RV250 benchmark - slower???
- Thread starter T2k
- Start date
Actually, how reliable is the naming of the original post calling it the Radeon 9000?
For all practical purposes, a more logical numbering scheme would be to call it the Radeon 8100 or similar.
I wont question the confusion or numbering scheme until it's actually sitting on a shelf. It's anyone's guess if the final retail model will be coined the "9000" or be given some sort of new numbering scheme to fall in line with the r300.
For all practical purposes, a more logical numbering scheme would be to call it the Radeon 8100 or similar.
I wont question the confusion or numbering scheme until it's actually sitting on a shelf. It's anyone's guess if the final retail model will be coined the "9000" or be given some sort of new numbering scheme to fall in line with the r300.
hrm , honestly, even if it's called Radeon 9000 or whatever, i think it's inevitable that they would go away from the 7x being DX7, 8x being DX8, 9x being DX9 etc. but having said that , it would be more than a little confusing , especially since they said that was the way they numbered it..
For the record, I also dislike calling "Geforce4 MX" a Geforce4 of any kind or the Ti200/Ti500 naming conventions and then going to geforce4 Ti4200/4400/4600 (have no idea of the thinking of that )
For the record, I also dislike calling "Geforce4 MX" a Geforce4 of any kind or the Ti200/Ti500 naming conventions and then going to geforce4 Ti4200/4400/4600 (have no idea of the thinking of that )
Naming the RV250 was always going to be tricky, i.e. 8250 sounds like a weaker part then the 8500 and 8750 sounds like a an 'Ultra' part (which it may not perform like).
Either way calling it 9000 means ATI deserves as much grief as NVidia received from the internet community for the Gf4MX.
Either way calling it 9000 means ATI deserves as much grief as NVidia received from the internet community for the Gf4MX.
Randell said:
I agree
IMO only when they name the R300 Radeon 9700.
If they call the R300 Radeon 10000, then no one, not even the stupid would mistake an RV250 for an R300;
like it often happens with the GF4MX ( I know one guy which knows computers quite good, but even he was fooled ).
mboeller said:
Yeah,I agree with a lot of posters on this...
ATi's naming scheme isn't as bad for the general public as the GF4 MX is...I don't know how many times I've seen/read/heard someone say they have a GF4...when it's a MX...
I have never heard anyone say that they got the Radeon 8500 due to the 8 in the name meaning full dx8.1 support...
Doomtrooper
Veteran
I disagree, I would have no issue AT all with the naming scheme of the Geforce 4 if it wasn't crippled. My main issue is naming it a Geforce 4 MX without any DX 8.1 compliance like its big brother ??
The RV250 will be PARTIALLY DX9 compliant as DX9 PS standards cover PS 1.1-20 and the RV 250 supports PS 1.4.
I have NO idea where you guys think ATI is off base, as they most certainly are not...they are offering advanced PS features in a value product
NTD:
The 8500 LE still has 60 million transistors and is a very complex chip...less transistors means the profit margin will increase alot. Look at a Geforce 4 MX, Nvidia is rolling in the dough off that chip (it doesn't even support EMBM ??)
The Rv250 doesn't need passive cooling so I imagine with two months where you are you could get a Hercules RV250 for $99 EURO.
The RV250 will be PARTIALLY DX9 compliant as DX9 PS standards cover PS 1.1-20 and the RV 250 supports PS 1.4.
I have NO idea where you guys think ATI is off base, as they most certainly are not...they are offering advanced PS features in a value product
NTD:
The 8500 LE still has 60 million transistors and is a very complex chip...less transistors means the profit margin will increase alot. Look at a Geforce 4 MX, Nvidia is rolling in the dough off that chip (it doesn't even support EMBM ??)
The Rv250 doesn't need passive cooling so I imagine with two months where you are you could get a Hercules RV250 for $99 EURO.
Doomtrooper said:
Everything (including the TNT) is PARTIALLY DX9 compliant if they have DX drivers. Its how the system works.
However, to call the 8500 a somewhat DX9 chip is being disingenuous. Just like saying GF3 is. They're both clearly not supporting the new things brought to the table by DX9.
Doomtrooper
Veteran
Lol, no it is not....did ATI strip R200 to no pixel shaders, no bump mapping and call it a Radeon 9000...NO.
This value priced card offers PIXEL SHADERS, what is the main technology in DX8 and DX9 cards...Pixel Shaders...the Rv250 supports PIXEL SHADERS... DX9 will support Ps 1.4....
Case closed !
This value priced card offers PIXEL SHADERS, what is the main technology in DX8 and DX9 cards...Pixel Shaders...the Rv250 supports PIXEL SHADERS... DX9 will support Ps 1.4....
Case closed !
Doomtrooper
Veteran
A EXCELLENT example WHY we need the Rv250 here now...
GeForce2 MX 149686 (29.8%)
NVidia TNT2 98224 (19.6%)
GeForce2 GTS 38505 (7.7%)
50% of the gamers in this survey are using Dx6 and Dx 7 cards..One hundred and forty-nine thousand six and and eighty-six people are using Geforce 2 MX (30%).
http://valve.speakeasy.net/
And I wonder why no new games support advanced DX8 engines
GeForce2 MX 149686 (29.8%)
NVidia TNT2 98224 (19.6%)
GeForce2 GTS 38505 (7.7%)
50% of the gamers in this survey are using Dx6 and Dx 7 cards..One hundred and forty-nine thousand six and and eighty-six people are using Geforce 2 MX (30%).
http://valve.speakeasy.net/
And I wonder why no new games support advanced DX8 engines
Doomtrooper said:
The problem with that logic is that PS 1.4 was introduced with DX8, not 9. So I don't see how the RV250 deserves the 9xxx name, if that logic is followed. But just as with the GF4MX, it's all marketing and therefore not really deserving of too much attention.
Doomtrooper
Veteran
I'm not debating over the Name, I don't care if they called it the 'Minnie Me' , what I care is what it brings to the table for the value market.
The bottom line is ATI chose to inlcude the things that make DX8 cards more advanced than their Dx 7 counterparts..Pixel Shaders.
Two most important things for a graphics card to sell is:
1) Price
2) A COOL looking retail box
This is the card WE desperatley need on the market to get these PC titles up to speed, and people want to debate about the name.
The bottom line is ATI chose to inlcude the things that make DX8 cards more advanced than their Dx 7 counterparts..Pixel Shaders.
Two most important things for a graphics card to sell is:
1) Price
2) A COOL looking retail box
This is the card WE desperatley need on the market to get these PC titles up to speed, and people want to debate about the name.
Doomtrooper
Veteran
Grrrr..the Xabre too
Doomtrooper said:
Oh, I agree that it looks like a really good value card. However, my point, and the point of others in this thread, is that ATi is clearly breaking their own naming convention that they just introduced last fall. Nothing wrong with acknowleding that, nor is such a mental assent really a mark against the card itself.
Doomtrooper said:I'm not debating over the Name, I don't care if they called it the 'Minnie Me' , what I care is what it brings to the table for the value market.
The bottom line is ATI chose to inlcude the things that make DX8 cards more advanced than their Dx 7 counterparts..Pixel Shaders.
Two most important things for a graphics card to sell is:
1) Price
2) A COOL looking retail box
This is the card WE desperatley need on the market to get these PC titles up to speed, and people want to debate about the name.
Add
3) Lots of BIG numbers, bigger then the ones next to it on the shelf. Like BIG megabytes, BIG megahertz, BIG polygon numbers and so on.