Inquirer spreading R420 info

[Stryyder]

Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?

IQ could be the ace in the hole but I'd assumed FSAA would remain as is. Have you heard of anything on this?

Why do you make that assumption?

1) The original R420 was scrapped
2) The idea of 2xR350 cores in a 175Million package comes in instead.
4) No new features have apparently been added.

All inaccurate

Sorry that should have been the R400 was scrapped. As for the others being inaccurate perhaps but can you explain why you feel they are?

I would rather have you offer some proof of their accuracy than asking Joe for negative proof.

 

[Seiko]

Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?

I would rather have you offer some proof of their accuracy than asking Joe for negative proof.

Well I asked Paul but that's splitting hairs Basically, it's simply how I have interpreted various speculations Inquirer, XbitLabs and forum comments.

If Paul feels they are inaccurate even with no evidence I would have liked to hear his breakdown or any one elses for that matter.

 

[Heathen]

1) The original R420 was scrapped
2) The idea of 2xR350 cores in a 175Million package comes in instead.
3) The R350 had very good IQ already and is still in front of the competition.
4) No new features have apparently been added.
5) ATI themselves said they would concentrate on speed.
6) The Xbox2 contract has been won and will need resource diverted
7) ATI have shown over the last 18 months they are prepared to call speedbinned and very minor tweaked chips new products.

1) IIRC it was the R400 which got shelved.
2) I tend to think the R420 as four really souped up RV360s
3) True
4) No? You sure about that?
5) And that's a good thing, but doesn't prclude IQ improvements.
6) Depends on how radical a departure the XB2 GPU is away from what ATi is designing for the PC market. also gotta remember that aTI are only selling the IP and not the design.
7) Well the RV series have some nice tweaks are are definitely on .13 with low K. Think about why ATi were going that route before seeing it as a bad thing. Personally I see it as aninteresting use of Project Management, ATi's had an extra 18 Months to really fine tune the 'old' R300 chipset design (which already had some hand tuning when it was released), just think on how much more efficient and effective they could make the technology in that amount of time...

 

[Stryyder]

Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?

IQ could be the ace in the hole but I'd assumed FSAA would remain as is. Have you heard of anything on this?

Why do you make that assumption?

1) The original R420 was scrapped
2) The idea of 2xR350 cores in a 175Million package comes in instead.
4) No new features have apparently been added.

All inaccurate

Sorry that should have been the R400 was scrapped. As for the others being inaccurate perhaps but can you explain why you feel they are?

I would rather have you offer some proof of their accuracy than asking Joe for negative proof.

Well I asked Paul but that's splitting hairs Basically, it's simply how I have interpreted various speculations Inquirer, XbitLabs and forum comments.

If Paul feels they are inaccurate even with no evidence I would have like to heard his breakdown or any one elses for that matter.

Considering that 1/3rd of your sources are completely unreliable another 1/3rd is notoriousl known for stating every possibility about NV4x R4xx and the remaining 1/3 is somewhat unreliable regardless of accuracy your assertions are basically pure conjecture then?

 

[Evildeus]

If the rumor of the R420 are right, don't you think it will be badwich limited? It seems that there's some 8*AA. Do you think 6*AA or 8*AA will be useable at high resolutions? (with AF enable of course)

OT: Guys can't you reduce thoses quotes? I think you should just quote the last answer ... :?

 

[Seiko]

Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?

Sorry that should have been the R400 was scrapped. As for the others being inaccurate perhaps but can you explain why you feel they are?

The rumour you're talking about with your second point was actually 3 or 4 RV360, not 2 R350. And even then, it's not literally 4 separate cores in there.

As for the last one - what do you expect me to say?

Thanks Paul
Hmmm, so ATI would take the RV360 design elements to produce their top range chip and not the R350s?
I honestly thought 16 pipes = 2x8 ala R350 not 4x4 ala RV360? Wow, now that does make more sense on the transistor count but it's surely cutting it close for any extras. Also, what's the RV360s shader scores like? Are they comparable to R350/2?

As for the new features, I'm still pretty sure we won't be seeing any in terms of PS3.0.

 

[Stryyder]

OT: Guys can't you reduce thoses quotes? I think you should just quote the last answer ... :?

Sorry getting lazy in my old age.

 

[PaulS]

Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?

As for the new features, I'm still pretty sure we won't be seeing any in terms of PS3.0.

Well it depends what you call a "feature", and what value you place on said feature. Let's theoretically say they improved IQ by a sizeable margin, whilst retaining the speed needed to use that IQ - would that be a feature you'd deem "in the terms" of PS3.0?

What about other things, like shader speed? Just because something doesn't have a marketting number stamped on the end, it doesn't mean it's not a feature that people will be more than pleased to have,

 

[Seiko]

Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?

Considering that 1/3rd of your sources are completely unreliable another 1/3rd is notoriousl known for stating every possibility about NV4x R4xx and the remaining 1/3 is somewhat unreliable regardless of accuracy your assertions are basically pure conjecture then?

I thought I'd established that 3 pages back? Yes completely. At this time we're all pretty much guessing. Trying to make sense of small technical leaks, silly half truths and tonnes of misinformation. At no time do I believe I or anyone else not currently under NDA will be completely right but it will be interesting looking back in a few weeks time. For me at least, it's simply an exercise in exchanging ideas and thoughts. I'm more than willing to accept or listen to others and may be required to rethink my ideas and guesses.

Luckily, my previous guesses have been fairly close not that it adds any weight here. Just like to see if I'm close or not really.

 

[Heathen]

Wow, now that does make more sense on the transistor count but it's surely cutting it close for any extras. Also, what's the RV360s shader scores like?

Don't think it's safe to just quad up the transistor count of the entire chip, there's probably quite a lot which won't get replicated four time. The memory controller comes to mind as a prime example (dunno how many trannys would be saved though).

 

[Seiko]

1) The original R420 was scrapped
2) The idea of 2xR350 cores in a 175Million package comes in instead.
3) The R350 had very good IQ already and is still in front of the competition.
4) No new features have apparently been added.
5) ATI themselves said they would concentrate on speed.
6) The Xbox2 contract has been won and will need resource diverted
7) ATI have shown over the last 18 months they are prepared to call speedbinned and very minor tweaked chips new products.

1) IIRC it was the R400 which got shelved.
2) I tend to think the R420 as four really souped up RV360s
3) True
4) No? You sure about that?
5) And that's a good thing, but doesn't prclude IQ improvements.
6) Depends on how radical a departure the XB2 GPU is away from what ATi is designing for the PC market. also gotta remember that aTI are only selling the IP and not the design.
7) Well the RV series have some nice tweaks are are definitely on .13 with low K. Think about why ATi were going that route before seeing it as a bad thing. Personally I see it as aninteresting use of Project Management, ATi's had an extra 18 Months to really fine tune the 'old' R300 chipset design (which already had some hand tuning when it was released), just think on how much more efficient and effective they could make the technology in that amount of time...

Yes Paul and yourself have shown me the light on the RV360 concept. Well I guess you have, a few weeks to wait and see. As for the continual tweaks and idea we'll see the benifits now. The rumours of a 400Mhz core don't instill great confidence. And as a greedy impatient consumer I think the incremental R3xx Mhz steps wound me up more and more each time.

 

[Pete]

Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?

As I said I am inclined to ignore abhorrent results. Both ways.

Aberrant, you mean.

 

[jvd]

And as a greedy impatient consumer I think the incremental R3xx Mhz steps wound me up more and more each time

I'm sorry the small steps with the geforce didn't bother u. How about the geforce 2 ? No ? How about the geforce 3 ... geforce 3 ti , geforce 4 ti ? No ? How about nv30 ? How about them downclocking from the nv30- the nv35 ? Then how about all the other small speed increases they did with that core.

How about we go back in time ? How about the tnt even before the geforce line ?

Nvidia set the stage for this .

It sucks yea . But you've had a number of years to get used to it .

 

[AlphaWolf]

Re: Hmmm, sounds slow to me?

As I said I am inclined to ignore abhorrent results. Both ways.

Aberrant, you mean.

Yes.
I blame my spellchecker.

 

[Pete]

Heh, just checking that you weren't degenerating into an unusually honest fanboi.

 

[Geeforcer]

And as a greedy impatient consumer I think the incremental R3xx Mhz steps wound me up more and more each time

I'm sorry the small steps with the geforce didn't bother u. How about the geforce 2 ? No ? How about the geforce 3 ... geforce 3 ti , geforce 4 ti ? No ? How about nv30 ? How about them downclocking from the nv30- the nv35 ? Then how about all the other small speed increases they did with that core.

How about we go back in time ? How about the tnt even before the geforce line ?

Nvidia set the stage for this .

It sucks yea . But you've had a number of years to get used to it .

Several comments. Until R300, Nvidia released new chips every 6 month while ATI did it every year. GF3 and GF3 Ti500, released within 6 month of each other and pretty much architecturally identical is not quite the same a R9700 and R9800XT, released within 18 month of each other and very, very similar architecturally. I am not saying that one approach is better then the other, but they are not the same. GF4 TI was a good architetural improvment over GF3. NV30 was a huge step from NV25, largely in the wrong direction. Finally, AFIAK NV30 and NV35 have a diffrent pipeline stucture (one is not simply an underlcock of the other).

 

[Tic_Tac]

Isnt the whole point of the nomenclature change from R3xx to R4xx indicative enough of a "generational" leap?

The R420 will have more pipes, more features and more speed as expected from a next generation product.

People are impressed with the NV40. The leap in performance and features rings a bell.

From what I gather, the R420 is less complex and clocked higher.

I would suggest that the ATi offering will be faster (10-20%) and offer just enough DX9 2.0+ support to make 3.0 compliance a check box feature.

Ruby looks good enough to me, and boy can she move.

 

[Mendel]

AFAIK r420 has pixel shader 3.0 but no dynamic branching.

 

[tEd]

AFAIK r420 has pixel shader 3.0 but no dynamic branching.

that doesn't work

 

[Seiko]

And as a greedy impatient consumer I think the incremental R3xx Mhz steps wound me up more and more each time

I'm sorry the small steps with the geforce didn't bother u. How about the geforce 2 ? No ? How about the geforce 3 ... geforce 3 ti , geforce 4 ti ? No ? How about nv30 ? How about them downclocking from the nv30- the nv35 ? Then how about all the other small speed increases they did with that core.

How about we go back in time ? How about the tnt even before the geforce line ?

Nvidia set the stage for this .

It sucks yea . But you've had a number of years to get used to it .

You assume incorrectly. The GF3/GF3 ti garbage really ticked me off but that starts to bring Nvidia into this discussion more than I'd like. I'm talking about ATI and the 3 series here and although a huge fan of the cards, 8500, 9700Pro and soon to have FireGL T2 I'm still the first to admit many things over the last 18months have really ticked me off with ATI.

That aside, I think those looking at the R420 and hoping for new features are going to be very disappointed. Those hoping for very high FPS are going to be thrilled!