No CrossFire for R4xx?

G

Geo

Mostly Harmless
Legend
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24289

This looks like irresponsible journalism to me, and more piling on ATI (which is in vogue at the moment, for understandable reasons --but then this community has generally believed that anything worth doing is worth doing to excess.)

Particularly since it's been only a week since Orton reaffirmed R4xx CrossFire availability for July.

The "seven weeks" thing looks like malarkey (been five on my calendar), but that may be a language tense problem for a non-native English speaker, and he's really pointing at seven weeks between launch and presumed availability of test systems.

The other interesting point is the stated no need for the separate compositing chip with R520. But given the rest of the article I'm not willing to give that much credence (tho it would be nice if it were true, of course).
 
geo said:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24289

This looks like irresponsible journalism to me, and more piling on ATI (which is in vogue at the moment, for understandable reasons --but then this community has generally believed that anything worth doing is worth doing to excess.)
Click to expand...

When I read it, I got the feeling that it was more apologetic than critical. It seems to me that many are saying that they don't mind how long ATi takes as long as it's worth the wait.
 
I think the tree Theo is barking up at is the wrong one on a couple of the technical points.
 
trinibwoy said:
When I read it, I got the feeling that it was more apologetic than critical. It seems to me that many are saying that they don't mind how long ATi takes as long as it's worth the wait.
Click to expand...

It still:

1). Directly contravenes what Orton said just last week.
2). Puts another pinprick in ATI's credibility that they can deliver on their promises. (if believed)
2). Disappoints those who already own X8xx cards and were looking forward to "seeing what all the shouting was about" relatively on the cheap. (if believed)

Y'know, I totally get that the titillation factor is a big part of Inq's success. But I also look around the net, and see that they've become what looks to me like the single largest source for forward-looking info on a range of pc topics, graphics near the top of the list. And I don't mean just for forum material --I mean front page cites across a wide variety of websites.

With influence comes responsibility. Having fun speculating on specs, benchmarks, and availability dates is one thing and one level of irresponsbility if done poorly. . .this kind of thing is a generic step beyond that, from my pov, and thus an even higher responsiblity to be in the ballpark.
 
geo said:
It still:

1). Directly contravenes what Orton said just last week.
2). Puts another pinprick in ATI's credibility that they can deliver on their promises. (if believed)
2). Disappoints those who already own X8xx cards and were looking forward to "seeing what all the shouting was about" relatively on the cheap. (if believed)

Y'know, I totally get that the titillation factor is a big part of Inq's success. But I also look around the net, and see that they've become what looks to me like the single largest source for forward-looking info on a range of pc topics, graphics near the top of the list. And I don't mean just for forum material --I mean front page cites across a wide variety of websites.

With influence comes responsibility. Having fun speculating on specs, benchmarks, and availability dates is one thing and one level of irresponsbility if done poorly. . .this kind of thing is a generic step beyond that, from my pov, and thus an even higher responsiblity to be in the ballpark.
Click to expand...
You are such a doomsayer for ATI news. lol Everytime somthing comes outon ATI your in the first comments , with doom for ATI... And no i wouldnt give the inqs that much credit. And no, i am a x800 owner and the delay or what ever is not a big deal. Though there are ppl on forums who need to have a issue to bloviate about.
 
Keerist, I'd love to have some good news to celebrate. Hoping the XFire reviews are going to provide that, which is probably why I had such a negative reaction to this article.
 
karlotta said:
Though there are ppl on forums who need to have a issue to bloviate about.
Click to expand...

You ain't see nuttin yet. Could you imagine if roles were switched and Nvidia was delayed. Walt would've been bloviating all over the place :LOL: It's actually kinda sad to see people rationalizing each companies' actions to fit their version of reality.
 
That'd be a hell of a nice "I've been a s*it, but I really love you, can't we work it out?" bouquet of R520 flowers from ATI to the community given the lack of AGP for 7800GTX. . .

Kombatant--

Oh, I wasn't taken in the by the Inq piece. . .just worried how many others would be.
 
It all depends what way you read the title of the news story. I read it as ATI won't launch Crossfire before they launch R520, not that no 'before' R520 Crossfire will ever exist.

Maybe he's right, who knows :?:
 
It's not ilogical to assume that with the introduction of the R520 ATI will just give all cards multi GPU logic. And this Slave/Master stuff will be a thing of the past is it?
 
Really?

With Crossfire logic supposedly being implemented into every R520 chip out there, making a costly and problematic Crossfire off-die chip would be a thing of the past, the most elegant thing for ATI is just to hold on to Crossfire until Fudo arrives.
Click to expand...

That seems pretty blunt to me.
 
I'm not sure I follow your responce? Are you answering my question? ;) I'm a little confused as to the direction ATI will take with its multi GPU solutions. It seems to me making every card from the ground up with multi GPU logic would make more sense than continue with master/slave setups.
 
Maybe because I know 100% that R4xx Crossfire will show up, I don't see the tone of his words :LOL:

Theo is wrong, seemingly ignoring all evidence around him that would straighten his story out and leave it with no ambiguity. And that, really, is that :LOL:
 
ChrisRay said:
I'm not sure I follow your responce? Are you answering my question? ;) I'm a little confused as to the direction ATI will take with its multi GPU solutions. It seems to me making every card from the ground up with multi GPU logic would make more sense than continue with master/slave setups.
Click to expand...

I would guess the setup will stay the same, for R520 at least. I can't imagine ATI wanting to go to the extra expense of putting the compositing chip on every board (or integrated into the die of the GPU), plus there's the issue of the external connector which I doubt ATI would want to put on every board rather than a straightforward dual DVI setup (Although of course that connector can also do DVI). If ATI dropped the compositing chip they'd probably end up going for a far more SLI-esque system, and quite likely end up losing their 'big thing' with CrossFire, SuperAA.

So, my hunch would be no changes to CrossFire for R520, but I could be wrong.
 
the compositing chip is not required for SuperAA techniques, as nVidia is demonstrating with their upcoming drivers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top