The ATI R600 Rumours & Speculation Centrum

Discussion in 'Pre-release GPU Speculation' started by Arun, Oct 16, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Arun

    Arun Unknown.
    Moderator Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Location:
    UK
    This thread is the new "official" place to discuss ATI's upcoming R600 chip, plus all related products and technologies, at least for the time being. The following points should be kept in mind:
    • The thread will be moderated to improve the signal-to-noise ratio slightly
    • All off-topic discussions will be moved to other threads, or deleted, at our discretion
    • This first post will be edited over time to link to related sources and leaks
    • Further "summaries" may be based on concensus or apparent credibility, with minority reports generally noted
    No matter how many stupid rules I come up with, the goal still is to have a good and active discussion going, so get started guys!

    Summary
    D3D10, 500M+ transistors, release sometime between January and the end of Q1 2007, certainly 80nm. Based on GDDR4, vast numbers of reports claiming a 512-bit external bus, although only midly reliable. Minority reports for 256-bit bus (although sometimes from more reliable sources), or a dual-chip solution (256-bit bus per chip, 2 chips per board).

    The vast majority believe in the existence 64 unified "real pipelines" (4x16 ala Xenos' 3x16, although perhaps with different units internally). There are minority reports for 80 and 96. It is unknown what the exact organization of the pipelines will be. Xenos is Vec4+Scalar MADD per "pipeline". There are minority reports of a similar organization, as well as those of a more R580-like one, and finally also some reports or fully scalar units (4xScalar MADD + ???). None of them seem particularly more credible than the others at this point.

    As per Direct3D10's requirements, native FP16 filtering should be supported, which should make Farcry HDR function on R6xx even with the original NVIDIA patch, at least in theory. Furthermore, little information is known on the AA and AF algorithms, with most believing they will be mostly similar to R580's. Minority reports of 8x MSAA support exist, however.

    Reliable performance predictions are currently inexistant at this point, as only sensationalistic tabloid sites have been claiming any relative or absolute figure. It is likely that the chip will be much faster in Vertex Shading than R580, as per its unified nature. It is however unknown how high the triangle setup figures will be, as well as some other related ones such as attribute fetch. These might or might not become new bottlenecks in modern industry benchmarks. It is also unknown whether the number of TMUs and ROPs has increased from the R580's 16 each.

    The power and heat figures of the R600 have been initially reported as being roughly "150W+", but recent minority reports have increased that number to 200-250W. Other older minority reports also mentionned 100-150W instead. Nothing reliable is known regarding heat dissipation and related technologies to minimize the problem, should these figures be accurate.

    Links
    The old R600 thread: http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31049
     
    Guden Oden likes this.
  2. incurable

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Messages:
    547
    Location:
    Germany
    I'm wondering about the cooling solution used, should R600 really go up into the 200W+ range, given the limitations on space available and the fact that -in a much less restrictive environment- even cooling a 130W Prescott was considered far from trivial.

    Any word on a possible watercooling option on these parts (beyond the Sapphire Toxic special SKUs), as some have suggested available for G80?

    Also, beyond R600 itself, I was wondering if there was anything known about its smaller brethren.
     
  3. Geo

    Geo Mostly Harmless
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,115
    Location:
    Uffda-land
    At one time it was being speculated that unification would be such a transistor-saver for low and low-mid that we might see a whole family if not simultaneously, then something close to it.

    But I don't think we've heard anything about the rest of the family. The roadmap that mentions R600 in Q1 does not mention any others. . . but is labeled "High-end CrossFire Roadmap", so you wouldn't expect it to. . .
     
  4. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,661
    Location:
    London
    Well, as I theorised in the other thread, shouldn't we be expecting 65nm value/mainstream/performance R6xx parts during the same quarter as R600?

    Additionally, if they're all (or at least some) scheduled for near-simultaneous release, would that explain the relative tardiness? Is ATI simply taking advantage of the "lateness" of Vista?

    Jawed
     
  5. epicstruggle

    epicstruggle Passenger on Serenity
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,903
    Location:
    Object in Space
    Stupid question time:
    Any word whether ATI plans on releasing features beyond D3D10?
     
  6. trumphsiao

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    285
    Sorry I have to state few points I suspision

    1. Raw Performance of R600 or G80 would not have more than 1.5 times that of G71

    2. Why It's harder to polish Winxp driver for DX10 Hardware ?
     
  7. Arun

    Arun Unknown.
    Moderator Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Location:
    UK
    So now you're telling us the G80 3DMark05/06 scores that leaked were shit? Decide yourself! ;)
    It isn't. Drivers of truly new architectures always take more time to get right, that's all. Do you think the R300 and NV40 drivers were perfect overnight? Hint: They weren't. And there hasn't been such a massive architecture transition since.


    Uttar
     
  8. psurge

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    896
    Location:
    LA, California
    Uttar - maybe the scores were for g80 SLIed?
     
  9. ^M^

    ^M^
    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Messages:
    47
    Did the news report a power surge in Taiwan ? ;)
     
  10. pjbliverpool

    pjbliverpool B3D Scallywag
    Legend

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,454
    Location:
    Guess...
    I still say 64 Xenos style shaders isn't enough as it would have to run at insane clock speeds just to match R580's raw shader performance.

    Plus didn't someone at ATI comment that the next gen would be over half a TFLOP? The chip would have to run at 875Mhz to achieve half a TFLOP :???:

    Im placing my money on either 96 Xenos sytle shaders at 600+ Mhz or 64, significantly beefed up shaders, again at 600+ Mhz.

    In fact R600 could may well just be double Xenos. 96 ALU's, 32 TMU's, 32 vertex texture units? Then either 24 or 32 ROPS and hopefully that really juicy 512bit memory interface. All running at 600+ Mhz should make quite a nice next gen chip.
     
  11. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Does the R600 really need a 512bit external bus? I would think it'd have to be mighty powerful for all of that bandwidth.
     
  12. Geo

    Geo Mostly Harmless
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,115
    Location:
    Uffda-land
    Hence the circular nature of the discussion. Pick the rumor you believe and work it out to its natural conclusion and you get to different places.

    64 units would not seem to require 512-bit gddr4. So one or the other is likely incorrect, unless someone can point at a different way to circle the square. HDR? The R580+gddr4 results would not seem to support that idea. Really eye-popping core speed? 800MHz or higher? Well, NV seems to have done something with G80 shaders to get to 1350MHz, so maybe that possibility shouldn't be entirely dismissed, tho the conventional wisdom doesn't seem to favor it.

    Oh yeah, toss some fairly frightening heat/power rumors in there too in trying to adjudicate the rumor mill. . . but that could go either way, either > 64 shaders or 800MHz+ clock. Would the power/heat rumors be consistent with 64 shaders at 650MHz? I tend to think not.
     
  13. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,661
    Location:
    London
    I really can't understand why 64 pipes has any credibility.

    If Orton winked when he said 96 pipes recently, why are people still beating round the bush?

    Jawed
     
  14. Geo

    Geo Mostly Harmless
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,115
    Location:
    Uffda-land
    Oh, hang on. Orton winked and said 96? When/where was this?

    The 64 comes from xbit claiming that ATI tipped them that way.
     
  15. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,661
    Location:
    London
  16. Geo

    Geo Mostly Harmless
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,115
    Location:
    Uffda-land
    Son of a gun.

    Missed that. Right. Time perhaps to update the conventional wisdom watch then, even with that "potentially" hedge.
     
  17. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,661
    Location:
    London
    It's why 512-bit has credibility for me, even though I'm dubious about die size being big enough for such a big bus, particularly with 65nm ~1 year away.

    Jawed
     
  18. PeterAce

    Regular

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    489
    Location:
    UK, Bedfordshire
    So R500/C1 is 500 * (48 * 9) = 216000

    So by that logic R600 might be:

    600 * (96 * 9) = 518400 ;)

    So 600 Mhz and six 16-way shader arrays. Very nice if true.
     
    #18 PeterAce, Oct 17, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 17, 2006
  19. psurge

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    896
    Location:
    LA, California
    They can always shrink back to a smaller bus size and over-compensate with insane memory clocks, no?
     
  20. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    I wonder how that'd go over. Use a massive bus till you get insane memory clocks. Interesting, but I personally dont think it'd make sense. The marketing would be terrible, the layout for 512bit would be insane......... wait, does sorta sound like ATi.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  • About Beyond3D

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...