Printable View
If an x850xt 256mb is $600, does this mean about $300 of the costs is for the ram? Thus a 512mb verson for less than $900 and they are giving you a discount on the ram, maybe even making no extra profit on their 512mb but just marketing to get more sales
Sometimes the stuff you say Gf4 really hurts my head :confused:Quote:
Thus a 512mb verson for less than $900 and they are giving you a discount on the ram, maybe even making no extra profit on their 512mb but just marketing to get more sales
Care to Elaborate ?
PErkam
yea, thats some interesting math there...
guys there is the ignore list...
as to this card, I sure hope it is athe r520 that fugger,macci and opp (is pcice going?) get to play with and not some 512mb x850.. that would be really annoying. Granted it would be faster, but why folks why.. let them break the records with the real deal.
LOL MaxxRacer you're right, I too would be dissappointed at the thought of a 512MB R480 as the main spectacle. Though, knowing ATI, they'd give the XS Triumvirate (lol) a sneek peek anyhoo even if the media wouldnt know about it.
LOL Yes there is but....its just that I read over the statement at least 5 times and its like if the only way for it to make sense is if you start reading it over again :dizzy:Quote:
guys there is the ignore list...
Perkam
My hope is that they give all the ocers there plain old x850xtpe's volt modded to :banana::banana::banana::banana: and more cherry picked then chosing a freshman college girl (ahh what dreams may come)
anyway, they [the overclockers] will clock the living crap out of there systems, then ati will have there own test righ, bring it out, and at stock it would cream all of the OCed systems.
Whoa !!! Wrong forum for that kind of cherry picking bub :eek:Quote:
picked then chosing a freshman college girl (ahh what dreams may come)
But yeah that's actually a great Idea DevR, make the OCers max out and say "AINNNNNNN" not good enough !!! Behold the Power !!!!Quote:
and at stock it would cream all of the OCed systems.
Or something to that effect :D
Perkam
yea remeber how the rumored specs said it was 3x as fast as an x800xtpe, well ive seen fugger and opp literally double the stock speeds lol, so what ATI has might just be a videocard on crack lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
hmmm, I can't very sure about thatQuote:
Originally Posted by perkam
1. it's a multicore CPU..... while Fugger's CPU is 'only' single core
http://arstechnica.com/images/cell/figure7.png
2. it was designed for graphics, multimedia and gaming, while PC is for multi application from computing to multimedia
3. it gonna use more advanced tech like XDR, Nvidia's next card (whatever series it will)
Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
to put this simple, the extra 256mb ram will cost you alot of $. How much does it cost them for 256mb ram? They have to charge enough to make a reasonable profit too so I expect 512mb high end card to be VERY expensive. The 256mb ones are bad enough at $600 :stick:
We have YET to find out how much more powerful a Dual-Core CPU is Napoleonic. And i believe you answred your own question. When you said that it was designed for graphics not for multiple applications lol yeah and dual core Cell processor may well be close to being faster if dedicated to multimeda use but then it begs the question, how powerful could a normal run of the mill 3.2ghz processor if it was dedicating all its resources to a game ??? VERY FAST. Now consider how fast a 6ghz, let alone 7ghz, CPU would be if only dedicated to gaming LOLQuote:
1. it's a multicore CPU..... while Fugger's CPU is 'only' single core
THe only reason the PS3 chip may come close is because it is a dedicated non multi-tasking processor and if you put those kinds of loads on the cell processor it would be less powerfull than today's FX55 to easily.
LOL Gf4 if you wanted to say that in the first place. Though you're right, and your calculation just needed clarification. If the cost of the ram is $300, then twice that makes $600 yes, then a price of $900 nets them the same profit as on a non-512MB X850, so its really to stall until the R520 arrives. THAT IS if the memory costs them $300.Quote:
The 256mb ones are bad enough at $600
perkam
the whole thing pissing me off is the "wow we don't need that much memory"
in 10 years when your videocard has 4gb of ram your going to slap yourself for saying there is such thing as enough of anything!!!!
You dont need to slap urself for that cos unless its 512MB of 1.6ns ram, you're VERY screwed. Take a look at the X800XT NON-PEs. Many of them had 2.0ns ram on one side and 1.6 on the next :eek: and they ended up with really mediocre OCs cos of that.Quote:
"wow we don't need that much memory"
And in addition to that, the more than ram, the harder it is to get the same OCs cos now you have 8 modules ? running at 70"C ??? making the other modules hotter than they would be? Remember that many of the same rules that apply to DDR can apply here, as well all know, for benching rigs, most recommend getting 512mb of memory not 1gb, same applies to vmemory.
Perkam
eh, I mean for multiple kind of application, :)Quote:
When you said that it was designed for graphics not for multiple applications
My apologies Marquzz, I thought you were just a bencher. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marquzz
I can see I might have to do a thousand apologies as everyone I thought were just benchers actually have their own sites :) ...
Regards
Andy
In regards to this 512MB card that is being seen this weekend if it is only an X850XT PE with 512MB of ram ( X850XT PEE ? ;) ) then how did the guy at driverheaven get 41k with it. An extra 512MB of RAM will not get you anywhere near that, you have to be fully modded and at least on very good single phase. The pictures they put up of Ati cases sem to be water cooled or similar.
I suppose they could have put on PCice's dual cascade on it at Ati and sent the screenshot from Ati to the webmaster ??? It's all a puzzle.
Maybe it is AMR and not r520 ? A dual vpu card would need twice as much memory so 512MB would be right ?
It's all very puzzling.
GF4 is right to think about the price, could be substantial. You could have it reduced by having 512MB of slower memory compared to faster ( as is often done in the midrange with 128 and 256MB cards, ie plain 6600 series ) but surely this will be on the XT PE version and so have to be the fastest ?
As well as puzzling Ati nvidia have got the G70 series mentioned in the latest inf file. Is this Generation 7 ?
Regards
Andy
it's using xdr, we're not sure how much that costs to produce, so it may not be comparable to ddr1, 2 or 3.
It isnt, Zardon said it isnt, which practically confirms that its a new gen card.Quote:
In regards to this 512MB card that is being seen this weekend if it is only an X850XT PE with 512MB of ram
Perkam
that would be some crazy stuff if it will be using XDR. I know Samsung said they are producing a lot of XDR.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...129TX1K0000532
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01...ung_ships_xdr/
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/memory/...126030743.html
all i'm worried xdr system memory which might end up cas10 or something, knowing rambus that is.
PErkam
wouldn't that be the ultimate kick in the pants. Get some super-fast new XDR, and it sitll only hits 8k in Sandra b/c of horrible timings. lol.
I'm thinking dual core is fairly logical, kinda like the Asus/Gigabyte cards.
I'm not, I don't see a big reason to really. I mean it would help, but I can't see their first next gen card being dual cored. They'd release a single cored card first, and then maybe later. And they have previously said there are no plans for dual core cards, so if they changed their mind down the road, I don't think we'd be seeing this card this weekend, it'd be alot later, but then I don't know it could be possible, but everything points against it.
You're right. Last time ATi was gonna relese the X800s, they had a "Its Coming" Campain for like a month or something. Its safe to assume that the card in the EVENT is the X850 @ 512 But the card in the DRIVERHEAVEN EDITOR"S COMPUTER is something else entirely.Quote:
but then I don't know it could be possible, but everything points against it.
Perkam
Oh, I meant if it were indeed a dual core card, that we wouldn't be seeing it this weekend, not the r520. Reason being they have been working on the r520 for awhile, and I believe they had said there are no plans for dual cores, so if they changed their mind since that statement, I don't think there would be enough time to just start over and make it dual cored. I do think they will be showing the r520 this weekend though.
i hope im right, the ocers will have an x850 w/ 512, but ati will show off same card in driver heaven article.Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilsRejection
I saw some talk about Cell, and I wanted to make some corrections:
--The Cell is not dual core, it has 9 cores.
--The Cell is not rated at 4.5Ghz, it actually runs at 4.5Ghz, and up to 5.2Ghz with enough voltage and a big PSU. That's on air mind you, on cascade you would probably get close to 10Ghz.
--The Cell theoretically can get 256GFLOPs performance, whereas a P4 even at 7.2Ghz would probably only get about 15.
--The reason Cell can achieve such speeds is because it exchanges control logic for processing logic. The actual processing units of P4s and AMDs make up a small portion of the overall chip (excluding cache), the rest is eaten up by control logic. Of course, by removing all that control logic it means the chip's performance is far more sensitive to how you program it. Now you have to control branch prediction, pre-fetching for caches, etc all manually. Of course this is primarily with the SPUs, the PPC core retains brach prediction, auto-prefetch, etc however it doesn't have out of order execution, so even then you have to be more careful. Even so, many of these problems, while seemingly very difficult, are imho actually quite manageable with the advancement of compilers and thinking differently about how you program.
Essentially the Cell takes the best from modern CPUs and GPUs and puts them together for awesome performance, and imho a better programming model. When you program the Cell, you really are programming the hardware directly. You are not hidden behind a monolith of control logic that totally re-compiles and changes your code to what the CPU sees fit. Rather such responsiblity is left to the programmer, where imho it should lie. With Cell you simply can't get away with being a bad programmer.
Of course realisitcally you won't get 256GFLOPs of performance, maybe 150GFLOPs sustained, which is still about 10x what a 7.2Ghz P4 can do. Then put the Cell on cascade, and that very same P4 will look like ENIAC in compairison, lol. Personally I can't wait to get one, high quality real time raytracing might be possible on such a processor. Does Cell mean the end of the GPU then, far from it imho. I believe it will allow a much more seamless integration of the GPU, and any other co-processor, within the computer system. They will be treated not as disparate devices, but rather extensions of the CPU itself. Sure, x86 processor will last a long time thanks to their extensive codebase, but Cell and Cell-like processors are the future. Especially so, when it's certainly powerful enough to run a virtual x86 processor (i.e. emulate it) and still beat the doors of any P4, even the overclocked ones.
Ok LOL No one ever gain will accuse either me Gf4 or ANYONE OTHER PERSON for TOO MUCH SPECULATION ROFL !!!!!Quote:
I saw some talk about Cell, and I wanted to make some corrections:
--The Cell is not dual core, it has 9 cores.
--The Cell is not rated at 4.5Ghz, it actually runs at 4.5Ghz, and up to 5.2Ghz with enough voltage and a big PSU. That's on air mind you, on cascade you would probably get close to 10Ghz.
--The Cell theoretically can get 256GFLOPs performance, whereas a P4 even at 7.2Ghz would probably only get about 15.
--The reason Cell can achieve such speeds is because it exchanges control logic for processing logic. The actual processing units of P4s and AMDs make up a small portion of the overall chip (excluding cache), the rest is eaten up by control logic. Of course, by removing all that control logic it means the chip's performance is far more sensitive to how you program it. Now you have to control branch prediction, pre-fetching for caches, etc all manually. Of course this is primarily with the SPUs, the PPC core retains brach prediction, auto-prefetch, etc however it doesn't have out of order execution, so even then you have to be more careful. Even so, many of these problems, while seemingly very difficult, are imho actually quite manageable with the advancement of compilers and thinking differently about how you program.
Essentially the Cell takes the best from modern CPUs and GPUs and puts them together for awesome performance, and imho a better programming model. When you program the Cell, you really are programming the hardware directly. You are not hidden behind a monolith of control logic that totally re-compiles and changes your code to what the CPU sees fit. Rather such responsiblity is left to the programmer, where imho it should lie. With Cell you simply can't get away with being a bad programmer.
Of course realisitcally you won't get 256GFLOPs of performance, maybe 150GFLOPs sustained, which is still about 10x what a 7.2Ghz P4 can do. Then put the Cell on cascade, and that very same P4 will look like ENIAC in compairison, lol. Personally I can't wait to get one, high quality real time raytracing might be possible on such a processor. Does Cell mean the end of the GPU then, far from it imho. I believe it will allow a much more seamless integration of the GPU, and any other co-processor, within the computer system. They will be treated not as disparate devices, but rather extensions of the CPU itself. Sure, x86 processor will last a long time thanks to their extensive codebase, but Cell and Cell-like processors are the future. Especially so, when it's certainly powerful enough to run a virtual x86 processor (i.e. emulate it) and still beat the doors of any P4, even the overclocked ones.
There's enough there for a year's worth of it !!!
Seriously, DudeMeister, if I asked you for a link, I imagine you'd have as much trouble finding one as convincing me that it can go from 4.5 stock to 10ghz LOL
Perkam
Are you sure you all havent been lead up the garden path by him slipping one little word into the sentance ... ati. It could be a cunning ruse to shy you away from the fact nvidia may have something new floating about
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=54149
the plot thickens :D
Relax Rancid, Nvidia is ways off from making any breakthroughs until 2006 and that isnt any news to get excited about lol. I mean, we didnt hear the confirmed X800 specs at least a month right before it was launch, you shouldnt waste too much enthusiasm on it, the plot will only thicken in a year when Nvidia brings out a response to the R520. Until then, ATIs lead, at least in the pc market, may well be easily maintained.Quote:
the plot thickens
For all way know it could Nvidia's entry into the Multimedia graphics market, the cards like those from Matrox for HD TV on pc and such, would make sense considering the "G"70 nametag.
Perkam
huh? how so? r500 taped out before r520 afaik... at least thats what i read...Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
Sort of like a downgrade R500 if you will, but yeah, the R500 on the Xbox II has to stand up to the NVXX (and pls dont someone be smart and tell me its the G70) cos Sony and Nvidia will have an extra year to work on them. Hence the R520s successor or update will be using R500 architecture. Makes sense to me.Quote:
huh? how so? r500 taped out before r520 afaik... at least thats what i read...
Perkam
Perkam
andy, but this doesnt make any sence... why is r420 not sm3.0? because ati had problems to design an sm3.0 gpu that performed well enough as its a hard thing to build an sm3.0 gpu from scratch.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
knowing this, does it make any sence for ati to build two ! different sm3.0 gpus? one for xbox and one for the pc market? they wont make that much money selling the license for the gpu to microsoft, so it wouldnt be worth it at all i think...
a ps3 doesnt have that much cpu power, its not really 9 cores, its 1 core + 8 fpu units...Quote:
Originally Posted by Napoleonic
wasnt that nvidia? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
ati loves surprises as far as i can remmeber... 8500 was a rabbit out of the hat, just like the 9700 and the 9800 and the x800 cards as far as i can remember. there were rumours about r420, but not much...
seeing it like this i doubt they will be playing with an r520... and they surely wouldnt allow people to post infos and results of it on the net before the release...
its not a multicore though... at least not in my opinion... its one core with a part of the core beeing split up and multiplicated, but it doesnt have several independant cores, hence its not a multi core processor... at least not by my definition :PQuote:
Originally Posted by DudeMiester
this would be the first time a pc chip would be a downgraded consolve chip in history... i doubt this is going to happen... :PQuote:
Originally Posted by perkam
the strengths of consoles are they get produced in masses and get produces cheap, thats also why r500 will be made in 65nm process afaik, to make them cheap enough, while r520 is already beeing made at 90nm afaik.
This is from a dutch site,Tweakers.net ,the came out with this news today,that it is the new X850 512mb that ATI introduched today,nice isnt it :D .
this is the one,another pic
So 256mb more of ram will give you 10,000 extra 3dmarks? I find this very doubtful
definately not 10k more marks by doubling memory gotte be more
extra ram wont help, period in todays games except maybe for 1600x1200 with aa/af in doom3 ultra quality
Thats going to matter someday though. Doom 3 on ultra at 1600x1200 aa/af will be equivalent to games in 3 years on medium or low. They need to make the step eventually.
actually according to ATI gains have been seen in Farcry and Doom 3 in resolutions as low as 1024Quote:
Originally Posted by Geforce4ti4200
The weekend will tell what card it is =p and i just bought 2 6800gt to run SLI YAY!!! :cussing: :brick: :grr: :soap: :rolleyes: typical me if it shows to be a x950xt :D so its bound to be the big bang card everyone is wondering about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackass
id like to see a review comparing a 512mb card vs. a 256mb with everything else being equal because the last time I saw one, it was a 128mb vs. 256mb 9800pro and there was ZERO difference except for 1600x1200 with aa/af where it was very small
was it doom or farcry?
"Gains" = .1 FPS :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackass
I think there is deliberate smoke and mirrors coming from Ati, almost certainly macci, Opp and FUGGER will be benching bullhead and X850 512MB but also that 41k score posted on Driverheaven is not going to be from a machine which is watercooled on cpu only and that has the above card in it. Not unless they have the worlds best AMD in it that can do 3.2GHz+ on water. That water is not even chilled as far as I can tell.
I think that they may show r520 running at the event with big numbers ( like nvidia did with Sli but more than likely the details will emerge at Cebit).
Sayaa, I do not think R500 has taped out yet ?? It has been in developement for a long time because it was originally due to be r400 but then Ati decided they could win the speed battle over nvidia with a simpler based on r360 r420 instead. So r400 morphed into r500. Ati did not do Sm3.0 on r420 not because they could not but because they judged that 3.0 marketing would not be as big as having the fastest video chip.
What they probably found difficult was having the unified pixel and vertex shader units, if this is a difficult task it actually makes it more sensible to put it in a console where strict parameters on other hardware and software are in place. Then you can trickle the complexity into the desktop market vpu when you get it sorted .. hence r500 is more complex than r520, but r520 uses techniques learnt on the r500.
Of course Ati underestimated nvidia when it came to pure speed, hence their last minute introduction of X800XT PE and connected small production of same. Sli probably did not make them too happy as well. So now nvidia have got the speed and the marketing tickbox of Sm3.0. So in goes SM3.0+ from Ati and 90nm and bigger clock speeds, possibly more pipes and possibly multicore.
It's all a bit grey of course, my pet theories might be wide of the mark, fun to speculate though.
Regards
Andy
Dude, the GPU in Xbox was better than the competition at the time. It had 1 more pixel shader than the desktop gf3 i think. It was surpassed, but it was better at the time.
the only reason im going with that being an r520 chip or just a card based on ati is the backplate, looks very very similar to a backplate for an x850 no?
http://img183.exs.cx/img183/7528/yum23oy.jpg
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...kplane_big.jpg
I doubt 256 mb of memory suddenly gives the X850 such power. Cos to me, that actually looks like a one-slot solution. And the R520 will have to be one for AMR possibility. Though considering they dont require the connector thingy sli has, the R520 CAN be dual slot but that wouldnt be a sign of newer tech but old tech maxed out ;)Quote:
the only reason im going with that being an r520 chip or just a card based on ati is the backplate, looks very very similar to a backplate for an x850 no?
Perkam
6800 ultra is dual slot.
Your point being ???Quote:
6800 ultra is dual slot.
Perkam
You said the card couldn't be dual slot if it was to be run in amr I thought, maybe I missread. :confused:
Well first of all the Cell does have 9 totally independant cores. They operate on their own processes totally independant of one another, that is of course unless you specifically program them not to be. Also, the PPC can run two processes at one, so all together you have 10 totally independant processes running on 9 seperate processing cores. Now you say 1 core + 8 FPUs, and I can see where you're coming from, but even under that not totally correct interpretation, when each supposed "FPU" is as powerful as a heavily overclocked P4, it's still very very fast! So sure they can interact like the CPU interacts with the FPU, but unlike that arragement they really are multi-core. You wouldn't call a network of computers a single processor either, a cell is just like that, a very tight network of processors that work together.
Also, the only speculation on my part is the thing with estimated real world performance, the rest is fact. Here are some links:
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/cell-1.ars
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/cell-2.ars
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19815 (Warning extremely long, but informative, thread)
http://www.eet.com/conf/isscc/ (Two news items from the conferance it was recently presented at)
http://www.igeek.com/CellProcessor.pdf
http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cf...WT021005084318
http://ascii24.com/news/i/tech/artic...54207-000.html (Some nice charts including the one that mentions 5.2Ghz)
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2.../kaigai153.htm (A bunch of nice PPT slides and photos of the chips)
http://www.scee.presscentre.com/imag...etailsID=25555 (Overview from ISSCC. You'll have to rename the file to .doc)
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1761407,00.asp (Another news story)
http://rambus.com/news/newsroom/pressrelease.cfm?id=162 (Memory bus and IO)
Needless to say, I am not GProphet4Ti4200 ;), if anything I'm GProphet6800Ultra. :p:
Anyways, enough going off topic. I just wanted to make a correction.
lol I predict another paper launch with massive price gauging to follow :mad:
gee, what coulda tipped ya off to that one? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by kouch
Ok guys, this could be good, I was reading other forums and came across this. He says he used to work for ati till to 4-5 months ago so his info is about that old. The pipe thing sounds reasonable, I remember there were rumors of 12 pipes of r420 which few believed, not only did it come with 12, but there was an xt verson with 16. I think history will repeat itself. As for core clocks, I am hearing 700-750 now but ati can change those up till the time they begin speed binning depending on yields. I remember they were aiming for 500MHz on x700xt but changed their minds and went with 475 due to bad yields then decided to cancel x700xt in favor of x800 and the few x700xt they made got remarked as pros. No use arguing over r520 core, even if its "only" 650MHz its still beyond fast. The ram sounds quite insane but truth is itll probably be NEEDED in order to feed a hungry fast core with 24,32 pipes. Less bandwith would be a dire bottleneck. Some people are saying r520 will be nothing more than dual or amr x850s but thats wrong cause x850s dont have ps3, why would ati go with this? Their goal is to finally have ps3 and I pretty much doubt they will change the x850xt core just to add ps3 and its still on 130nm too. I give that guy confirming the specs alot of credit. This is also in line from the guy who hit 40k on a 4.3ee p4 and a *stock* r520. on an x850xt the score would be around 33k. Yes this tells me the nature would just be insane and gives me a good idea of the r520s power in everything. Lastly, 512mb ram is a reality, even the x850xt is comming in 512mb flavors. There might be 256mb flavors of r520, even if its only on the non PE verson.
Well those who know me know I used to work for ATi up until last October. Now I'm not going to tell you what's true and what's not true seeing as even us employee's are pretty much kept in the dark but I do know this.. I'll leave you with what's true.. and remove what's false.
24 "Pipelines" (24x1 not 24x1.5 but supports up to 32x1)
96 Arithmetic Logic Units (ALU)
192 Shader Operations per Cycle (UNKNOWN)
700MHz Core(actually last we heard it was in the high 600's)
256-bit 512MB 1.8GHz GDDR3 Memory (yes that's the memory)
57.6 GB/sec Bandwidth (at 1.8GHz)
300-350 Million Transistors
90nm Manufacturing
Shader Model 3.0
ATI HyperMemory (the core will support Hypermemory which probably will only be used in the lower end versions of the core).
ATI Multi Rendering Technology (AMR)
Launch: Q2 2005 (closer to June)
FP32 blending, texturing
Programmable Primitive Processor/Tesselator (not entirely true but will support Truform in hardware).
It's basically an R420 derivative (R3xx) with addons. It was brought back to the drawing board.
I don't like the memory speed and the number of pipelines, it could be 24 but my guess is 16 and also it is likely to have 1.4Ghz GDDr3 not 1800 IMO.
Regards
Andy
well i might be blown away if those 'specs' hadnt already come to light 2 weeks ago, i can't see GDDR3 memory running at 1.8ghz, seen as the 1.4ns version of the ram hasnt really come to light yet, so imo yeilds will still be low - plus theres still another 200mhz jump on that, ATi would need to be real lucky with alot of GDDR3 to sustain the 1.8ghz clocks if you ask me, leaving very little headroom for any overclocking at all and as previously stated memory doesnt seem to clock as well on ATI cards probably due to thier architecture, if that 1.8ghz speed is spot on my money would have to be on XDR, i just cant see them getting alot of GDDR3 chips stable at that speed
Why do you think it would have only 16 pipelines? So your saying all they are really doing is uping the clockspeed and adding support for ps3.0, dosn't sound like much of a card to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
It will have 24 and possibily 32 for the "xt" verson that may be released as a refresh or even at the same time as the pro. I was checking another forum and another "ati worker" said he highly doubts 750MHz or even 700MHz core and instead agrees with the high 600, says even with 90nm itll be too hot for 700MHz and yields too low.
700MHz Core(actually last we heard it was in the high 600's) <------probably accurate. We may see overclocks to 700-750 with 3rd party beefy air cooling though. 650-680 sounds reasonable