Problems with volume production of 5600 Ultra rev2?

K

kemosabe

Veteran
"Users will again have difficulty in choosing cards because the traders can easily pass off 350MHz cards as 400MHz ones, and most people who don't use the Internet or PC press can be easily deceived. I just hope that companies which have already released the GeForce FX 5600 Ultra 350 MHz will name 400MHz cards differently. However, the rumor has it that there are currently some problems with the mass production of the new ultras."

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/gffx/gffx-12.html

Anyone here in a position to confirm these rumors? Uttar?
 
Ostsol said:
Reminds me of the Radeon 8500 LE debacle. . .
Click to expand...

Except that it was 8500 vs. 8500 LE this is 5600 Ultra vs. 5600 Ultra. I think it is the first time we have had two different clocked chips named exactly the same.
 
Very WRONG, ND. The difference was between the retail & the OEM 8500's. The OEM's were NEVER meant for the retail market. Now, this doesn't make it right, but in no way can you compare it to sell 2 totally different 5600Ultra's named exactly the same in the retail marketplace.....
 
Tim said:
Ostsol said:
Reminds me of the Radeon 8500 LE debacle. . .
Click to expand...

Except that it was 8500 vs. 8500 LE this is 5600 Ultra vs. 5600 Ultra. I think it is the first time we have had two different clocked chips named exactly the same.
Click to expand...
Well, there also was 8500LE (250/250) vs 8500LE (230/230). Of course, this was only in the OEM market, but there appeared to be alot of places where OEM was the only viable option.
 
Tim said:
I think it is the first time we have had two different clocked chips named exactly the same.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's that rare, actually. There are a few cards on the retail shelves where you have to look very closely to see that they don't match the "official" specifications. Or there have benn no strict specs at all by the chip maker.
 
Ostsol said:
Well, there also was 8500LE (250/250) vs 8500LE (230/230). Of course, this was only in the OEM market, but there appeared to be alot of places where OEM was the only viable option.
Click to expand...

230/230 were labelled as LELE...
 
not at first.

the LELE nomenclature only appeared after a lot of complaints.

the 8500LE was 250/250, 230/230, and even 200/200 (IIRC on that last)

So, these mess-ups have happened before. No excuse for it happening again. (Also, I do remember Kyle going on a series of rants about how the 8500LE "misleading marketing" or whatever. Anyone want to place bets on him doing so w/ this 5600Ultra confusion? :LOL: )
 
I seriously thought LELE was a joke, given how silly it sounds. Cards were actually labeled with that suffix? :p
 
martrox said:
Very WRONG, ND. The difference was between the retail & the OEM 8500's. The OEM's were NEVER meant for the retail market.
Click to expand...

You are right i apparently got confused about 8500 (retail), 8500 (oem @ LE speed) and the 2 LE clocked differently.
 
I just recieved a 5600 Ultra retail from ABIT which is only clocked to 350 Mhz core.
I've also recieved a gainward 5600 Ultra but at least that board never hit retail shelves as they pulled the boards before they went into mass production and are now waiting for mass production of rev 2.
BUT they're having problems with quantities. They simply have gotten any chips allocated to them yet and yet they're a tier one nvidia partner...

So yeah I think there's truth to the story.
 
Doomtrooper said:
Ostsol said:
Well, there also was 8500LE (250/250) vs 8500LE (230/230). Of course, this was only in the OEM market, but there appeared to be alot of places where OEM was the only viable option.
Click to expand...

230/230 were labelled as LELE...
Click to expand...

Actually, I bought a Built By ATI Radeon 8500LE that was clocked at 230/230. It would artifact if I tried 250/250.
________
Oregon Medical Marijuana Dispensary
 
Last edited by a moderator:
martrox said:
micron said:
There were 8500LE's boxed and branded as 8500's.
Click to expand...

From ATI? Show me where, and I'll "eat" my words......
Click to expand...
I hope they go down easy, because ATi did indeed sell retail boxed LE's. :p They came with VGA out only (as opposed to VGA/DVI/TV), and were originally at 250/250. Later ones were 250/230 or 230/230 (can't remember which, but SsP45 is probably right), but in the same box--a cause for grumbling. Sounds like the current 5600 situation, but in reverse (slower cards later, not first). The box had a picture of the head of a suit of armor, IIRC.
 
There is no such _card_ as GF FX 5600 Ultra. It's a chip.

End users buy cards, not chips. And i'm pretty sure that cardmakers will give different names to cards based on 5600U/350 vs 5600U/400.
 
Pete said:
martrox said:
micron said:
There were 8500LE's boxed and branded as 8500's.
Click to expand...

From ATI? Show me where, and I'll "eat" my words......
Click to expand...
I hope they go down easy, because ATi did indeed sell retail boxed LE's. :p They came with VGA out only (as opposed to VGA/DVI/TV), and were originally at 250/250. Later ones were 250/230 or 230/230 (can't remember which, but SsP45 is probably right), but in the same box--a cause for grumbling. Sounds like the current 5600 situation, but in reverse (slower cards later, not first). The box had a picture of the head of a suit of armor, IIRC.
Click to expand...
Lol, I have a Built by ATi 8500LE in my second PC, it has DVI out, VGA out, and S-Video out. It came clocked at 250/275 and has 3.3ns memory on it. Part#100-431038.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
NV31 Ultra's may be clocked slower than previewed?
Replies
19
Views
4K
martrox
M
Back
Top