R520 launch delayed?

karlotta said:
trinibwoy said:
Well we've been over this a bazillion times. I'm not sure which cases you're referring to but the AGP GT is currently cheaper than the AGP XL and most people are still buying AGP parts. For those going with PCIe the obvious choice is the XL but this is no where near the majority.
Well at Bestbuy a XL is 50$ cheeper..... AGP to AGP and the PCIe XL is 299$

Yeah I know. Sucks for whoever shops at BB. :LOL: But seriously, for every person that walks into a BestBuy understanding that the XL is a steal, there's another sucker who's gonna see SM3.0 on the box and say "ooooh this must be worth the $50 since it's more advanced!!".

It would actually be interesting to find out what percentage of these parts the AIB's move through B&M shops compared to online stores.
 
trinibwoy said:
It would actually be interesting to find out what percentage of these parts the AIB's move through B&M shops compared to online stores.
IMO, the B&M sell many more cards than online. And they have been cheaper in the BB and Compusa for almost a year.And if there is a "delay" tho i want a ATI date to show it was a delay.It would be for the amount of product in the stores and channels. Dont need another 9800xt for 400$ again when the x800pros where 400$.
 
I choose to combine the "Wavey-isms" with geo´s last two posts for the time being. I doubt there´s only one factor at play here and the combination of the two perspectives make sense at this point.
 
caboosemoose said:
Perhaps R520 is being dumped in favour of R580...

Don't you mean that the R520 is simply too advanced and has been bumped to R625? Meanwhile ATI will extend the current architecture and focus on speed over features... :p

It's true that there was no good reason to expect the R520 this early in the year. It would make very little sense business-wise and ATI are better served toughing it out with the current line-up, even if the current specs, or lack thereof, is not helping their cause. If Nvidia could tough it out with NV30, then ATI certainly should have no problems maintaining a smile and waving to the crowd.

That said, with all the early excitement about an imminent R520 launch, I was almost smelling the PCB. Furthermore, I had a secret reason for wanting an early R520 release: If the R520 had launched alone with no new Nvidia counterpart, it would have made the deicsion to buy one that much easier. I absolutely hate choosing between the two.
 
The problem could as well be on the drivers side. I guess the new architecture will take some time to be brought up to the desired stability/performance level, drivers-wise. Just a guess...
 
Rather than big problems with ATi maybe it is just that they are doing a lot at present, for example

R520
R500 for Xbox 360
New chipsets
AMR

it seems strange that all of these are expected summer onwards, quite a tight timeframe for a company with obviosuly a certain number of engineers. I'm still puzzled why ATi are doing AMR and r520 in the same period, ie end Q2 through Q3 ?

nvidia, through foresight or good luck, seemed to have things more evenly spreadout with always something appearing into a gap

nfoece3 / nv40 / SLi / nforce4 and Intel chipset / G70.

( I think that's the right order ).

From memory all those items just kept popping out while other things were quiet. So, maybe there are a few teething problems with Ati but nothing major, it's just that they are doing a lot of things concurrently.
 
Ratchet said:
I think ATI should be very careful making decisions based on on any information they get regarding G70. Very careful.

We know what ATI did last year with the smoke screen around the R420, nVidia can do the same thing.

...but then again, maybe this is ATI Smoke Screen v2.0

As far as i'm concerned ATI f*cked up last year when they should've released the R42x earlier and they didn't but rather opted to wait for the GF6xxx series which then came out with SM3.0 and is a great feature, even if it isn't really needed atm. If they(ATI) had released the card earlier then they would've had more sales . .that's of course if they actually had stock .. which now we know they didn't.

So as for the R52x .. I see them f*cking up again if they gonna hold out. Stupid imo since they still don't have a SM3.0 card and just because the R52x could be slower than the SLI 6800 Ultra's .. woopeedo. Who gives a f*ck. As far as I'm concerned .. as long as it's faster than a single 6800 Ultra using SM3.0 then i'll be happy. All they are giving (nvidia if they hold the R52x) will be time to come up with something else they can screw ATI with. F*ck .. haven't they(ATI) learnt anything these last two years?

I mean when the 9700 came out and kicked the pants off the NV3x, nvidia still played hardball and got the developers to regect SM2.0 initially .. and by the time SM2.0 started to become mainstream they released a SM3.0 part which helped them(Nvidia). And when ATI released their SM2.x part Nvidia were laughing and pushing SM3.0 to the developers. So for ATI to sit on the SM3.0 part has me flabbergasted if they think nvidia are just sitting on their hands.

This is turn might change my mind into buying a Nvidia card next. So beware ATI .. your customers won't mind jumping ship if you screw them. Don't release the card in June and you gonna be screwing them.

ATI don't have to release a AMR version of the card initally(if they having problems). They can release it later when the drivers are stable .. but if the R520 is stable with the current drivers then I suggest ATi release the card ASAP .. since at least this time they seem to have stock available. When AMR drivers are stable then they can release the drivers. Nvidia did the same thing when they released SLI . .the drivers didn't support a lot of games .. yet the systems sold. ATI should do the same thing and when the drivers are good .. then make it available.

US
 
Bah, I always buy a new card when it's needed to run some newest games and not before that. So it'll be enough time to see what each side has to offer and buy the one that offers best price/performance ratio, as always.
 
I agree that ATI stating their "expected" financials are probably based on on the coming Xbox 360 more over then their next generation PC GPU.

As for the INQ stating the 520 being pushed back, I'm kind of iffy on that because as many have said, INQ is probably correct 50% of the time if that.

I am wondering if this is a ATI smoke screen to maybe see if NV will show a little more of what the G70 has to offer but then again at this point (and so close to when they wanted to release the 520) I would think the 520 is ready and other then possibly ramping the speed is already taped and waiting.

Does anyone know if the 520 driver set will be an extension of the current one, a big overhall of current driver set or a totally new one? This is the only reason I can see for a hold up if true given all the information we have had on the 520 fabs so far (if correct that is). If ATI is using AMR as the reasoning, I think they are making a big mistake.

I think that one 520 able to beat NV ultras in SLI would be a statement in itself more that saying we have a SLI variant too :devilish:
 
As a followup to my post above about ATi doing everything at once, say they had a few glitches with one of the things they are developing they either have to move resources to it or let it delay.

They are doing the r520 for themselves but they are doing the r500 for a customer, Microsoft, so it is not therefore surprising that if something would be delayed it would be their own product rather than upsetting a big customer with potentially new business in the future if this product is successful.

To put it bluntly, if Xbox R500 had a problem then you move resuroces from R520, if R520 has a problem you just extend your graphs a bit and put on a smile.

If I was in charge that's certainly what I be doing, Microsft have probably been geared up for a launch around E3 for a long time now, so any bumps after that plan from ATi's area of expertise, would need to be fixed as a priority to make sure that happened. Certainly it is not as if their current line-up, as mentioned by other posters, is struggling to sell.

I think people are being unfairly harsh on ATi, I would say the most that can be levelled at them is that maybe doing all that they are was simply too ambitious IF there is a long delay. It's not as if they have made any promises to the general public. nvidia seem to be in no hurry to ship G70 either, maybe for very similar reasons to ATi.
 
DaveBaumann said:
People need to get over these ideas of "waiting for xxx" and the like. Rarely is that the case.

I think the difference here is that a lot of people are now waiting for next-gen cards in order to jump to PCIe. If you're waiting to upgrade, you want to jump to PCIe, and you don't want to have to buy a R4xx or NV4x card while new ones are on the horizon, especially given the high price of these cards. It's not like you can upgrade machines to PCIe and keep using your old graphics card until the next-gen cards arrive.

I think this might be contributing to the frustration at these marketing games. It's not just delaying an upgrade to a spanky new graphics card, it's delaying an upgrade to a whole new class of PC.
 
It really puzzles me why would ATi launch a product at almost the same time as Nvidia's G70 when they already have solid product in hand currently.The only reason I can think of is that they are intending to go head on with Nvidia just for the sake of pride and to reclaim the performance crown.

The competition is far from being over.One pulls out a card the other will try to outbeat him when his turn comes.ATi should strike when the advantage is now with them unless they themselves are not confident in their next generation product.It would not be the case if the R520 is a few times more powerful than a SLi 6800U.
 
overclocked said:
A couple of things here, my belif is that the "simplest" answer is usually right.
I belive/guess that ATI are having some problems with the process change to 90nm.

I'd go with that, except that the simplest answer is that the Inq's story is unfounded.
 
MuFu said:
overclocked said:
A couple of things here, my belif is that the "simplest" answer is usually right.
I belive/guess that ATI are having some problems with the process change to 90nm.

I'd go with that, except that the simplest answer is that the Inq's story is unfounded.

It is not denied neither by ATI nor by Mr. Dave Baumann. :)
 
Back
Top