R300 clocked at 315mhz!!!

[Prometheus]

www.theinquirer.net has some news for us!!They are saying that r300 will be clocked at 315mhz and will give about 15000 marks. That's about 50% more than a gforce 4 4600!!Just a rumor!Seems interesting though!! 8)What have they put on that gpu?Maybe a fridge!!

 

[Joe DeFuria]

If that turns out to be true....all I can say is WOW!

I was personally expecting roughly the same clock speeds as the Parhelia...low 200's, with 250 being the absolute max. And even THAT is impressive to me assuming 8 pipes on 0.15 process.

I remain skeptical of the 315 Mhz figure, but if it's true for some R-300 variant (and that variant is not some $1000 workstation based model), then this would have greatly exceeded my expectations.

 

[Doomtrooper]

ATI Radeon GPUs historically operate at higher frequencies with less heat, I would not be surprised if this is true in the least

 

[Nappe1]

hmmh... does anybody else find that 3DMark result a bit low for 8 pipeline chip with 256Bit memory interface and core clocked to 315Mhz?? because Afaik, here in finland some overclockers have surpassed 16000 3DMarks with GF4Ti4600...

http://gamershq.madonion.com/hardware/halloffame/

 

[Randell]

well all huge grains of, as usual with all the rumours floating around here.

wouldnt 3dmark 2001 be quite CPU limited on the R300?

16000 3dmarks heh, on very high fsbs, with very positive lod adjustments etc etc.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

No, I don't find the 3D Mark score too low...mostly because there is no basis for comparison. For example, what CPUs are we talking about? We know that with those "tricked out GeForce4" scores, if legit, the users did everything possible to sqeeze out every last 3D Mark. Probably not the same with the R-300 scores.

More importantly though, I expect at these levels of hardware, we'll start seeing diminishing returns at 1024x768, which is the standard 3D Mark resolution. These high end boards like R-300 and upcoming NV30 should start distancing themselves at higher resolutions, and with FSAA / advanced filtering, etc.

 

[Prometheus]

Well Nappe1 we have to know the configuration os the tests in my opinion.If you are using P4 2.53mhz with 1066 rambus for gf4 and an athlon xp 1.6 for the r300 thing could look a bit wrong.I guess the 15000 score for r300 anf 10000 for the gf4 is using about the same configuration.
We'll see!!Anyway, if this turns out be true then the only thing I have to say is

 

[Tahir2]

If you start with 15000 and the overclock your FSB and processor you also overclock your AGP bus....then your GFX card memory and GPU.

Your whole system overclocked you can expect to beat 20000 3Dmarks

So... the 15000 3DMark is feasible and damn fast for even a 2.53GHz PC1066 RDRAM system.

Normal GF4 Ti4600 figures on a comparable system runing at defualt speeds would but it at around 10000 to 11000 as mentioned. About the same kind of jump from Radeon 8500 to GF4 Ti4600 and definitely higher than GF3Ti 500 to GF4 Ti4600.

So in conclusion Nappe1 I strongly disagree with your comment

 

[Doomtrooper]

Don't base your decision on the very political 3Dmark Slash Screen Edition

Macci is the one achieving 16000 marks by the way (like I said this benchmark is a money machine for exotic cooling etc...)


His Machine...hmmm P4 @ 3500 mhz isn't exactly a stock computer

NW 2.4B@3492MHz (194FSB 3X RDRAM), ASUS P4T-E w/ (selfmade) turbopll module, PNY GF4 @398/783, Custommade vaporphase (R404) cooling for CPU and GPU, no pelts no water just pure Vaporphase cooling pics => http://www.solidhardware.com/macci/vaporphase/ See ya guys - I'm going to the army now ) .. bbl..

 

[Prometheus]

Misae same post at the same time!!

 

[Nappe1]

So in conclusion Nappe1 I strongly disagree with your comment

well, I was just asking that's all... because to me it looks like most of general public is waiting something even more than this. (mostly because Parhelia was so hyped and was actually a bit slower than waited for.)

So, to exceed general public's expectations, R300 should be some kind of warp speeder...

 

[Doomtrooper]

I really like Macci's tower, I wonder where I can get one like that

 

[Prometheus]

Try NASA Doomtrooper

 

[Tahir2]

Yea, great ventilation

Wonder if he lays games on it, tho'!

Edit.. lay? eauww... i meant, Wonder if he PLAYS games on it

 

[Doomtrooper]

Try NASA Doomtrooper

Ya Edwards Air Force Base and Area 51 ...fades into X-files music

 

[Bambers]

It should distance itself quite a bit in 3dmark2002/3 whenever DX9 is released.

Normal GF4 Ti4600 figures on a comparable system runing at defualt speeds would but it at around 10000 to 11000 as mentioned. About the same kind of jump from Radeon 8500 to GF4 Ti4600 and definitely higher than GF3Ti 500 to GF4 Ti4600

The gap in 3dmark2001 between the 8500 and ti4600 is actually only a little over 1000 points. By comparison a 4000-5000 point gap is very big.

 

[Nappe1]

It should distance itself quite a bit in 3dmark2002/3 whenever DX9 is released.

Normal GF4 Ti4600 figures on a comparable system runing at defualt speeds would but it at around 10000 to 11000 as mentioned. About the same kind of jump from Radeon 8500 to GF4 Ti4600 and definitely higher than GF3Ti 500 to GF4 Ti4600

The gap in 3dmark2001 between the 8500 and ti4600 is actually only a little over 1000 points. By comparison a 4000-5000 point gap is very big.

I surely didn't wrote that...
Bambers, time to check your quote's source.

EDIT: That should be Misae's comment, not mine

 

[Tahir2]

It should distance itself quite a bit in 3dmark2002/3 whenever DX9 is released.

Normal GF4 Ti4600 figures on a comparable system runing at defualt speeds would but it at around 10000 to 11000 as mentioned. About the same kind of jump from Radeon 8500 to GF4 Ti4600 and definitely higher than GF3Ti 500 to GF4 Ti4600

The gap in 3dmark2001 between the 8500 and ti4600 is actually only a little over 1000 points. By comparison a 4000-5000 point gap is very big.

Ahh... proves my point even more succintly...

If the R300 is pulling of those figures at default speeds on comparable systems then... thats not bad at all... almost a 50% increase in a synthetic benchmark loved by this industry a little too much.

 

[GetStuff]

If the R300 has 8 pipes I don't see why ATI would be pushing for >300Mhz especially since it's the first version of the core introduced. Unless the R300 is not all that efficiant per Mhz like the R200 is compared to NV20(and 25).

14k 3dmarks sounds really nice though, but a number like that (at defualt resolution w/ no AA) sounds kinda fishy IMO since 3dmark2k1 is fairly CPU limited (even moreso with such a fast video card).

 

[Dave]

If the R300 has 8 pipes I don't see why ATI would be pushing for >300Mhz especially since it's the first version of the core introduced. Unless the R300 is not all that efficiant per Mhz like the R200 is compared to NV20(and 25).

If I had to guess, I'd say they have a flexible pipeline. Meaning, they can have 8 pipes with 2 textures/clock or 4 pipes with 4 textures/clock. That way you don't waste resources in 2 texture apps, but in 4+ texture apps you don't have to go in multi-pass rendering (or at least not as many passes and/or loopbacks).