATI is thrilled to announce worldwide availability of the Radeon X1800 XT," said Rich Heye, Vice President and GM, Desktop Discrete Products, ATI Technologies Inc.

Really?

 

I don't have stock, I was just thinking of people whining who themselves are not even going ti buy one. Limited availability= higher prices though and it affects everyone to a certain extent who is buying a card by distortibg the market.

 

Already discussed. If you want to examine it further there are other more suitable threads.

 

what are you jabberin on about? email any popular e-tailers and retail outlets that have the X1800 listed, in stock or out of stock, they'll all tell you the same thing. Shipments have been selling out the same day they post them available. newegg has stated they've gone through now 8 shipments of X1800XT's. The cards are selling like hotcakes. But i guess thats ATI's fault right? Dont be so blatently biased or at least learn the facts before you pipe up.

Nvidia stocked for months for the GTX/GT launch. ATI didnt have that luxury. Its not their fault cards are selling out faster then they can supply since they literally just started successful mass production of high clocking R520 cores. I have found 3 oppertunities in the last week where i could of purchased X1800XTs for 599 by simply checking e-tailers for stock. So people who are patient or insistant enough, sure can get a card. They are most certainly available.

 

Hell, you can't find a GTX 256 MB at a brick and mortar retailer. Come to my city and show me a shop that has it, probably goes for the whole state.

 

LOL. (Remember Ruprecht from Dirty Rotten Scoundrels? Heh.)

It's so true. I am not convinced that the number of cards produced and technically available is the main problem, but distribution of those cards is. It's the same principle as distribution of wealth. Who cares if 1,000,000 cards are available at one particular geographic location, creating a surplus there while the rest of the World starves?

Maybe this is not the case, but I often get the impression that Nvidia cards are available everywhere and ATI cards (or PBA) are some precious commodity at the high-end in places of the World.

I think ATI really fumbled in the case of the R520. Not only was it late, but they somehow let it slip that it would be soon superceded by a product that is far more powerful. This certainly put my breaks on. I was going to purchase an X1800XT without question after first reading about it. However, after seeing the reviews, the non-crushing performance, and coupled with this near-future promise, I think it's safe to say I won't be buying ATI until the refresh comes out. Strangely, I am fascinated by the 512MB GTX and extremely tempted to just buy it, if only to get it off the shelf from where it is taunting me.

(Darn it, this happened last time! I was going to buy an X800XTPE, it was not immediately available, when it was it was grossly overpriced, and the 6800 Ultra was "right there and then." I liked the specs of the Ultra, just like I like the specs of the X1800, but I was going to buy ATI "just because". It's starting to look like the same thing will happen again and I refuse to call this my fault.)

 

I didn't mean that directed at you in any way. I was just speaking generally. Like you mentioned with the whiners, how people are always debating "oh yeah? Well, do they have them on the store shelves in <insert obscure place>?" to make some case that no card is actually available everywhere and therefore anywhere. At some point we have to say "who cares as long as I get mine!" The problem I see with some product launches is that a large group of people want to buy something and it just proves near impossible. To bring it back to my earlier reply to you, I don't think selling a product early is indicative that such a scenario will play out.

All we need is just enough in all the right places (just like JIT management. Only time is mentioned in the name, but place is important and implicit). This is so very simple in theory and so incredibly difficult in practice.

 

I am hardly the first person in this thread to discuss the availability issue. I'll just keep my mouth shut and lurk from now on so I don't spoil anyone's time. The subject of availability will be invaribly linked to any card A vs card B discussion until both companies make it a moot issue.

 

No doubt but where are IQ evaluations aside all that so far? I saw a couple of screenshots in reviews but nothing really extensive concentrating on it.

I can see a 34 paged thread here where the majority mostly cares about performance and availability; not that both aren't valid points and ATI did definitely chose the correct path when it comes to my preferences, but how sure exactly are you that in a highly relative sense some transistors for the HQ AF as an example didn't go to "waste"?

I'd really love to lay my hands on a R520, but can't afford one right now.

 

how did ATI let anything slip about the R580? A slide saying "In house and working" is hardly something i found new knowledge. Anyone who frequents here i think would of simply figured the R580 already being tested in ATI's labs simply because of what was known. I dont see it becoming immediatly available though. If its released within the next 3 months i'd personally be a little surprised at its haste.

And dont forget the common "rumor" if you will, is that the R580 is far more advanced shader wise then both the R520 and G70, however how its pixel structure was changed, if at all, is unknown. Consensus is very little. So if you're hoping for a beast right off the get go, i dont think the R580 will be it, at least not until well into 2006 when we get some shader-limited titles to show its power. This is what people suspect will happen causing the G70 to crumple even against the R520.

Take a look at recent Splinter Cell release and how much better the R520 did, i think thats a pretty good guage as to how the core will perform in similiarly structured games.

 

That was part of the point - you're going over the same ground that has already been discussed.

The point I was making is that had this been released in the March-June timeframe, which was its initial schedule, we'd be looking at other applications than those that are getting the focus now - as I said at the end of the GTX review, its hardly as though we are awash with particuarly shader heavy titles. Allowing more IQ options to soak up the rendering power is a fairly good move, as both of them have offered more IQ. More importantly, though, as detailing in our R520 review, they concentrated on making FSAA more useful in a wider variety of situations (which I also class as "concentrating on IQ"). Had we been looking at this earlier in the year the reviews we wouldn't be looking at the newer titles such as the likes of FEAR, etc. and the FSAA performances would have been more a focus. Whether that was by design or by accident I don't know.

I don't think you need do anything other than point at configurations already set out in other parts of the series.

 

Except those titles had to have started development 18 months ago, so they were not written by developers with working R580 silicon. We still don't have many shader limited titles yet.

 

that has little to do with it. Many engines take 3-4 years if not more to develop, and they do so in cycles. It simply matters what they want to add ontop. SC for example is running on the modified Unreal engine which has its roots back in DX8, yet that game is very shader intensive. Even the unreal 3 engine has development roots dating back years, and im quite sure that game is going to be very shader intensive (and also quite sure its going to work excellent on the G70). You dont need the working chips as a developer to develop specifically for them, i think whats much more important is what they want to take advantange of through API's and their releases. The FEAR engine is an excellent example of this. Look at how aweful it runs on todays best hardware let alone mainstream stuff when people tried to do things they were use to, max settings, use soft shadows, etc.. Monolith didnt start to develop that engine with the idea of running superb on the G70 and R520.

ATI simply saw the gaming industry heading towards a shader limitation and fast enough that they felt they wanted to add much more complex instruction into these next two flagship chips. Even the RV530, i think, will become a monster under the right conditions.

but again it has absolutly nothing to do with working silicon being around when the chips were made, or at least very little. We'll be seeing engines in 2008 and 2009 that have their creation started in this year im sure.