Impact of Early Vista on GPU Release Schedules?

[Geo]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27970

Yes, I know there is a thread about this in Software, but not enuf of the right people will see it there, and it doesn't focus on this element.

Could this even be part of the reasoning behind pulling R580 so far forward (if you assume Anand's "early to mid January" is correct)?

 

[AlphaWolf]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27970

Yes, I know there is a thread about this in Software, but not enuf of the right people will see it there, and it doesn't focus on this element.

Could this even be part of the reasoning behind pulling R580 so far forward (if you assume Anand's "early to mid January" is correct)?

I am not entirely certain that an r580 in January isn't late, but if they are using Vista as a timing for the release for r600 they'd have to get r580 out of the door sooner rather than later.

 

[Geo]

I am not entirely certain that an r580 in January isn't late, but if they are using Vista as a timing for the release for r600 they'd have to get r580 out of the door sooner rather than later.

How late could it be? The X850 reviews were 12/1/2004. And we know availability was signifcantly later. Informed opinion seems to think R520 was originally shooting at the same time frame as R420. Maybe a few weeks later if Computex was the target. Add in that it seems to be a goal to tighten the announce/available envelope from the standards (not just the reality, which was even worse) in place a year ago and it looks to me that an R580 actually available in January is pretty consistent with last year's refresh cycle.

 

[Geo]

The other side of the ball is even more interesting, I think. The Green Team vibes (6800GS, 7800GS) seem to be towards pushing back the next gen, not pulling it forward. Obviously they must be closely in touch with MS on Vista timing as well, so what does this mean if we aren't going to see a 90nm high-end part from them until, say, March? Could it be later? Might they be going straight to their Vista part on the next one?

 

[ninelven]

I don't understand why people think there will be a 90nm refresh of G70.

 

[Geo]

I don't understand why people think there will be a 90nm refresh of G70.

I suppose it might depend on just what you call a "refresh", which seems pretty gender-bending from both companies these days based on past standards.

But I'll guess you mean something else. . .so why don't you tell us what you expect from NV and when?

 

[Rys]

I don't understand why people think there will be a 90nm refresh of G70.

Who said refresh?

 

[Tim Murray]

Is WGF2.0 shipping with Vista in the first place (or whatever the hell it's called now)? I wouldn't be surprised if it's delayed slightly.

By the way, Rys, from some insane debug code from a recent programming assignment:

public String StringtoString(String q) {
if (q.equals("O RLY?"))
  return "YA RLY";
return "";
}

 

[fallguy]

Could this even be part of the reasoning behind pulling R580 so far forward (if you assume Anand's "early to mid January" is correct)?

Why do we think ATi "pulled" it so far forward?

 

[Geo]

Why do we think ATi "pulled" it so far forward?

Depends on your context, I guess. Tho even the "early" (by relative timing to previous release, rather than "staying on independant schedule") rumored dates originally seemed aimed more March-ish. Tho I would agree that January seems consistent to me with previous practice from an "independant schedule" pov, and am interested in the reasoning of folks who think that is "late" in an "independant schedule" scenario.

 

[Skrying]

R520 was very late to the game. R580 is pushed back some actually, I believe. And R600 is potentially gonna be pushed back to depending on when R580 is launched. All because of how late R520 was.

 

[wireframe]

And R600 is potentially gonna be pushed back to depending on when R580 is launched. All because of how late R520 was.

This sound highly unlikely. R600 looks to be timed to Vista/DirectX 10. Its release will be fixed to that release schedule and not what R5xx are doing. I think R580/590 will act as the "washers" in the release "screw"-up that is the R520. ATI will play those cards in there to maximize their outcome in what has become a trickier situation than they anticipated. R600 should mark a new beginning and should therefore be on time within the larger picture and not be influenced by R580.

 

[Geo]

R580 is pushed back some actually, I believe.

Okay. So what do you think the original target was for R580 availability? If you tell me December, I'll have to fight to not roll my eyes --one month is rounding error in this business given the complexity we're talking about.

 

[Skrying]

Okay. So what do you think the original target was for R580 availability? If you tell me December, I'll have to fight to not roll my eyes --one month is rounding error in this business given the complexity we're talking about.

Late Novemeber early December. Just in time for Xmas. Sure, you say a month could be a rounding error, but certainly not when it comes to this time of the year, during the holiday season key timing is important.

Wireframe, I would like to believe that is true. But for some reason I doubt it kinda. ATi has rather stupid business men behind it from my point of view. A lot of their mistakes have seen to be easily avoided almost.

 

[Geo]

Late Novemeber early December. Just in time for Xmas. Sure, you say a month could be a rounding error, but certainly not when it comes to this time of the year, during the holiday season key timing is important.

I rather think that the folks who run ATI are more intensely aware of the vagaries of their business that can impact these things than you or I. If catching the holiday season was the aim I rather think they'd have aimed early to have some room to miss a little --like, say, September or October.

 

[Rollo]

Why do we think ATi "pulled" it so far forward?

I think because they lack a product that competes at the high end? Single or multi card, although the Asus Top looks interesting.

 

[Skrying]

I think because they lack a product that competes at the high end? Single or multi card, although the Asus Top looks interesting.

How? The X1800XT offers very comparable performance to the 7800GTX 512MB. Also, the X1800XT offers better IQ. Its also cheaper and now its easier to find. In fact there are several X1800XT's in stock at Newegg, no 7800GTX 512MB's though. Your point is mute actually, it depends highly on the buyers personal choice, if he wants IQ or performance, and with that performance comes a $150 price permium.

 

[ninelven]

so why don't you tell us what you expect from NV and when?

SM4 2H 2006.

 

[AlphaWolf]

SM4 2H 2006.

So you expect them to ride g70 for another 8mos+?

 

[Jawed]

How late could it be? The X850 reviews were 12/1/2004. And we know availability was signifcantly later. Informed opinion seems to think R520 was originally shooting at the same time frame as R420. Maybe a few weeks later if Computex was the target. Add in that it seems to be a goal to tighten the announce/available envelope from the standards (not just the reality, which was even worse) in place a year ago and it looks to me that an R580 actually available in January is pretty consistent with last year's refresh cycle.

Considering what a mess ATI made of pretty much everything a year ago, basing R580's timetable on what happened to R480 is nonsense.

Why refresh a product intentionally to miss the biggest sales-volume period of the year? Especially when the refresh was supposed to be an "availability refresh".

I still think R580 was meant to be a November product, according to the original schedule of R520 in May, RV515 in August and RV530 in September/October.

Jawed