ATI`s R600 News Thread

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

10-12-2006, 02:50 PM
ocmyface

anyone remember R520?
dont hold your breath
10-12-2006, 02:50 PM
Dimitriman

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickS

Doesn't look to good for nVidia now does it :p:

As it stands at the moment, from looking at specs, nVidia has no chance. There are SO many variables though, like if ATi has enough stock or not, and weather or not they can keep up with supply and demand. They should be able to though, given the fact that AMD owns them now and should be able to provide the neceserry materials, and funds to make things happen quickly. It also depends on how much heat this will put out, power consumption, real-world benching, drivers, etc.

I wouldn't count on AMD helping ATI keep supply up too much cause AMD is having their own problems with keeping the channel happy. Plus I don't think that the merger came early enough to tie production of R600 with AMD's fabs. Perhaps a 65nm version could be made there though.

http://uk.theinquirer.net/?article=35004
10-12-2006, 02:51 PM
[XC] hipno650

i am pretty shure that there is 64 UNIFIED shaders not pipes! unlike the g80's 128 shaders. also does ati have anything that alows you to run physics on the single gpu like the nvidia quantum physics?
10-12-2006, 02:53 PM
nn_step

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocmyface

anyone remember R520?
dont hold your breath

True, it may be the new R520
or it could be the new R580.
But lets just pretend 64 unified is the R520, imagine what its big brother is going to do
10-12-2006, 02:54 PM
Turtle 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dimitriman

They talk about free 4xAA but apparently they don't take the eDRAM approach, so it isn't necessarily free 4xAA but rather so much ram so fast that 4xAA can be considered free, from what I understood

I don't think the E-dram is the property tech of ATI on the R-500 . I believe thats MS tech.
10-12-2006, 02:54 PM
topaimz

hmmmm, does everyone really think ATi would never-ever make a chipset for Intel again? (After RD600)

Don't ya guys think, if Intel doesn't buy Nvidia, they'll still use chipsets from ATi? (not as much as before, but still once in a while?)

Or am I just delusional over thinking about Kentfield + RD600 + R600 :slobber:
10-12-2006, 02:55 PM
DilTech

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turtle 1

You the man . and you are correct

No, he's incorrect... Much like the info in just about every post you've left on this site.

First off, with these cards, there isn't pipes.

There's Texture Unit, unified shaders(which switch between pixel, vertex, and geometry shaders), and rops.

Therefore, the "64 pipe" means 64 unified shaders. It's not possible to tie 3 shaders to each shader, unlike how the R580 had 3 pixelshaders for every pipe.

If it's 64 shaders, which is the current word, then it's just that. 64 shaders. That's it.
10-12-2006, 02:57 PM
Helmore

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipno650

i am pretty shure that there is 64 UNIFIED shaders not pipes! unlike the g80's 128 shaders. also does ati have anything that alows you to run physics on the single gpu like the nvidia quantum physics?

Where did you get the information from that you can do physics and graphics on a single GPU with NVIDIA Quamtum Physics? I didn't really take it that way, I thought it was just the name NVIDIA is going to use for thier physics solution.
10-12-2006, 02:58 PM
DilTech

Quote:

Originally Posted by Helmore

Where did you get the information from that you can do physics and graphics on a single GPU with NVIDIA Quamtum Physics? I didn't really take it that way, I thought it was just the name NVIDIA is going to use for thier physics solution.

Actually..it was on Dailytech.

The G80 has the ability to have shaders switch to handling physics as part of it's unified architecture.

Either way, I wouldn't count NVidia out even if ATi has a 512bit memory bus. Keep in mind the 7600GT managed to beat the x1800gto even though the x1800GTO had a 256bit memory bus against the 7600GT's 128bit.

It's not just about bus width, it's about efficiency.
10-12-2006, 02:59 PM
fhpchris

Donno how accurate all of this info is, but this was posted somewhere...

Quote:

SPECS
=============================
65nm
64 Shader pipelines (Vec4+Scalar)
32 TMU's
32 ROPs
128 Shader Operations per Cycle
800MHz Core
102.4 billion shader ops/sec
512GFLOPs for the shaders
2 Billion triangles/sec
25.6 Gpixels/Gtexels/sec
256-bit 512MB 1.8GHz GDDR4 Memory
57.6 GB/sec Bandwidth (at 1.8GHz)
WGF2.0 Unified Shader

I am sure some of this info is wrong though, as INQ said that core is estimated to be 700mhz ATM and final estimates are not out.
This also isnt really fast GDDR4.

I only posted this to show that each "unified shader", both has vec4+scalar units.. pretty much the same as the 8800gtx
10-12-2006, 03:02 PM
nn_step

Honest it is too early to know what ATi or nVidia is going to do, but we know it is going to be spectactular
10-12-2006, 03:02 PM
[XC] Lead Head

Quote:

Originally Posted by fhpchris

Donno how accurate all of this info is, but this was posted somewhere...

I am sure some of this info is wrong though, as INQ said that core is estimated to be 700mhz ATM and final estimates are not out.
This also isnt GDDR4.

Um 1.8GHz...lower then the x1950...I dont think so
10-12-2006, 03:03 PM
Dimitriman

It should be hard to make any conclusions about the 64 unified shader approach cause most of us have no clue how its going to translate into PC gaming, we know 48 shaders worked great for the X360 but its hard to estimate how good the Xenos would be on the PC, never mind R600 which has beastly more powerful bandwidth on a 512bit bus and 16 extra shaders.

It might turn out that 64 unified beats 128 pipes, but might be the total opposite, we just need to wait and see.
10-12-2006, 03:05 PM
v_rr

Quote:

Originally Posted by DilTech

No, he's incorrect... Much like the info in just about every post you've left on this site.

First off, with these cards, there isn't pipes.

There's Texture Unit, unified shaders(which switch between pixel, vertex, and geometry shaders), and rops.

Therefore, the "64 pipe" means 64 unified shaders. It's not possible to tie 3 shaders to each shader, unlike how the R580 had 3 pixelshaders for every pipe.

If it's 64 shaders, which is the current word, then it's just that. 64 shaders. That's it.

No, you are incorrect.

And some people think that G80 have 128 pipes. That is complitly wrong. It´s markting. G80 will have 32pipes that are acomplished with 128 pixel processors. In the case of G71 there are 24 pipes with 48 ALU´s.

Nvidia's G80 has 32 pixel pipes
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32856

yes there are pipes. And in the case of G80 you don´t know how many they are.
It is said 128 pixel processors/ALU´s, but the G71 has 48 ALU´s and only 24 pipes, so the G80 could have 32 pipes and 128 ALU´s, but the info isn´t out yet.

ATI's R600 has 64 real pipes
http://uk.theinquirer.net/?article=33784

And do you think that because R600 is unified that 64 shaders only? Hitch pipe has can calculate pixel/processor/geometry, but at diferent speed. The pixel part can be 3x faster than the vertex or geometry part.

So you can explayning in a simpler way that R600 has 198 pixel shaders, just because those 64 pipes do the pixel work 3x times faster than the other tipe of work.

And also can be there pixel processors just like the R580. That doesn´t invalidate that de GPU will be unified.
10-12-2006, 03:08 PM
Helmore

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turtle 1

I don't think the E-dram is the property tech of ATI on the R-500 . I believe thats MS tech.

ATI said that the E-DRAM approach will, for the foreseeable future, never be used in PC graphics, as this approach is to much optimized for a certain resolution. The Xenon chip for the X-Box was build specificallyto render a game at 1080i (or was it 1080p, I just can't get them sepperated) and this 10MB E-DRAM just made sure you could have 4x AA for free at that resolution. On the PC though, everyone wants a different resolution and the higher the resolution, the more E-DRAM and more bandwidth you need to get the same effect. The tradeoff between implementing it or providing other ways that are more of a general solution, thus what you need on the PC, where good enough to not use E-DRAM on the PC. This E-DRAm approach might be used in a year or 10 though, or maybe we should look onto the GPU on a CPU (one die) solution, then the GPU could use the CPU's cache as E-DRAM. (and as we know, AMD is working on such a CPU and this is also one of the main reasons for buying ATI)
EDIT: I just realised that this comment is not really a reply towards Turtle1's comment, it's more pointed towards what Turtle1 was replying.
10-12-2006, 03:10 PM
nn_step

Actually I think this best explains unified shaders
http://www.elitebastards.com/cms/ind...1&limitstart=1
10-12-2006, 03:12 PM
ocmyface

citing the inquirer has never turned out well, especially citing Fuad...

there are no physical pipes
10-12-2006, 03:13 PM
kemo

with all these specs can they keep prices below 500$ ?
I don?t think so
________
Dodge Viper
10-12-2006, 03:14 PM
Turtle 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by DilTech

No, he's incorrect... Much like the info in just about every post you've left on this site.

First off, with these cards, there isn't pipes.

There's Texture Unit, unified shaders(which switch between pixel, vertex, and geometry shaders), and rops.

Therefore, the "64 pipe" means 64 unified shaders. It's not possible to tie 3 shaders to each shader, unlike how the R580 had 3 pixelshaders for every pipe.

If it's 64 shaders, which is the current word, then it's just that. 64 shaders. That's it.

heres old info on the r600 . and yes your correct on the shader thing .
But please refrane from getting personall ok . wise guy.

65nm
64 Shader pipelines (Vec4+Scalar)
32 TMU's
32 ROPs
128 Shader Operations per Cycle
800MHz Core
102.4 billion shader ops/sec
512GFLOPs for the shaders
2 Billion triangles/sec
25.6 Gpixels/Gtexels/sec
256-bit 512MB 1.8GHz GDDR4 Memory
57.6 GB/sec Bandwidth (at 1.8GHz)
WGF2.0 Unified Shader

So we know the 65nm thing is incorrect. But a 512-bit. seems like a stretch could be why ATI delayed the R-600.

A 128 shader ops per cycle is pretty good.
10-12-2006, 03:18 PM
Helmore

I'd say, let's just wait and see for what's coming. Once it's there, then we will know for sure but one thing is for certain, these puppies are going to be bad dogs.
10-12-2006, 03:26 PM
Turtle 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

Actually I think this best explains unified shaders
http://www.elitebastards.com/cms/ind...1&limitstart=1

Thanks good read.
10-12-2006, 03:36 PM
nn_step

now that being covered, imagine 64 mini-floating point/vector processors working together to do what ever you want. Now that is R600 and it is going to be a lower power beast
10-12-2006, 03:38 PM
Turtle 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Helmore

ATI said that the E-DRAM approach will, for the foreseeable future, never be used in PC graphics, as this approach is to much optimized for a certain resolution. The Xenon chip for the X-Box was build specificallyto render a game at 1080i (or was it 1080p, I just can't get them sepperated) and this 10MB E-DRAM just made sure you could have 4x AA for free at that resolution. On the PC though, everyone wants a different resolution and the higher the resolution, the more E-DRAM and more bandwidth you need to get the same effect. The tradeoff between implementing it or providing other ways that are more of a general solution, thus what you need on the PC, where good enough to not use E-DRAM on the PC. This E-DRAm approach might be used in a year or 10 though, or maybe we should look onto the GPU on a CPU (one die) solution, then the GPU could use the CPU's cache as E-DRAM. (and as we know, AMD is working on such a CPU and this is also one of the main reasons for buying ATI)
EDIT: I just realised that this comment is not really a reply towards Turtle1's comment, it's more pointed towards what Turtle1 was replying.

Yes I remeber reading about the res . problem with the E-Drams . But in that same article I remember reading that some of the tech MS allowed ATI to use was intellectual proprerty of MS. and the e-dram on the chip was MS property. Keep in mind its not ATI or NV running the show . Its MS running the show. ATI had to build a cpu to MS specs. It is after all dIRECTX10 IS MS IDEA OF MAKING gaming programms easier to write.
10-12-2006, 03:40 PM
Turtle 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

now that being covered, imagine 64 mini-floating point/vector processors working together to do what ever you want. Now that is R600 and it is going to be a lower power beast

When you say its a lower power beast . are you comparing that to G80 or say an R580?
10-12-2006, 03:43 PM
nn_step

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turtle 1

When you say its a lower power beast . are you comparing that to G80 or say an R580?

:D The least expected of the two

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page