ATI R520 will be AGP also
- Thread starter Redeemer
- Start date
Hush you, I got my own reasons...
YeuEmMaiMai
Regular
they said the same thing about the x800 and it took them how long to release one?
I believe it when I see it.
Stupid Ati lost market share becuase some moron decided that AGP wasn't worth supporting. Someone needs to make sure that Dave Orton gets the message this time around.
Yeah, I am gonna give up my mobile barton 2500+ running at 2.8Ghz for a slower more expensive a64 system (based upon what I am willing to spend). I would much rather buy a screaming fast ATi AGP card for my current rig.
I believe it when I see it.
Stupid Ati lost market share becuase some moron decided that AGP wasn't worth supporting. Someone needs to make sure that Dave Orton gets the message this time around.
Yeah, I am gonna give up my mobile barton 2500+ running at 2.8Ghz for a slower more expensive a64 system (based upon what I am willing to spend). I would much rather buy a screaming fast ATi AGP card for my current rig.
I believe that was due to some problems they had with the bridge chip, since they've worked those out I don't expect this part to be delayed.YeuEmMaiMai said:
I think it's a little early to be busting 'em for not having an AGP version out though when the card hasn't even been officially announced...
YeuEmMaiMai
Regular
dw, you know I am an ati fan but you gotta admitt they were stupid this last generation when it came to agp cards. I as a consumer do not accept any excuses since they could have designed the chip with an AGP interface from the start (that is what they said they were going to do when the issue first came up there were going to be 2 varients of the chip one with PCI-X and one with AGP)
I dunno, I had absolutely no problem whatsoever getting the AGP card I wanted when my 9700 pro died....then again, that was when the R420s first came out and I was looking for a pro VIVO 'cause I'm a cheap bastard.
(Yeah, a $470us viddy card is being a "cheap bastard". )
I'm not saying they didn't have some problems, I'm just honestly saying that their problems didn't affect me in the slightest way personally.
(Yeah, a $470us viddy card is being a "cheap bastard".
)I'm not saying they didn't have some problems, I'm just honestly saying that their problems didn't affect me in the slightest way personally.
Killer-Kris
Regular
CyFactor said:
And seeing as that's where the money's at, I certainly can't find much fault with that "moron"'s decision not to get AGP out sooner.
YeuEmMaiMai
Regular
I guess that is why they (ATi) lost market share compared to Nvidia who had an AGP solution out sooner.
CyFactor said:
Yeah, but it sure got us enthusiasts all riled. :?Killer-Kris said:
I'm enthused to hear they'll have an AGP R520, this will probably force nVidia to support it a while longer too.
YeuEmMaiMai
Regular
quote="CyFactor"]
That is not what happened. They had every intention of supporting it, but work on the bridge took longer than expected.
"Stupid ATI" stole 90+% of the OEM PCI-E marketshare from nVidia by going native PCI-E.[/quote]
that is exactly what happened. They did not have an AGP card ready because they did not do what they said they would do. ATi stated that there were going to be 2 varients of the x800 VPU 1 was going to be AGP and one was going to be PCI. Then ATi came out and stated that it was to expensive to do that and they were going to make a bridge chip. Now they had some major issues with that chip and it cost them more in the long run. [
YeuEmMaiMai said:
That is not what happened. They had every intention of supporting it, but work on the bridge took longer than expected.
"Stupid ATI" stole 90+% of the OEM PCI-E marketshare from nVidia by going native PCI-E.[/quote]
that is exactly what happened. They did not have an AGP card ready because they did not do what they said they would do. ATi stated that there were going to be 2 varients of the x800 VPU 1 was going to be AGP and one was going to be PCI. Then ATi came out and stated that it was to expensive to do that and they were going to make a bridge chip. Now they had some major issues with that chip and it cost them more in the long run. [
Not meaning to provoke you or nothing, but how do you figure? ATi seems to be sitting pretty bloody pretty right now from what I'm looking at. :?YeuEmMaiMai said:
Yes, they had some problems...but things are looking really good with the launch of the X850 and I think those problems are behind them.
YeuEmMaiMai said:
You are badly misinformed. ATI's discrete desktop market share skyrocketed from below 30% to a whopping 55% two quarters ago, thanks almost entirely to the success of its native PCI-E X300/X600 parts. Yes, NVDA did gain back a few points in the last quarter, mostly because of strength in retail and some OEM wins for the 6600 parts. Certainly they've executed poorly on AGP recently (soon to be resolved) and have taken heat from the consumer, but to say that the focus on PCI-E hasn't been beneficial to ATI is misguided.
Putting the focus on PCIe is not the same as neglecting the AGP market.kemosabe said:
There was demand they couldn't satisfy in the AGP AIB market, and while this market isn't as high-volume as the OEM market, it offers higher margins.
I'd say they underestimated the AGP demand, and missed good opportunities because of that.
My gut is that targetting AGP now is not going to be the right answer, as by the time the chip ships in real volume, PCIE WILL have taken off.Xmas said:
But maybe not.
RussSchultz said:
I agree. The sooner AGP dies the better. I find it slightly odd that people clamoring for x850XTs would want it in AGP. The low end I could understand, but if you want high end, usually you want the latest and greatest. When AGP was first released it was clear to so many they wanted it and the 3D revolution wasn't even in full swing yet. This is like wanting a Geforce 2 GTS for PCI. Why?
(Don't answer that. I understand that people want to hang on to older mainboards and still be able to upgrade.)
I think the problem is with mainboard/chipset manufacturers not having pushed PCIe hard enough. Now they have a twilight situation where they need to really push it but it doesn't have the freshness it had when it really was. Get rid of all this PCI/AGP business completely, I say.
kemosabe said:
Yes, but I think the problem for ATi AGP production was simply a capacity problem as OEM demands for their chips running on PCIe PCBs ate up most of their raw gpu manufacturing capacity and that they'd have hit the AGP market a good deal sooner if they'd have been able to ramp up their capcity a good deal faster (I think the "bridge problem" was just not that significant.) Nearly doubling your market share in that period of time is a production achievement in itself, and I'm sure that even for PCIe they might not have produced all they could have sold in that period. As their capacity increases we should see AGP production for retail increase as well. That's my opinion, anyway...
YeuEmMaiMai said:
Nope. Sorry. I have an AGP X800XT PE running in my machine currently. It's native R420 AGP and I bought it last year. R423 is native PCI Express. You are thinking of nVidia, not ATI. nVidia said it was too expensive to do native PCI-E and instead did the bridge. Get your facts straight.
R481 = native AGP = X850 AGP Series
R480 = native PCI-E = X850 PCI-E Series
R420 = native AGP - X800 AGP Series
R423 = native PCI-E = X800 PCI-E Series
Looks like two different chips to me (actually 4).
Now that the bugs are out of Rialto (ATI's bridge), you'll see X700 (RV410) and X800/X800XL (R430) in the AGP space. And, currently, nVidia has nothing to compete with the performance/price point of the 16-pipeline X800XL, so things could very well change back to ATI's favor on the AGP front. Should be interesting.
Similar threads
