Inquirer spreading R420 info
- Thread starter 991060
- Start date
Joe DeFuria
Legend
DW Fan!!!!! said:
Yes...but this doesn't mean ATI's clocks will be lower. (And I'm not sure what both the core and memory clocks at GDC were, either.)
crusher_pt
Newcomer
WaltC said:
Where that come from? SM3?
DW Fan!!!!!
Newcomer
I never meant it that way, they could be higher or lower, I was commenting on the fact that dave had mentioned they would not be what was stated 991060 said:
Not exactly whopping power draw in his rig
also a few 3dmark loops is not a real intensive test especially as he didn't provide the scores. That rig is hardly stress the 12v rails.. Like to see some intensive testing in a rig with two cd or dvd drives, multiple hard drives, and a CPU that draws more power. tested in a game as I thought 3dmark doesn't stress the CPU.
engall said:
nothing is impossible
check this link...seems they have the same information albatron said in their press release.
you go to the site and look under the albatron card and you see...
"Albatronの「GeFORCE6800UV」。コアクロックは600MHz、メモリクロックは1GHz。ビデオ入力対応。冷却機構は1スロットの独自タイプ。発売は5月上旬の予定"
somebody has to get a translator for that site lol
edit: sorry i forgot the link
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0416/nvidia2.htm
DW Fan!!!!!
Newcomer
Bad_Boy said:
You gotta think though, they could have pulled that information straight from albatron's site so it would be the same, im in no clue either way :?
crusher_pt
Newcomer
AFAIK the best oc result for the 6800U was about 475MHz with that big heatsink...
Bad_Boy said:
altavistas babelfish will translate it...
"GeFORCE6800UV" of Albatron. As for core clock as for 600MHz and memory clock 1GHz. Video input correspondence. As for cooling mechanism individual type of 1 slot. As for sale schedule of May first third
but further down
"GV-N68U256VH" of GIGABYTE. As for cooling mechanism reference type. As for core clock as for 400MHz and memory clock 1GHz. Middle of May sale schedule
and also
[blah] says "the margin of the over clock is left to GeForce 6800 Ultra,",, but the product of Albatron really have assumed that the 600MHz core which than 200MHz is higher than standard is loaded. As for memory clock 1GHz.
Furthermore, also the GeForce 6800 on-board card of the same company as for the core clock with 600MHz, as for the memory clock has become 700MHz.
Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?
What's the status on ATi's Extreme Pipelines?
Aren't they supposed to be a lot more enhanced than the R3xx generation? Unless they couldn't pull it off well enough in the timeframe, and hence why they went with more pipes....I mean, what I 1st heard was that they were gonna have either 8 or 12 Extreme pipes, which are far more efficient than the previous ones (considering they were very good in the 1st place, that would be quite an intrigueing feat). So is the reason that they now have more pipes due to them not being able to enhance the pipes further...
Or were they meant to be a 16 pipe architecture all the while and the extreme pipes were just BS rumours...heh
Joe DeFuria said:
What's the status on ATi's Extreme Pipelines?
Aren't they supposed to be a lot more enhanced than the R3xx generation? Unless they couldn't pull it off well enough in the timeframe, and hence why they went with more pipes....I mean, what I 1st heard was that they were gonna have either 8 or 12 Extreme pipes, which are far more efficient than the previous ones (considering they were very good in the 1st place, that would be quite an intrigueing feat). So is the reason that they now have more pipes due to them not being able to enhance the pipes further...
Or were they meant to be a 16 pipe architecture all the while and the extreme pipes were just BS rumours...heh
Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?
Hmmm, although this is all idle speculation and I don't want to turn this into an argument I don't see how a clock for clock R420(XT) and NV40(Ultra) would show dramatically different FPS. I know that statement alone is ludricous but assuming from the initial previews the NV40 is a well balanced piece of hardware and already scroes the same as 2xR350 how can the R420 supposedly also based on 2xR350 cores produce anything miraculously higher? Performance surely will be down to a clock speed race? It used to be apparent that the PS/VS aspects of R3xx series and perhaps even it's 24bit precision helped against the NV30 and NV35. Unfortunately the limited testing so far appears to show the NV40s PS/VS units and 32 precision working just fine. Combined with a healthy PP boost and it's suddenly not so easy to see ATIs advatange? Thus for me, ATI need speed and plenty of it and from these current speculations I don't think it's enough. Knowing the ATI of old, they may not even go for 500Mhz on the XT if the PRO is set at 475Mhz. And as for that 400Mhz figure, boy do I hope that's "gobbledygook"
I suspect even a 475Mhz 12pipe will be shown a very clean pair of heals by any 16 pipe card clocked 75Mhz lower or not yet alone a 12 pipe card running at 400Mhz.
As for the "monster" reference, I was simply using the word in the context of throwing all caution to the wind and following Nvidias aggressive cooling and power requirements. This may not be the wisest thing to do for your mid range series but if you want to be king of the roost it may just be required! How many review sites do you think will report, ATIs flagship comes in 2nd again but uses less power so that's ok,
I'll give you a hint, it'll be less than 1.
The more I think of it the more I'm convinced this is yet another negatitive aspect of the 18 month release strategy. I can honestly say I believe that we'll end up getting the X800 (XT) at 500Mhz, then 6-12 months down the line the X805(XT) which has no new features and is now clocked at 550/600Mhz. Perhaps a new core enabling it to hit the 600 mark but I bet the new core is primarily designed to increase margins. Is this a bad thing? Depends on your own viewpoint I guess. Me? I'm a selfish gamer who just wants a new core every 12 months where upon the old core can be plonked down a section, and so on and so on.
Joe DeFuria said:Seiko said:
It is interesting...ATI looks to be increasing their clocks for their "full, 4 quad" board relative to the 3 quad, while you're anticipating nvdia doing just the opposite.
While that may indeed turn out to be the case, nvidia would be more or less shooting themselves in the foot IMO. The closer it is in performance to the Ultra, the less they can charge for the Ultra.
12 pipes at 475 Mhz (X800Pro) would be within about 10% of the 6800 Ultra at 400 Mhz, in terms of pixel shading power, and about 20% slower in AA situations based on lower bandwidth of the Pro.
I think if EITHER the X800Pro or the 6800 non-Ultra is that close in performance to the 6800 ultra (while at the same time requiring less stringent cooling and power), the 6800 Ultra is all the sudden a very, very tough card to buy assuimg a $100-200 price difference.
While I agree that a 600 Mhz version sounds unlikely given this info...I've had that opinion from the start.
I think this is the one area will ATI will end up having a decided advantage.
Agree.
Agree.
Agree.
I think it will be about evenly split. Some seing the performance increase as not outweighing the lack of PS 3.0...others seeing it the other way.
Agreed!
Honestly, I think a 500 Mhz, 16 pipe part is a monster....as long as it's paried up with at least 550Mhz+ memory.
Hmmm, although this is all idle speculation and I don't want to turn this into an argument I don't see how a clock for clock R420(XT) and NV40(Ultra) would show dramatically different FPS. I know that statement alone is ludricous but assuming from the initial previews the NV40 is a well balanced piece of hardware and already scroes the same as 2xR350 how can the R420 supposedly also based on 2xR350 cores produce anything miraculously higher? Performance surely will be down to a clock speed race? It used to be apparent that the PS/VS aspects of R3xx series and perhaps even it's 24bit precision helped against the NV30 and NV35. Unfortunately the limited testing so far appears to show the NV40s PS/VS units and 32 precision working just fine. Combined with a healthy PP boost and it's suddenly not so easy to see ATIs advatange? Thus for me, ATI need speed and plenty of it and from these current speculations I don't think it's enough. Knowing the ATI of old, they may not even go for 500Mhz on the XT if the PRO is set at 475Mhz. And as for that 400Mhz figure, boy do I hope that's "gobbledygook"
I suspect even a 475Mhz 12pipe will be shown a very clean pair of heals by any 16 pipe card clocked 75Mhz lower or not yet alone a 12 pipe card running at 400Mhz.
As for the "monster" reference, I was simply using the word in the context of throwing all caution to the wind and following Nvidias aggressive cooling and power requirements. This may not be the wisest thing to do for your mid range series but if you want to be king of the roost it may just be required! How many review sites do you think will report, ATIs flagship comes in 2nd again but uses less power so that's ok,
I'll give you a hint, it'll be less than 1.
The more I think of it the more I'm convinced this is yet another negatitive aspect of the 18 month release strategy. I can honestly say I believe that we'll end up getting the X800 (XT) at 500Mhz, then 6-12 months down the line the X805(XT) which has no new features and is now clocked at 550/600Mhz. Perhaps a new core enabling it to hit the 600 mark but I bet the new core is primarily designed to increase margins. Is this a bad thing? Depends on your own viewpoint I guess. Me? I'm a selfish gamer who just wants a new core every 12 months where upon the old core can be plonked down a section, and so on and so on.
Hellbinder
Banned
Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?
Xtreme Pipelines still applies and is not fud.
Shader processing is enhanced over the current cards. In fact I was sure it was PS3.0 for a long time and FP32. Although recently things have been put out that make me doubt my own info.. but then again... If r420 is not PS3.0 then its mighty close and has some EXTREME PS2.0 processing capabilities.
People are making a big mistake thinking that the R420 is no more than a 16 pipe version of the R300TacTisIt said:
Xtreme Pipelines still applies and is not fud.
Shader processing is enhanced over the current cards. In fact I was sure it was PS3.0 for a long time and FP32. Although recently things have been put out that make me doubt my own info.. but then again... If r420 is not PS3.0 then its mighty close and has some EXTREME PS2.0 processing capabilities.
Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?
I hope your right but is it possible to go from 8 pipes to 16 ubbar performing ones by only increasing the transistor count to 175 million? With only 60 million additions (that sounds so harsh!), I'd suspect new features including PS3.0 to be on the next gen part.
I hope your right though, ATI need their Pro biting at the heals of the NV40 Ultra and the XT to be way infront if marketing of features isn't going to rain on their parade. IQ could be the ace in the hole but I'd assumed FSAA would remain as is. Have yuo heard of anything on this?
Hellbinder said:People are making a big mistake thinking that the R420 is no more than a 16 pipe version of the R300TacTisIt said:
Xtreme Pipelines still applies and is not fud.
Shader processing is enhanced over the current cards. In fact I was sure it was PS3.0 for a long time and FP32. Although recently things have been put out that make me doubt my own info.. but then again... If r420 is not PS3.0 then its mighty close and has some EXTREME PS2.0 processing capabilities.
I hope your right but is it possible to go from 8 pipes to 16 ubbar performing ones by only increasing the transistor count to 175 million? With only 60 million additions (that sounds so harsh!), I'd suspect new features including PS3.0 to be on the next gen part.
I hope your right though, ATI need their Pro biting at the heals of the NV40 Ultra and the XT to be way infront if marketing of features isn't going to rain on their parade. IQ could be the ace in the hole but I'd assumed FSAA would remain as is. Have yuo heard of anything on this?
Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?
I hope you're right. And if ATi can pull of such a card, then it should be a lot faster than the NV40 in order to make up for its apparant lack of PS3.0. Well, here's hoping.
I would get a 6800Non-U if it turns out to not be as power hungry as the Ultra. I am especially liking its video encoder and the ability to use hardware editing to touch up images and such.
I hope ATi have something along those lines this round too, as I've always liked their video capabilities, and this is something that the NV40 has begun to shine bright in. Bring on the features, If they can't be bringiing them in the DX field, then they should bloody well advance them in other key areas.
Hellbinder said:People are making a big mistake thinking that the R420 is no more than a 16 pipe version of the R300TacTisIt said:
Xtreme Pipelines still applies and is not fud.
Shader processing is enhanced over the current cards. In fact I was sure it was PS3.0 for a long time and FP32. Although recently things have been put out that make me doubt my own info.. but then again... If r420 is not PS3.0 then its mighty close and has some EXTREME PS2.0 processing capabilities.
I hope you're right. And if ATi can pull of such a card, then it should be a lot faster than the NV40 in order to make up for its apparant lack of PS3.0. Well, here's hoping.
I would get a 6800Non-U if it turns out to not be as power hungry as the Ultra. I am especially liking its video encoder and the ability to use hardware editing to touch up images and such.
I hope ATi have something along those lines this round too, as I've always liked their video capabilities, and this is something that the NV40 has begun to shine bright in. Bring on the features, If they can't be bringiing them in the DX field, then they should bloody well advance them in other key areas.