Specs for r300 and rv250

[MuFu]

Hi.

Having seen those RV250 pics I'm not so sure about the 200Mhz memory for the 9000LE (?) and 300MHz memory for the 9000 (?). I know they were the configurations initially proposed but I guess ATi will use whatever memory is the most economically justifiable at the time of launch.

The daughtercards are a very interesting innovation (whereas in the past they have been used for debug and sample qualification, they are now being use for I/O in retail products). Good stuff, ATi.

MuFu.

P.S. That was supposed to be "The RV250 is a "toned-down" R200 core w/TV-out and a secondary RAMDAC on die. Whether this toning down involves the removal of two rendering pipelines I do NOT know for sure", btw.

 

[Doomtrooper]

You are doing nice detective work I must say Mufu

 

[MuFu]

*secret handshake*



MuFu.

 

[Crusher]

Don't forget that only around now are games starting to demand a GeForce as a minimum requirement. It will likely be another two years yet before a GeForce3-class product is demanded as the minimum.

Off the top of my head:

Deus Ex 2
Thief 2
Doom 3
EverQuest 2

will all require a DX8 card to run, and should be out within a year. There are more, but I'm not sure they'll be ready in a year, probably less than two years though. Of course, don't forget that once the Doom 3 technology is finished (even before the game is), the engine will be licensed to other companies, who will have their own games ready within 6 months of Doom 3's release.

I also have to agree with Dolemite. I don't care if it is the end-user's perspective, there's no market for a card that is similar to an 8500 right now. Even a value priced card would be over $100, which makes the 8500 cheaper, and possibly faster. It doesn't matter what your profit margin is on a product that nobody buys. Not to mention the fact that it's rediculous to spend money on the development of a new card that isn't any more advanced than the old one already available, let alone one that is even less capable, if you're planning on charging more for it. If the RV250 isn't an *improved* R200 chip at a price comparable to the 8500, it has no reason to exist, and the only sales it will get will be the impulse buys at CompUSA by people who, via random chance, pick it off a shelf instead of one of the other value priced cards. The only alternative is to completely cleanse the market of R200 products and replace them all with RV250 products, similar to what NVIDIA tried to do with the Ti series for the GeForce 3. The difference being, the GeForce 4 wasn't around at that time, and it sounds like the general concensus is that this RV250 will be hitting the market at the same time as the R300.

 

[Randell]

Similar to what nVidia did with the Gf4MX then? No sane 'gamer' would buy it, but Didi you ever see a Gf3 and Gf4mx on the shelf of your local PC superstore at the same time? I didnt in teh UK.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

I don't care if it is the end-user's perspective, there's no market for a card that is similar to an 8500 right now.

You can not make a blanket statement about the "marketability" of a card unless you take into consideration the price.

Not to mention the fact that it's rediculous to spend money on the development of a new card that isn't any more advanced than the old one already available, let alone one that is even less capable, if you're planning on charging more for it.

Right...and who said that this is such a part? Specifically, the "charging more for it" part? You spend R&D money to do one of two things (or both.)

1) Make a better part.
2) Make the same part cheaper.

BOTH are valid reasons to spend money.

If the RV250 isn't an *improved* R200 chip at a price comparable to the 8500, it has no reason to exist,

Wrong. If the RV250 is a LESS COSTLY product to produce, with performance / features similar to R200, then it has a very valid reason to exist.

 

[Entropy]

I don't care if it is the end-user's perspective, there's no market for a card that is similar to an 8500 right now.

You can not make a blanket statement about the "marketability" of a card unless you take into consideration the price.

Which Crusher clearly did:

Even a value priced card would be over $100, which makes the 8500 cheaper, and possibly faster.

I'm not saying Crusher is right about that number, (I doubt he is) but he doesn't particularly deserve being treated like an idiot, he clearly understands that pricing is a factor. In fact, it's the basis of his argument.

I think it is pretty safe to say that assuming that the two pipe et cetera rumours are correct, the card will perform dismally in the marketplace if it is only available at a $100 pricepoint. The 460MX is a great recent example of a card without a market, with few manufacturers producing them, and even fewer online retailers offering the cards.

A card such as the rumoured one could do pretty good in the marketplace if it is sold at $30 less. I can't see that we have enough (any?) info to go on as far as pricing is concerned to make any predictions.

I doubt ATI will do a 460MX mistake, but it's difficult to be 100% sure of course.

Entropy

 

[OpenGL guy]

I don't care if it is the end-user's perspective, there's no market for a card that is similar to an 8500 right now. Even a value priced card would be over $100, which makes the 8500 cheaper, and possibly faster. It doesn't matter what your profit margin is on a product that nobody buys. Not to mention the fact that it's rediculous to spend money on the development of a new card that isn't any more advanced than the old one already available, let alone one that is even less capable, if you're planning on charging more for it.

Pretty amusing comments. So what your saying is that nvidia shouldn't be making Geforce MX cards anymore? Fine by me!


It's obvious you have no idea what these products are (they haven't been announced and the specs haven't been released) yet you're already convinced that they won't have a place in the market. Sounds very rational. What do you think ATI and nvidia's top selling chips are? You think they are Radeon 8500's and GeForce 4 4600's? If so, you have no clue about the video chip market.

What you like isn't necessarily the same as what other people like. That's what companies hire marketing people: To figure out how to reach the most people with your products and figure out what products people want/need.

For example: Think about what sort of chip should be in your grandma's computer.

 

[Entropy]

What you like isn't necessarily the same as what other people like. That's what companies hire marketing people: To figure out how to reach the most people with your products and figure out what products people want/need.

The cheapest MX460 on pricewatch is $129 and the cheapest 8500 is $102 and GF3Ti200s are $92. Man, those MX460s must be flying off the shelves.....
Doing a local (Swedish) search gave just over one page of hits for the MX460 and four pages for the MX440. Only the closest allies of nVidia even offer the MX460. Major OEMs do NOT offer it as a build to order option, and so on.

My point? Sometimes those analysts make mistakes and a product finds itself with a much smaller market than anticipated. When the RV250 was on the drawing board, were the SIS Xabres taken into consideration? The Zeotrope (if it comes to market)? GF4MX refresher? It doesn't take all that much to miss your market window. Happens all the time, in fact.

That said, I don't particularly think we have the necessary info to suggest that ATI has done so with the RV250. But it is equally obvious that it cannot be ruled out until the card is actually offered on the market.

Entropy

 

[MuFu]

One thing I just noticed re. those leaked RV250 pics... one of them was an ATi reference board. The other is no doubt going to be the Powercolor Radeon 9000 Evil Master "Ultra" or something similar:

Powercolor Radeon 7500 Evil Master "Ultra" aka RV2A:

Powercolor Radeon 9000 Evil Master "Ultra" (?) aka RV25A:

So obviously Powercolor are screwing with the ATi reference design a little. They're probably taken the reference board with a medium-quality core, paired it with 3.6ns TSOP and clocked it at ~250/250MHz. It's similar to what they have done with the 7500.

As for the reference board seen here, I can only assume it's a qualified sample of the lower-clocked RV250 cards (9000LE?) with that Hynix "bargain-bucket" 3.3ns RAM we've seen on 8500LE's at newegg.com. I'm sure we'll see a 300/300MHz card using BGA in addition to this.

BTW... all you guys saying there is no market for this card, there is. It's a totally sideways move by ATi with a few bonuses chucked in (the daughtercard I/O is amazing) . Ok, might not outperform the 8500 in all situations, but it is a mainstream graphics card. From ATi's prize giveaway, for example...

1st Prize Pack: "One ATI's high-end next-generation product..." - R300/Radeon 10k(?)
2nd Prize: "One ATI mainstream next-generation product..." - RV250/Radeon 9k(?)

8500 will be discontinued but there will still be massive stockpiles for OEMs to fight over (as I think I mentioned earlier in the topic).

BTW, anybody know what ASIC ID "516c" is? I was wondering about it, here. It's in the leaked 6093's. Obviously something based on R200 (514x) but I don't know what.

MuFu.

P.S. Going to keep all my crap at Rage3D I think, but I thought you guys should see this.

 

[MuFu]

If the RV250 isn't an *improved* R200 chip at a price comparable to the 8500, it has no reason to exist,

Wrong. If the RV250 is a LESS COSTLY product to produce, with performance / features similar to R200, then it has a very valid reason to exist.

Exactly. DX8.1 compatibility + daughtercard I/O in the mainstream market is ATi's trumpcard.

 

[Crusher]

Right...and who said that this is such a part? Specifically, the "charging more for it" part?

I can't recall ever seeing a value priced card of this kind being sold for less than $100 when it was introduced to the market. I'm basing my assumptions off of previous market trends, and the fact that I can go to pricewatch and see a Radeon 8500 for sale for $101 including shipping. I am fully aware that that is not the MSRP, and that the RV250 will also be sold below its MSRP eventually. However, again looking at the trend for the market, it usually takes some time for that to happen once a product is released.

Therefore, I am reasonably certain that you will be able to buy an 8500 for the same ammount of money ATI plans to charge for the RV250. Taking that into consideration, IF the RV250 is a cut-down version of the 8500 (as other people have suggested, no one knows for sure), THEN I do not believe it will sell enough to justify it's existence. It will still sell, because I'm sure in the brick-and-mortar stores the RV250 will be cheaper than the 8500, since they usually keep their prices close to the MSRP until they discontinue a product. And as I said, ATI could force people to buy the RV250 instead of the 8500 if they completely eliminate the 8500 from the marketplace, but it takes time to do that as well.

Wrong. If the RV250 is a LESS COSTLY product to produce, with performance / features similar to R200, then it has a very valid reason to exist.

You neglected to say anything about it's selling price. If the RV250 performs just as well as, or better than, the 8500, AND it's not given an MSRP significantly higher than what you can get an 8500 for (read: $100), then I don't see any problem with it either. However, that's not what the grapevine is whispering, and I don't think that's what we'll see. I believe it will either be more than $100 (closer to $150), or it won't perform as well as the 8500. There's also a possibility it will be both, which would be extremely unfortunate.

Pretty amusing comments. So what your saying is that nvidia shouldn't be making Geforce MX cards anymore? Fine by me!


It's obvious you have no idea what these products are (they haven't been announced and the specs haven't been released) yet you're already convinced that they won't have a place in the market. Sounds very rational. What do you think ATI and nvidia's top selling chips are? You think they are Radeon 8500's and GeForce 4 4600's? If so, you have no clue about the video chip market.

I think I have as much of a clue as you or anyone else around here, except any possible ATI employees that are lurking around. And I wouldn't mind at all if no company ever made a value-priced card again. I would gladly welcome the freedom from having to explain to others why they should spend the extra cash to get a real card. And I'm not convinced the RV250 will have no place in the market, I just think there need to be specific conditions in order for it to be successful, and I expressed my doubt as to whether those conditions will exist.

What you like isn't necessarily the same as what other people like. That's what companies hire marketing people: To figure out how to reach the most people with your products and figure out what products people want/need.

Well, you're half right. Marketing people are hired to reach as many people as possible, but their mission isn't to find out what people want/need, it's to convince them that they want/need what the company already has to offer them.

For example: Think about what sort of chip should be in your grandma's computer.

My grandma doesn't have a computer, and she doesn't want one. But, if she were to have one, I would probably throw an 8MB G200 or something in it, since I know she wouldn't care less about 3D graphics, and she certainly doesn't need a $100+ "value" graphics card.

 

[MuFu]

Yes, but not all grannies have forum-junkies for grandsons.

I think you're neglecting the fact that the OEM/"Joe Schmoe" sector is where the money is earnt. The people that know better (i.e the "enthusiasts") won't be the profit-makers for ATi. Plus, they can purge the retail sector pretty quickly. Who's to say that the ridiculously low prices we are currently seeing on 64MB ATi 8500's & 8500LE's aren't because they've been fast-channelled to make way for the new products? newegg.com are out of stock of those "special edition" LE's at the moment which may be an indicator. Plus... don't forget the rest of the world. You should see the market as it stands in Europe. Things look quite different over here: margins must be huge still.

The RV250 will be a significantly more attractive product than the GF4MX, all things considered. If they stick to the original plan (as seen on internal blurb), the cheaper of the two RV250 models planned could be very close to that $100 mark.

MuFu.

P.S. There ARE people on this board that know more details than others, let me just say that.

 

[Geeforcer]

I think I have as much of a clue as you or anyone else around here, except any possible ATI employees that are lurking around.

Well that would be him (OpenGl guy works for ATi)


BTW, I find it quite surprising that several people think that RV250 card will be named Radeon 9xxx, considering that in their GF4MX-slamming presentation ATi said something along the lines "Our products are clearly labeled, the first number corresponds to the supported DX version".

 

[Doomtrooper]

Oh there is more..just not 'looking' hard enough

 

[Ichneumon]

that several people think that RV250 card will be named Radeon 9xxx, considering that in their GF4MX-slamming presentation ATi said something along the lines "Our products are clearly labeled, the first number corresponds to the supported DX version".

I agree completely. If ATi does try to call their rv250 products part of the 9000 series, I think it would be a big mistake.

 

[Randell]

Yep the RV250 as a DX8.1 part, being named Radeon9000 would be a 'worse' PR?marketing mistake than nVidia and the Gf4mx as far as the 'hardcore to slightly knowledgable' would be concerned. Especially after those statements about clear product labelling.

 

[Jazz]

wats up everybody, i just found a very interesting thing over at hardcops forums http://www.hardforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=427743 , it sounds kinda fake but i thought id post it here, this is what it says:


I was speaking with the ATi rep at the T.O. AMD Tech Tour (heh).

He said:
"It will have a 128bit floating point colour system!"

So I commented and said how carmack let it slip that the newer hardware has done a good thing with increasing the colour depth of graphics cards and he finished my sentence by saying;

"he (referring to carmack) said that 64bit colour wasn't enough! Yeah thats why the r300 supports more then needed...if there is such a thing. Basically when we release the R300 the whole industry will take a step back, and realize they are behind...r300 is truly ground breaking: Full DX9 support, which is as big a leap from DX8.1 as DX8.1 was to DX7, precision calculations both on polygon and texture information, and a whole host of other stuff that I can't really comment on."

So much shit...he also said:
"You have no idea. The sample that Doom]I[ ran on was both ALPHA hardware as well as ALPHA drivers....the way the card is now (referring to its alpha stage) it can do 14XXX+ 3Dmarks...we will definately do our best to get it higher. Also realize that we haven't determined the final clock speeds either...the pics you have probably seen on various sites show a PRE PRE engineering sample....
Basically we WILL have a show stopper. The R300 will revolutionize the way we see graphics. In fact nothing will even be able to compete with us until Februray or March of 2k3 (I think he was talking about nVidias 6month cycle)."

He said it will be out late Q3...or late fall...

 

[Doomtrooper]

Interesting

 

[LittlePenny]

The most interesting thing I find when reading the Beyond3d forums is when our members try and debate marketing.