The Official RV630/RV610 Rumours & Speculation Thread

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by Arun, Mar 4, 2007.

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

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,716
    Likes Received:
    2,137
    Location:
    London
    Yeah, this is why I assumed the board was below-XT spec. If it's merely a 256MB GDDR4 board, then that's much closer to the "top" than expected.

    Perhaps the 512MB GDDR4 version is higher-clocked and has a dual-slot cooler. Or maybe the idea is to allow the AIBs to offer "overclocking" versions, so the PEG power socket will come into play.

    Jawed
     
  2. vertex_shader

    Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Messages:
    961
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Far far away
    80 watt not possible without extra power connector, according the rumors all rx6xx card pci-e 2.0 competible this can be used for 150watt power, but no pci-e 2.0 motherboards released yet, and when its use more than 75watt and pci-e 2.0 compatible still need extra power connector for the old motheboards, so i think the hd2600xt 256mb gddr4 consume less than 75 watt.
    When its consume close to 75watt than OC can be limited do the lack of enough power, so i think AIB's will sell the card with extra 6pin connector.

    Possible 512mb version need extra psu connector when the 256mb version power usage close to 75watt, old rumors said 512mb version consume +7watt as the 256mb, but this rumors said the 121/128watt TDP too :smile:
     
  3. Sound_Card

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2006
    Messages:
    936
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    I really hope that ATi does not stick 512mb of ram on a 128bit interface. What a waste. Just like the x1600pro 512mb. :roll: I hope that dual slot cooler is a 256bit part.
     
  4. Sound_Card

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2006
    Messages:
    936
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Don't know if this was posted yet but looks good to me.

    http://www.fx57.net/?p=581

    - 3DMark 2005: 12500
    - 3DMark 2006: 5600


    The only problem I have with these scores is that they dont state their system spec. For all I know they could be using a quad core clocked at 3+ghz which in the end, means nothing to me.
     
  5. jamis

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    4
    Screw 3DMark, unlike 8600GTS it might actually deliver it at games!:grin: Look at the NFS Carbon test:
    http://www.hardspell.com/english/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=414&pageid=517

    51@1280X1024

    G8600GTS = 33,9
    X1950Pro = 45,1

    [​IMG]

    Maybe it's somehow more balanced architecture and gives more steady performance than G8600GTS? So unlike with it's nvidia counterpart that 3DMark number might actually somewhat reflect the real life prformance. We need more benchmarks!

    Edit: Are there any Infernal benchies with 8600GTS? Couldn't find one.
     
    #245 jamis, Apr 20, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 20, 2007
  6. INKster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Io, lava pit number 12
    Let's see if this can compete with a 8800 GS.
     
  7. jamis

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    4
    Why should it compete with 8800GS? :lol: That's for RV660/670 or whatever coming sometime H2.
     
  8. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,716
    Likes Received:
    2,137
    Location:
    London
    A single FRAPs number for an instantaneous frame rate like that is even worse than a single 3DMk number.

    Jawed
     
  9. vertex_shader

    Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Messages:
    961
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Far far away
    That 51frame is not avarage, its jut a single frame, check the picture.

    Edit: I was late again :wink:
     
  10. jamis

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    4
    I know, that's why I said we need mor bencies.:wink: However looking at that NFSC benchamrk it seems it's a game where NV parts are generally performing poorly so it prolly doesn't tell that much..

    Edit: Well they are saying that the benchmark gives 51FPS so I trusted that..of course it can be BS

    Edit2: Actually it's propably very much real. 8600GTS(@33,9fps) seems to perform better than 7900GTX/GS, so it would be logical that RV630(@51fps) performs better than X1950Pro. But it's a game where NV generally performs poorly, so even if real it doesn tell that much.
     
    #250 jamis, Apr 20, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 20, 2007
  11. Plano

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Finland
    If you are looking that "Infernal benchmark" it says 88fps and in that screenshot fraps says 88fps too. Same thing with that NFS screen. Looks more like they just took one fps number and posted it. :p
     
  12. jamis

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    4
    Nah, and as I said it doesn't really matter anyhow. Dunno about Infernal but in NFSC NV cards generally seem to perfom poorly. So looking at previous generation Radeons that 51fps seems realistic for RV630. But even if it's real it doesn't tell much as it is a benchmark where the Radeons generally do very well.
     
  13. Evildeus

    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,657
    Likes Received:
    2
    Don't forget that NFS is an ATI favour bench (like there's some NV favour benchies :D)
     
  14. Hanners

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2002
    Messages:
    816
    Likes Received:
    57
    Location:
    England
    Particularly when it's taken at a menu screen, rather than in-game. Performance in Need For Speed: Carbon with motion blur turned on is always lower by quite a large degree compared to performance while rendering the game's menus.
     
  15. vertex_shader

    Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Messages:
    961
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Far far away
  16. jamis

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ok, now all we need to know is how the rest of the cards run the menu screen. :lol:
    It allmost made me download the NFSC demo myself but it was > 650MB.
     
  17. mao5

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    5
  18. Arty

    Arty KEPLER
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,906
    Likes Received:
    55
    Is that admitting that RV630 > G84 ? :lol:
     
  19. Sound_Card

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2006
    Messages:
    936
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
  20. INKster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Io, lava pit number 12
    Well, it's all over for 8800 GS, but perhaps something else is in the the cards for the future. ;)
    Traditionally, NV never gives up on launching a "just below the high-end pair derivative GPU" before Christmas.
    We've had the FX5900 XT, the 6800 GS and the 7950 GT so, maybe next Fall...
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  • About Us

    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...