ATI - Entire family of products in first half 2004

[Super Grafx]

I agree that GeForce 3 Ti500 was *not* a refresh. it was still a NV20 afterall. it was simply a faster GF3. like GeForce 2 Ultra over GeForce 2 GTS.

GeForce4 Ti (all speed grades) was the refresh of GeForce 3

 

[Mariner]

By "refresh" I was talking about the GeForce4, the NV25, and the GeForce4 MX, the NV17.

I suppose you could class the NV17 as part of the GF4 'family' but I was talking more about technology generations. It would be one heck of stretch to claim that the NV25 and NV17 had much in common in the way of capabilities - the NV17 wouldn't know a DX8 shader if was kicked up the arse by one.

I think the problem here is that I thought your original argument was that NVidia had released a whole technology generation at the same time for several years (high end to low end as the have with GFFX). I wasn't reading the thread too closely so if I was wrong about what you meant, my apologies.

 

[Ostsol]

So by refresh we're talking about an upgrade in technology while remaining within the same generation of features, perhaps adding more of the features within that set? So what does the Geforce 3 ti series count as, compared to the original Geforce 3?

 

[KimB]

I suppose you could class the NV17 as part of the GF4 'family' but I was talking more about technology generations. It would be one heck of stretch to claim that the NV25 and NV17 had much in common in the way of capabilities - the NV17 wouldn't know a DX8 shader if was kicked up the arse by one.

The question wasn't one of technology. It was one of products.

 

[KimB]

So by refresh we're talking about an upgrade in technology while remaining within the same generation of features, perhaps adding more of the features within that set? So what does the Geforce 3 ti series count as, compared to the original Geforce 3?

Intermediate update might be an accurate term.

 

[Sabastian]

According to Digitimes the R420 will go into mass production in the first quarter of 2004... Sounds good to me. Transistor count is 160 million done on the .13 low K process teamed up with GDDR3. Anyhow here is the link. They are also reporting that the RV423 will be twice as fast as the Radeon 9800.... Few other tid bits in there as well.

http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/12/19&pages=A7&seq=47

 

[rwolf]

According to Digitimes the R420 will go into mass production in the first quarter of 2004... Sounds good to me. Transistor count is 160 million done on the .13 low K process teamed up with GDDR3. Anyhow here is the link. They are also reporting that the RV423 will be twice as fast as the Radeon 9800.... Few other tid bits in there as well.

http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/12/19&pages=A7&seq=47

Sounds like a reasonable number of transistors and the process seems right because the 9600XT was used to test the process ahead of time.

Seems kind of odd that an RV processor wouldn't be the midrange model.

 

[Morris Ital]

RV423

I thought V was the value part and therefore not as powerful as the high end part ? Have Digit-times been printing rubbish ?

If that is wrong then the rest of it should not be relied on either.

 

[nelg]

RV423

I thought V was the value part and therefore not as powerful as the high end part ? Have Digit-times been printing rubbish ?

If that is wrong then the rest of it should not be relied on either.

Typo ?

 

[Mariner]

Well, (sort of) logically I'd expect RV423 to be to R420 what the RV380 is to R350 (RV380 is supposed to be a PCI Express RV360, right?).

 

[MuFu]

RV423

I thought V was the value part and therefore not as powerful as the high end part ? Have Digit-times been printing rubbish ?

If that is wrong then the rest of it should not be relied on either.

Typo ?

Yep.

MuFu.

 

[Super Grafx]

R420
*mass production in Q1
*160M transistors
*GDDR3

according to:
http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/12/19&pages=A7&seq=47

 

[KimB]

Neither ATi (nor even nVidia until the FX) released budget parts of the same "technical" gen as their high-end.

nVidia did it with the TNT2 Vanta, TNT2 M64, and GeForce2 MX. The only time nVidia's budget part was not of the same "technical" generation as their high-end part was with the GeForce4 MX.

And that ATi quote says "generation," not "technical generation," so there's nothing inaccurate about it.

It says technology generation. Read it again. I distorted nothing.

 

[Dave Baumann]

Note: discussion on the evils of naming split off from this topic and moved here. If you wish to discuss about naming please do so there and keep this to the topic.