Sir Eric Demers on AMD R600

Status
Not open for further replies.
AF drop is very bad compared to competition 8800GTX in BOTH parts (R580 also suffered texture hardware deficiency).

In 2 out of 3 games the AF drop HD2900 is much more than X1950, in 1 game it is similar. I dont think that bears out your statement. One tie and two severe losses.

The AA results are troubling though, though the sample size is small.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/1115/1/page_1_introduction/index.html

This newer teaktown review in which for some reason they did not turn on AA/AF is interesting and bears out what we are saying, without AA and AF 2900 performs very well, often beating 8800gtx. And at least placing much closer to 8800GTX than 8800GTS.

The AF hit can be more significant on R600 at this time. It should show higher quality in exchange (not on the LOD isotropy front, but on the mipmap transition front). I believe some of that will be addressed, in part, in future drivers. I can't promise a % improvement at this time.
 
Does that mean that the typical way of measuring AF quality (by just using those AF tests that show the shape of the AF) is not giving us the full picture?

How would we measure the quality of the transistions?

... or have I misunderstood what is being said?
 
But anytime 64b pixels will be invoked (i.e. HDR games), I expect performance of R600 to be substantially higher than R580.
So, can we conclude, that resolving AA samples in INT type (non-HDR type) of surfaces is actually under-utilizing overall throughput capacity of moving data, inside the chip?
 
So, can we conclude, that resolving AA samples in INT type (non-HDR type) of surfaces is actually under-utilizing overall throughput capacity of moving data, inside the chip?
I see that as a way to say TMUs were designed to shine at filtering FP64 textures as filtering rate for them is the same as it is for RGBA8 textures
 
The AF hit can be more significant on R600 at this time. It should show higher quality in exchange (not on the LOD isotropy front, but on the mipmap transition front). I believe some of that will be addressed, in part, in future drivers. I can't promise a % improvement at this time.

I saw that in tech specs for HD2900 there is listed "bicubic fitlering" but this seems not yet being reviewed anywhere, could you please give some detail on this feature and if it will be really implemented in future drivers?
 
Hopefully by the time the R650 (or whatever the revision is) gets released, the drivers will have caught up. About the time I'll be in need of an upgrade. But Ati REALLY needs to make the cards quieter. I'm sick of the loudness of my x1900xtx.

Sireric,

You have referenced being "late" as reason why perhaps some of the forward thinking tech in the R5xx series wasn't exploited by games but would it be just as important to recoginze nvidia well recognized developer relations through their TWIMTBP vs. Ati's non existant GITG program? Being late is only part of the issue, I believe.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Was anyone expecting G80 to be a unified architecture, much less a scalar one?

No we didn't, but it also doesn't explain why AMD delayed the chip. The explanation that they wanted to release the family is bull. I mean, are there RV630/610 reviews yet(and I mean actual reviews)?

The delay has cost AMD much.

US
 
I think there is an irony in the fact most of the R600 problems are being attributed to the inability to get driver quality up there in time, while a few months back ATI representatives bombastically chided Nvidia for the lack of planning and preperation when it came to dirvers.
 
I think there is an irony in the fact most of the R600 problems are being attributed to the inability to get driver quality up there in time, while a few months back ATI representatives bombastically chided Nvidia for the lack of planning and preperation when it came to dirvers.

I recall the same thing. Remember ATI and NVIDIA are treated differently for some reason when it comes to the public. Odd, but true.

My only question is when is the power output going to be even looked at? It's getting completely out of hand that the latest cards are requiring so much power to run them. We have 1000 and even 2000 watt power supplies now. It's unnecessary.

When is ATI ever going to look at reducing power? Why can't high-end chips be looked at the same way as mobility chips? There is no reason for the high watt output of today's electronics.
 
I saw that in tech specs for HD2900 there is listed "bicubic fitlering" but this seems not yet being reviewed anywhere, could you please give some detail on this feature and if it will be really implemented in future drivers?

It`s not there, it was simply a forum post trying to stir stuff up. I may be wrong,even though I`m not certain bicubic filtering would be that useful for anything.
 
I saw that in tech specs for HD2900 there is listed "bicubic fitlering" but this seems not yet being reviewed anywhere, could you please give some detail on this feature and if it will be really implemented in future drivers?

Bicubic is supported, and was intended for some OS font features (I think). It's not exposed at this time. I don't believe that DX allows it to be exposed. It does not operate at the same rate as bilinear. Might show up in OGL.
 
So, can we conclude, that resolving AA samples in INT type (non-HDR type) of surfaces is actually under-utilizing overall throughput capacity of moving data, inside the chip?

In a way, yes. But it's not simple -- Some busses are under utilized, but that doesn't mean you could easily go faster. For example, we only filter in float; but having int doesn't make it go faster, since the number of units doesn't change (we actually promote most things to float).
 
Good question. A13 was fabricated in January, but released in May. Maybe another revision was on the way, but didn't came right?

/edit: Morgoth the Dark Enemy: and what's this? :)

Most of the work was on the drivers -- 2 OS's, new arch, DX9, DX10 and OGL. Work is still ongoing. I'm not sure on the silicon dates, off hand. But at some point, it just made more sense to launch all at the same time.
 
In a way, yes. But it's not simple -- Some busses are under utilized, but that doesn't mean you could easily go faster. For example, we only filter in float; but having int doesn't make it go faster, since the number of units doesn't change (we actually promote most things to float).
Thanks -- a slight resemblance of the PentiumPro era and the 32-vs-16-bit performance hype. :LOL:
 
...and then what happend?

And yet one of his answers talks about the derivatives being "very popular". If there haven't been any sales, how could that be true? I do wonder if they did launch together, just not in both channels (OEM and retail) simultaneously in order to preference supplies for one over the other in the fat part (volume-wise) of the market. The "sucks to be you" part of such deals is you don't announce for the customer, so you can't beat your chest until he's ready for you to do so.
 
Does that mean that the typical way of measuring AF quality (by just using those AF tests that show the shape of the AF) is not giving us the full picture?
Of course not. Only actually playing games can give you the full picture.


In yesterday's games, and even a lot of today's game, the ALU:TEX ratio selected is probably overkill. But when I look at some of the newest games, or some coming down the pipe, or even some of our demoes, a ratio of 4:1 seems pale -- Shaders are coming with 10:1, 20:1 ratios -- Even with the most advance filters, those apps are still ALU bound. That is more where we shot for.
How are you counting the ALU part of these ratios? Each arithmetic op, scalar or vec4 MAD, clocks on R600?
Ah, things used to be so much simpler in the old days...
 
Ah, things used to be so much simpler in the old days...

Ah yes, back in the old days the only tough decision was what brand of 3dfx Voodoo video card to buy, an Orchid Righteous or a Diamond Monster. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top