GeCube prepares AGP versions of RV610, RV630 and even an OC edition of RV630XT
http://www.theinq.com/default.aspx?article=38288
http://www.theinq.com/default.aspx?article=38288
Last edited by a moderator:
The Official RV630/RV610 Rumours & Speculation Thread
- Thread starter Arun
- Start date
- Status
Because some sound devices have managed to screw things even when using optical S/PDIF? :/ And then there's that game support issue, how does it handle oAL or EAX?
Looking at the AMD slide there is no codec in play here, so any sound quality issues are moot. It's simply a vehicle for A/V use with only a single hookup needed to pass through digital HD-Audio content.
As for the first point I guess you're referring to Creative resampling the output? I wouldn't expect something like that to be an issue. As for the latter point, look at how current solutions handle that: Unless you're running an old nForce2 or a recent C-Media chip, gaming over a digital connection is 2-channel anyway and all audio processing is done in software. Dedicated gamers would probably still use their gaming soundcards over an analog hookup. No difference there.
http://www.ixbt.com/news/all/index.shtml?07/97/78
iXBT guys (better their chinese source) say, that RV630 (540 MHz/700 MHz) reaches 3000 marks in 3D 2006 and 5000 marks in 3D 2005.
Real 700 MHz or some kind of 700 MHz DDR, that means real 350 MHz (eg DDR2 version Sefadu)?
iXBT guys (better their chinese source) say, that RV630 (540 MHz/700 MHz) reaches 3000 marks in 3D 2006 and 5000 marks in 3D 2005.
Real 700 MHz or some kind of 700 MHz DDR, that means real 350 MHz (eg DDR2 version Sefadu)?
How is that possible when the next card up supposedly gets 12K in 3dmark05? Maybe they meant RV610
Something else to think about. Why is the new (RV630) midrange card slower than the previous midrange card (RV530). And let's not forget that RV560 (7700 in 3DM05) and RV570 (10000 in 3DM05) can already be had for €140-150 which is the supposed pricesegment of the RV630.
Funny to see all these sites come up with numbers now. It's nice to see which site was right at the end and which one wasn't. Here's what we got so far:
3DM05 & 3DM06
RV610LE: 20xx (05) - 12xx (06) [VR-Zone]
RV610Pro: ??
RV630(??): 5000 (05) - 3000 (06) [iXBT]
RV630XT: 12000 (05) [VR-Zone]
R600XT: 17xxx (05) - 11xxx (06) [VR-Zone & OC Workbench]
R600XTX: ??
For comparison:
8600GT: 94xx (05) - 46xx (06)
8600GTS: 114xx (05) - 55xx (06)
Both from OC Workbench
Last edited by a moderator:
No, not referring only to Creative; others have managed to screw sound quality as well (without resampling), especially integrated solutions.
I use optical S/PDIF and therefore have "only" 2 channels, but it still is better to have HW-accelarated audio. And at least in some cases it gives you a better quality (because of games settings).
As Zaphod said, it's for digital sound only, and with digital sound, it doesn't matter at all what kinda chip it is, it's only there to pass the signal via HDMI to your amplifier/tv/whatever
Anon Lamer
Newcomer
Oh god, I really hope the R600 counter isn't some ridiculous dual-GPU card again
Better news on the mid-range if accurate. X1950XTX performance for $250 is mighty fine.
A x1950XT/512 is about $250 now. Not too far from x1950XTX. I myself dont think a midrange card for $250 is a midrange card.
Anon Lamer
Newcomer
Thats lower high end. To be midrange you should be at 120-200. GPUs are becoming too powerhungry and expensive, you need a high end powersupply for a high end card and high end cooling with a high end case too if you for some reason place a non exhausting cooler on it.
chavvdarrr
Veteran
wrong. High-end is 200+, where do you see 400$ range? With same success one can claim 1000$ range taking in account Pro cards
Personally I define HE with " cards bought from game maniacs with enough money "
And mid range obviously is for ones that don't have enough money
wrong. High-end is 200+, where do you see 400$ range? With same success one can claim 1000$ range taking in account Pro cards
Personally I define HE with " cards bought from game maniacs with enough money "
And mid range obviously is for ones that don't have enough money
Lol, you completely misunderstood my post. If you classify high-end as $200+ that means it is between 200 and 600 which is a $400 "range". But he classified mid-range as 120-200 which is a $80 "range".
I simply asked how you can have such a narrow range for midrange and such a wide one for high-end. I find that very silly since the cards at the low end of that range are nowhere near the performance of the cards at the high end. e.g a $250 card is typically nowhere near the performance of the $600 variant.
No idea what you're talking about with pro-cards and people with money - what does that have to do with anything?
chavvdarrr
Veteran
anyone can define low/mid/high to fit his own agendas?
One defines HE as 200+, other can say its 300+ .
I don't think that defining range by simply slicing card prices into equal prices is best way - what about number of cards sold?
pfff weird, its supposed to be R600discussion not how everyone defines card segments
/stopping offtopic
One defines HE as 200+, other can say its 300+ .
I don't think that defining range by simply slicing card prices into equal prices is best way - what about number of cards sold?
pfff weird, its supposed to be R600discussion not how everyone defines card segments
/stopping offtopic
Anon Lamer
Newcomer
It goes like this: low end, midrange, performance, high end.
Performance is $200-300
High end is 300+.
There is no upper limit to high end. If ATI releases a dualcore R600 with 2 gig ram for $1200, then it doesnt mean that you have to redefine all the ranges so they are evenly proportioned.
- Status
