Is this the R520? wowo!!!!

[Karma Police]

Holy........

http://www.driverheaven.net/showthread.php?t=68471&page=2

Or is it fake? How easy is it to fake something like this? I can't tell.........

 

[Karma Police]

If it's real, notice the 1 out of 2 display devices.......

 

[egore]

Why would a PCIX card have AGP memory. I think it's fake.

 

[Karma Police]

hmmmm........

I assumed 3DMark 05 showed all video memory as Total AGP Memory.

Does anyone know how 3DMark 05 shows video memory on a PCIe card? AGP or PCIe?

 

[tEd]

it's un-real

 

[Karma Police]

uh, is that good or bad?

please say good!!!

My spidey sense is tingling, but I have no proof otherwise.........

 

[tEd]

with unreal i mean not real.

the driver number makes no sense considering the date plus the vendorID is wrong.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Plus it seems a copy/paste of the nV50 "specs" that were going around last week. :?

 

[Karma Police]

awww......

well, back to reality!

 

[DOGMA1138]

if they`ll have any thing close to 1800mhz on the memory front ill buy one just to eat it! 8)

 

[KimB]

Haha. It's a cut and paste from these very forums:
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20412&start=0

Notice in particular that the last few "features" were ones posted by DemoCoder as a sarcastic response to the original rumored specs.

 

[anaqer]

"X950" - 'nuff said, that alone should have been a dead give-away.

 

[Neeyik]

hmmmm........

I assumed 3DMark 05 showed all video memory as Total AGP Memory.

Does anyone know how 3DMark 05 shows video memory on a PCIe card? AGP or PCIe?

An example (X700 Pro PCIe):

Description   RADEON X700 Series     
Manufacturer   ATI Technologies Inc.     
Total Local Video Memory   256 MB      
Total Local Texture Memory   256 MB      
Total AGP Memory   256 MB

AGP
Revision   3.0     
Rate   1x, 2x, 4x     
Available Rate   0x00000007     
Selected Rate   0x00000000     
Aperture Size   249 MB      
Sideband Addressing   supported (disabled)     
Fast Write   not supported

Slot 2/6 (PCI)
RADEON X700 Series
Order   2      
Designation   PCI2     
Type   PCI     
Characteristics   5.0V, PME Signal     
Data Bus Width   32 b     
Details   In Use, Long     
Device Class   Display Adapter     
Manufacturer   ATI Technologies Inc.     
Driver Version   6.14.10.6512     
Driver Date   1-19-2005     
IRQ   0

Slot 4/6 ()
Order   4      
Designation   PCIEX16     
Characteristics   5.0V, PME Signal     
Data Bus Width   32 b     
Details   Available, Long     
IRQ   0

As you can see, 3DMark needs a bit of an update to display the details correctly it would seem.

 

[Acert93]

"X950" - 'nuff said, that alone should have been a dead give-away.

I am not sure that is.

ATi is in an odd position. They need to have a SM 3.0 part out, yet the R520 is basically a beefed up R420. But with the R500 in X2 coming out in the fall and nVidias NV50 coming out in Fall/Winter is it worth it to release the Y800 series, only to come out with the R600 (Longhorn) Z800 series 6-9 months later?

These dates are speculative of course, but you can see the dilemma. I get the feeling R520 needs to come out soon because they need to support SM 3.0, yet the Radeon X-series is JUST getting good quantities available. Why kill the X800/X850 line when you are finally selling them? Introducing "Y-Series" kinda takes the momentum away. Adding a "high end" part in the X800 series just extends its lifetime.

Sorry this is not coherant (tired). I am not sure a X950 name for their SM 3.0 part is an indication this is wrong. The problem would be with the mid level cards, but I guess they could have the X750 SM 3.0 and the like.

 

[Dave Baumann]

R520 is significantly different enough that they wouldn't waste their efforts on only producing a high end; there will be a full line of chips based on the archotecture. I also wouldn't look to early 2006 for Longhorns release, IMO.

 

[DOGMA1138]

"X950" - 'nuff said, that alone should have been a dead give-away.

I am not sure that is.

ATi is in an odd position. They need to have a SM 3.0 part out, yet the R520 is basically a beefed up R420. But with the R500 in X2 coming out in the fall and nVidias NV50 coming out in Fall/Winter is it worth it to release the Y800 series, only to come out with the R600 (Longhorn) Z800 series 6-9 months later?

These dates are speculative of course, but you can see the dilemma. I get the feeling R520 needs to come out soon because they need to support SM 3.0, yet the Radeon X-series is JUST getting good quantities available. Why kill the X800/X850 line when you are finally selling them? Introducing "Y-Series" kinda takes the momentum away. Adding a "high end" part in the X800 series just extends its lifetime.

Sorry this is not coherant (tired). I am not sure a X950 name for their SM 3.0 part is an indication this is wrong. The problem would be with the mid level cards, but I guess they could have the X750 SM 3.0 and the like.

the X was instead of a 10 7xxx... 8xxx..9xxx.... -.- 10xxx but Xxxx sounds way cooler, they can allways go back to digits and we`ll get a 11xxx

 

[IgnorancePersonified]

Hmmmm.... "X" ... "Y" was thier a "Z" class spaceship in Starwars?? Maybe the R600 is going to be "A800"

 

[bigz]

using roman numerals would be quite cool

XI800 XT, etc

 

[digitalwanderer]

R520 is significantly different enough that they wouldn't waste their efforts on only producing a high end; there will be a full line of chips based on the architecture.

Thanks, but from that I'm inferring that this card shouldn't be an R520 then...I got problems figuring on ATi dumping the X300/X600/X800 line-up entirely right now.

I also wouldn't look to early 2006 for Longhorns release, IMO.

It keeps getting pushed back so much that I just think of it as still un-announced.

 

[wireframe]

R520 is significantly different enough that they wouldn't waste their efforts on only producing a high end; there will be a full line of chips based on the archotecture. I also wouldn't look to early 2006 for Longhorns release, IMO.

This coupled with strange behavior regarding the intermediate 850 release is what has me thinking maybe, just perhaps ATI are pushing for a early release of R520. It's not the battle at the top that is hurting ATI, it is the fact that Nvidia has a whole SM 3.0 range of cards from top to bottom.