R520 information galore

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-09-14 02:18pm

the 90nm R520 will be a 16-pipe, 16-shader processor design with a number of different SKUs based on the GPU. Internal ATI documentation specifically claims that the R520 series will ship at launch, just as NVIDIA's 7800GTX and 7800GT series shipped and launched on the same dates.

Xilleon based TV encoder, SM3.0, H.264 decode acceleration and CrossFire support. Also expect to see HDTV options for all 90nm ATI cards in the near future, although they may be limited to the All In Wonder series for R520.

At the top end is the Radeon X1800 XT; this 16-pipe R520 will feature a 600MHz core clock, with a 256-bit memory bus connected to 512MB of GDDR3 memory clocked at 700MHz. The 600MHz core clock will give it a lower fill rate than the GeForce 7800 GTX (24-pipes at 430MHz), while the 700MHz memory clock will give it more memory bandwidth than the stock GTX (600MHz). Much like the GTX, the X1800 XT will be priced at $599. The X1800 XT will feature two DVI outputs with HDCP support. The lower fillrate seems alarming at first, but consider several factors. First of all, ATI's traditional core design can do "more" per clock cycle (at least on the R420 design) than NVIDIA. Secondly, R520 has a lot of little tweaks including hardware asissted H.264 decoding. Just last week, we also received details about ATI's revamped memory controller which operates on an internal 512-bit ring bus. There is a lot to speculate about performance, but even with similar fill rates as NVIDIA, there is a strong possibility that other workings in R520 will differentiate the card on a real world performance level.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-09-14 03:36pm

It's a shame to see just 16 pixel pipelines, but that's not the end-all be-all of performance. Can't wait for benchmarks.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2005-09-14 03:57pm

Yes back to the eighteen hundreds! Stupid naming programs. What was the matter with Radeon 1-50 with the XT or whatever for the preminum and the PC(Pile of crap) for the value?

Ahh well. Funny to note with have another "clock speed don't matter" debate heading up with the new faster Cored ATI cards.

Which makes them Intel.... and Nvidia is AMD? Wait... how did that happen?

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-09-14 04:52pm

People focus too much on pixel pipeline counts. Fill rate has now taken a back seat to shader performance, and since we don't know much about the comparative shader capabilities between the X1800 and 7800 series, we still don't have much info to go on.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2005-09-14 05:26pm

Hope it really is a new design, and not yet another upgraded "old" design like the R420...

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-09-14 05:41pm

Why? The upgraded "old" design performaned admirably. It certainly held its own with nVidia's "new" design. If they can deliver excellent performance, who cares? They can be using a chip unearthed in some archeological dig and I'd still buy it if it performed well.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2005-09-14 05:45pm

SPOOFE wrote:Why? The upgraded "old" design performaned admirably. It certainly held its own with nVidia's "new" design. If they can deliver excellent performance, who cares? They can be using a chip unearthed in some archeological dig and I'd still buy it if it performed well.

But it didn't move ahead technologically. Pixelshader version, HDR, all the interesting stuff...

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-09-14 07:27pm

I'm fairly sure this new card will support SM 3.0, even though it's still based on the R300.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-09-14 08:25pm

But it didn't move ahead technologically. Pixelshader version, HDR, all the interesting stuff...

Shader 3.0 offered very little in terms of real-world additions, and HDR is compatible with Shader 2.0. What other interesting stuff is there other than pushing pixels and lighting effects at awesome framerates?

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2005-09-14 08:47pm

SPOOFE wrote:
But it didn't move ahead technologically. Pixelshader version, HDR, all the interesting stuff...
Shader 3.0 offered very little in terms of real-world additions, and HDR is compatible with Shader 2.0. What other interesting stuff is there other than pushing pixels and lighting effects at awesome framerates?

SLI support, or the equivalent?

[ducks]

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-09-14 09:01pm

SPOOFE wrote:Shader 3.0 offered very little in terms of real-world additions, and HDR is compatible with Shader 2.0. What other interesting stuff is there other than pushing pixels and lighting effects at awesome framerates?

What else do you need? More and better effects at a higher framerate sounds like a winner to me. We're starting to see a noticeable difference in performance between 2.0 and 3.0 in the newer games, and this gap will only increase for future games.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-09-14 09:54pm

SLI support, or the equivalent?

Very good point. ATi was supposed to have Crossfire out at the beginning of this year...

We're starting to see a noticeable difference in performance between 2.0 and 3.0 in the newer games, and this gap will only increase for future games.

As has been pointed out, the new series from ATi has support for SM 3.0.

All that remains to be seen with ATi's new offering is if they can match nVidia's performance and image quality. Benchmarks, I say!