Radeon X800PRO will beat NV40 Ultra

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

_______________________________________________________________________________

X800XT ends up even faster


By Fuad Abazovic: Monday 19 April 2004, 12:19

WISE BIRDS tell us here in Vienna that ATI and at least some of their
knowledgeable partners don't feel so bad about NV40 Ultra. Even though
the NV 40 Ultra, Geforce 6800 Ultra is a very fast card that
outperforms everything else on planet for the time being, the ATI next
generation chip might end up even faster.
The canaries are singing that 12 pipelines, 475MHz/950MHz card with 96
bit precision and PS 2.0 shader only will end up faster then 16
pipelines, 400MHz /1100MHz cards with 128 bit precision and PS 3.0
shader model.

ATI knew for some time it would lose out feature wise, but stays
committed to bring the faster technology, without some of the extra
features.

The R400 card - now renamed to R500 - has support for all these nice
features but got postponed but that is the chip with 128 bit precision
and PS 3.0 support from ATI. Until that chip dawns, later this year at
the earliest, ATI stays PS 2.0 and 96 bit precise only.

But Nvidia seems to be keeping some of its powder dry too. We hear
about some faster NV40 chips that Nvidia is saving for later. µ

_______________________________________________________________________________



http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15406
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

R420 wrote:
>
____________________________________________________________________________
___
>
> X800XT ends up even faster
>
>
> By Fuad Abazovic: Monday 19 April 2004, 12:19
>
> WISE BIRDS tell us here in Vienna that ATI and at least some of their
> knowledgeable partners don't feel so bad about NV40 Ultra. Even though
> the NV 40 Ultra, Geforce 6800 Ultra is a very fast card that
> outperforms everything else on planet for the time being, the ATI next
> generation chip might end up even faster.
> The canaries are singing that 12 pipelines, 475MHz/950MHz card with 96
> bit precision and PS 2.0 shader only will end up faster then 16
> pipelines, 400MHz /1100MHz cards with 128 bit precision and PS 3.0
> shader model.
>
> ATI knew for some time it would lose out feature wise, but stays
> committed to bring the faster technology, without some of the extra
> features.
>
> The R400 card - now renamed to R500 - has support for all these nice
> features but got postponed but that is the chip with 128 bit precision
> and PS 3.0 support from ATI. Until that chip dawns, later this year at
> the earliest, ATI stays PS 2.0 and 96 bit precise only.
>
> But Nvidia seems to be keeping some of its powder dry too. We hear
> about some faster NV40 chips that Nvidia is saving for later. µ
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
___
>
>
>
> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15406


I find it interesting that ATI would take the "less features, faster speed"
road that Nvidia has taken in the past. Of course, the inquirer is like a
local gossip column, so I take everything on it with a grain of salt.

*If* this is true, however, I will be disappointed because for me that will
mean that Nvidia has definitely won this round, no competition. And no
competition = higher prices for longer. Ah well, I just picked up a 9800P
for like $220, so I'm in no rush to upgrade quite yet. So perhaps when it's
time for me to get a new video card, I will be able to pick up ATI's 2nd
iteration of their next generation that will be better then Nvidias 6800 =).

Khabs,
Mark
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"The Mighty MF" <sether01@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:10896tr3qhpul7f@corp.supernews.com:


>>
>> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15406
>
>
> I find it interesting that ATI would take the "less features, faster
> speed" road that Nvidia has taken in the past. Of course, the
> inquirer is like a local gossip column, so I take everything on it
> with a grain of salt.
>
> *If* this is true, however, I will be disappointed because for me that
> will mean that Nvidia has definitely won this round, no competition.
> And no competition = higher prices for longer. Ah well, I just picked
> up a 9800P for like $220, so I'm in no rush to upgrade quite yet. So
> perhaps when it's time for me to get a new video card, I will be able
> to pick up ATI's 2nd iteration of their next generation that will be
> better then Nvidias 6800 =).
>
> Khabs,
> Mark

I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. What comes to mind
is when 3DFX tried to compete on speed alone and missed features. They
ended up comming back into the game too little, too late.

I don't think the 6800 would have been as good as it is if it weren't for
ATI nipping at Nvidia's with the 9800XT etc. I hope ATI keeps it up.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Mr. Grinch" <grinch@hatespam.yucky> wrote in message
news:Xns94D111E55412Agrinchhatespamyucksh@24.71.223.159...
>
> I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. What comes to
mind
> is when 3DFX tried to compete on speed alone and missed features.
They > ended up comming back into the game too little, too late.
>


Interesting that you should bring up 3dfx because I remember when ATI
came out with the 9700 Pro and Nvidia came out very late in releasing
it's NV30 in response. Of course, the NV30 was a disappointment and
people began to wonder out loud if Nvidia was going "the way of 3dfx".
I'm not saying you've done this, but it should be interesting to see if
people in general start saying that ATI is going "the way of 3dfx" if
the X800 is not absolutely everything people envision it should be.


> I don't think the 6800 would have been as good as it is if it weren't
for
> ATI nipping at Nvidia's with the 9800XT etc. I hope ATI keeps it up.
>


No kidding since ATI seems to be the only other real contender out
there.
 

chip

Distinguished
Nov 16, 2001
513
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"R420" <radeonr420@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:51488ce2.0404191125.243c11a7@posting.google.com...
>
____________________________________________________________________________
___
>
> X800XT ends up even faster
>
>
> By Fuad Abazovic: Monday 19 April 2004, 12:19
>
> WISE BIRDS tell us here in Vienna that ATI and at least some of their
> knowledgeable partners don't feel so bad about NV40 Ultra. Even though
> the NV 40 Ultra, Geforce 6800 Ultra is a very fast card that
> outperforms everything else on planet for the time being, the ATI next
> generation chip might end up even faster.
> The canaries are singing that 12 pipelines, 475MHz/950MHz card with 96
> bit precision and PS 2.0 shader only will end up faster then 16
> pipelines, 400MHz /1100MHz cards with 128 bit precision and PS 3.0
> shader model.

I think you may find that the ATI card lauches with 16 pipelines rather than
12. I believe that ATI were originally planning on launching with 8 (and
presumably the other 8 disabled) but have decided they need a bit more
"oomph", in the light of the devastating nVidia benchmarks.

ATI obviously have a lot up their sleeve, but having seen the previews and
the nvidia NV40 launch demo video, its hard to see how ATI is going to be
even faster. Never in the history of gaming has a card come along that has
blown away what went before it to the extent that the new NV40 seems to do.
Its a *massive* jump in performance. Even bigger than when we went from
Geforce3 and Radeon 8500's to the then awesome 9700 Pro.

I just can't see ATI coming up with something even faster.

But we shall see: we don't have long to wait to find out!

Chip


>
> ATI knew for some time it would lose out feature wise, but stays
> committed to bring the faster technology, without some of the extra
> features.
>
> The R400 card - now renamed to R500 - has support for all these nice
> features but got postponed but that is the chip with 128 bit precision
> and PS 3.0 support from ATI. Until that chip dawns, later this year at
> the earliest, ATI stays PS 2.0 and 96 bit precise only.
>
> But Nvidia seems to be keeping some of its powder dry too. We hear
> about some faster NV40 chips that Nvidia is saving for later. µ
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
___
>
>
>
> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15406
 

DaveL

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2001
634
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Even if ATI's product is no competition it does not mean they are going
away. If that were the case Matrox would have went away a long time ago.
It's all based on profits and losses. 3dfx went belly up because they made
some bad business decisions like buying STB to make their own boards.

DaveL


"NightSky 421" <nightsky421@no-mail-please.com> wrote in message
news:108admk614kmt9d@corp.supernews.com...
> "Mr. Grinch" <grinch@hatespam.yucky> wrote in message
> news:Xns94D111E55412Agrinchhatespamyucksh@24.71.223.159...
> >
> > I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. What comes to
> mind
> > is when 3DFX tried to compete on speed alone and missed features.
> They > ended up comming back into the game too little, too late.
> >
>
>
> Interesting that you should bring up 3dfx because I remember when ATI
> came out with the 9700 Pro and Nvidia came out very late in releasing
> it's NV30 in response. Of course, the NV30 was a disappointment and
> people began to wonder out loud if Nvidia was going "the way of 3dfx".
> I'm not saying you've done this, but it should be interesting to see if
> people in general start saying that ATI is going "the way of 3dfx" if
> the X800 is not absolutely everything people envision it should be.
>
>
> > I don't think the 6800 would have been as good as it is if it weren't
> for
> > ATI nipping at Nvidia's with the 9800XT etc. I hope ATI keeps it up.
> >
>
>
> No kidding since ATI seems to be the only other real contender out
> there.
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"DaveL" <dave1027@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8ZGdnTGmkJoe-xjd4p2dnA@comcast.com...
> Even if ATI's product is no competition it does not mean they are
going
> away. If that were the case Matrox would have went away a long time
ago.
> It's all based on profits and losses. 3dfx went belly up because they
made
> some bad business decisions like buying STB to make their own boards.
>
> DaveL
>


I agree with you 100% and I also think ATI will do pretty good this time
around as well regardless of how their news cards stack up. My
commentary was from the point of view that I hope whichever company has
what is considered to be the #2 product isn't automatically accused of
"going the way of 3dfx".
 

chip

Distinguished
Nov 16, 2001
513
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"NightSky 421" <nightsky421@no-mail-please.com> wrote in message
news:108bplm78ioml5a@corp.supernews.com...
> "DaveL" <dave1027@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:8ZGdnTGmkJoe-xjd4p2dnA@comcast.com...
> > Even if ATI's product is no competition it does not mean they are
> going
> > away. If that were the case Matrox would have went away a long time
> ago.
> > It's all based on profits and losses. 3dfx went belly up because they
> made
> > some bad business decisions like buying STB to make their own boards.
> >
> > DaveL
> >
>
>
> I agree with you 100% and I also think ATI will do pretty good this time
> around as well regardless of how their news cards stack up. My
> commentary was from the point of view that I hope whichever company has
> what is considered to be the #2 product isn't automatically accused of
> "going the way of 3dfx".

I also agree 100%. People seem to forget what massive markets the OEM and
laptop sectors are. The fastest-graphics-card-in-the-world market is very
small really. The marketing qudos it gives you is the only real reason its
important.

So whilst their is some debate around who will have the fastest card, its
not really all that importannt. In every other area, we know that both
companies will have competitive offerings. The reason I say that is because
all they need to do is to set the prices right such that a card of
performance X matches the price of their competitor's performance X card.
How each card achieves "X" is irrelevant. The only thing affected will be
either company's profits. If their architecture is good, they will make big
margins, and if its not so good, they will have to sell higher spec cards
(in order to compete) and then their margins will be lower.

On this basis ATI oem's will largely continue to buy ATI, irrespective of
what's happening at "the top end". In just the same way as nVidia continued
to sell chips, even though its architecture has generally been considered to
be inferior.

Incidentally, personally I think its unlikely that ATI will manage to match
the NV40 in the short term. Just my personal opinion. But such a *huge*
jump in performance that the NV40 offers; this is not the norm. I suspect
its caught ATI by surprise. Heck - its caught everyone else by surprise!

And perhaps its nVidia's turn to get back on top? They were the ones caught
out when the 9700 Pro came out. No-one expected such a big leap in
performance then, and it was nVidia caught with their pants down. It looks
to me like they have been secretly beavering away in the background to try
to get their crown back. And I suspect they may have achieved it. We will
see. Interesting times!

Chip
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 10:43:11 +0100, "Chip" <anneonymouse@virgin.net>
wrote:


>So whilst their is some debate around who will have the fastest card, its
>not really all that importannt. In every other area, we know that both
>companies will have competitive offerings. The reason I say that is because
>all they need to do is to set the prices right such that a card of
>performance X matches the price of their competitor's performance X card.
>How each card achieves "X" is irrelevant. The only thing affected will be
>either company's profits. If their architecture is good, they will make big
>margins, and if its not so good, they will have to sell higher spec cards
>(in order to compete) and then their margins will be lower.
>
>On this basis ATI oem's will largely continue to buy ATI, irrespective of
>what's happening at "the top end". In just the same way as nVidia continued
>to sell chips, even though its architecture has generally been considered to
>be inferior.
>

Not any more........... nVidia has obviously learnt very well from the
painful mistakes.

John Lewis

>Incidentally, personally I think its unlikely that ATI will manage to match
>the NV40 in the short term. Just my personal opinion. But such a *huge*
>jump in performance that the NV40 offers; this is not the norm. I suspect
>its caught ATI by surprise. Heck - its caught everyone else by surprise!
>
>And perhaps its nVidia's turn to get back on top? They were the ones caught
>out when the 9700 Pro came out. No-one expected such a big leap in
>performance then, and it was nVidia caught with their pants down. It looks
>to me like they have been secretly beavering away in the background to try
>to get their crown back. And I suspect they may have achieved it. We will
>see. Interesting times!
>
>Chip
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis) wrote:

>nVidia has obviously learnt very well from the
>painful mistakes.

Maybe they'll stop cheating on benchmarks, too.

8)