StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Holy.fucking.shit

VR-Zone has learned about some new details on 80nm R600 today and there will be 2 SKUs at launch; XTX and XT. There will be 2 versions of R600XTX; one is for OEM/SI and the other for retail. Both feature 1GB DDR4 memories on board but the OEM version is 12.4" long to be exact and the retail is 9.5" long. The above picture shows a 12.4" OEM version. The power consumption of the card is huge at 270W for 12" version and 240W for 9.5" version. As for R600XT, it will have 512MB of GDDR3 memories onboard, 9.5" long and consumes 240W of power. Lastly, there is a cheaper R600XL SKU to be launched at a later date.

The retail version is just slightly shorter then the 8800GTX...

............ what is that?




No seriously. There's all this stuff that looks like copper tubing and such. That is gigantic. It's as if ATI whipped out its penis in response to Nvidia's offering.

That is the R600, the most power hungry add-on chip ever marketed to gamers.

This is why I don't play computer games...

Hehe. I only see 2 6-pin PCIe connectors, which when you include slot power, is only 225 watts. Where's the other 15 to 45 watts coming from?

I think this thing is going to flop. It might be faster than the 8800, but its going to cost more to buy (just by virtue of its technology), cost more to own (power requirements), and its going to sound to like a dust buster (which the 5800 proved will cost you sales).

240 watts?!?!?

At 10 cents per kilowatt-hour, that would cost you $210.24 in electricity bills per year, assuming you're one of those people who keeps his computer running 24/7.

Darth Wong wrote:240 watts?!?!?

At 10 cents per kilowatt-hour, that would cost you $210.24 in electricity bills per year, assuming you're one of those people who keeps his computer running 24/7.

It gets better when you factor in the latest RAM upgrades, multi-core processors and then add this in. There are PCs out there that need 700 Watt PSUs just to run idle! The heat from the thing must offset gas heating bills at least, because I can't imagine such set-ups being without anything short of good water cooling.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:240 watts?!?!?

At 10 cents per kilowatt-hour, that would cost you $210.24 in electricity bills per year, assuming you're one of those people who keeps his computer running 24/7.

It gets better when you factor in the latest RAM upgrades, multi-core processors and then add this in. There are PCs out there that need 700 Watt PSUs just to run idle! The heat from the thing must offset gas heating bills at least, because I can't imagine such set-ups being without anything short of good water cooling.

I can tell that having two 8800s under the desk does make things nice and toasty. When I leave the room, the rest of the house feels cold.

I don't run my PC 24/7. It runs 3 to 4 hours on weeknights, but I let it run during the day on weekends - it gets shut off at night, though.

Darth Wong wrote:240 watts?!?!?

At 10 cents per kilowatt-hour, that would cost you $210.24 in electricity bills per year, assuming you're one of those people who keeps his computer running 24/7.

Even if you run it 24/7, I doubt the GPU will be pulling that much energy all the time.

Ace Pace wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:240 watts?!?!?

At 10 cents per kilowatt-hour, that would cost you $210.24 in electricity bills per year, assuming you're one of those people who keeps his computer running 24/7.

Even if you run it 24/7, I doubt the GPU will be pulling that much energy all the time.

Still, I bet it will it idle at over 100w.

OT: DW, I put a post in the "Report board software problems here". I don't know if you've seen it yet.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:It gets better when you factor in the latest RAM upgrades, multi-core processors and then add this in. There are PCs out there that need 700 Watt PSUs just to run idle! The heat from the thing must offset gas heating bills at least, because I can't imagine such set-ups being without anything short of good water cooling.

Those are generally only because every component is bleeding-edge top of the line... if you're building PCs that need such tremendous amounts of energy you're probably not in a position to give a damn about an extra $200 a year or so on your electric bill.

Uraniun235 wrote: Those are generally only because every component is bleeding-edge top of the line... if you're building PCs that need such tremendous amounts of energy you're probably not in a position to give a damn about an extra $200 a year or so on your electric bill.

The joke's on them when the world dies from global warming in a few centuries from now.

Darth Wong wrote:240 watts?!?!?

At 10 cents per kilowatt-hour, that would cost you $210.24 in electricity bills per year, assuming you're one of those people who keeps his computer running 24/7.

Suddenly, I don't feel so bad about all the vacuum tube audio gear I own...

Is that a damn air conditionging plant I see on the board?

So.. er.. what is the recommended PSU for this thing? I only have a 500W PSU and I have no interest in buying a new one.

I heard there's a subsequent R600 model that is smaller though.

I take it for the same price as buying one of these I could buy myself a next-gen console?

Ubiquitous wrote:I take it for the same price as buying one of these I could buy myself a next-gen console?

You could probably buy an Xbox 360 and a Wii. That's the way it is with the 8800 GTX, and I don't really see this card being any cheaper at all...

All the copper tubing is heatpipes. They're more efficient at conducting heat than plain copper, so they're being used pretty much everywhere that produces a noticable amount of heat.

I doubt it the card itself will require over 100W while idle, though it might be kinda close. It will possibly require a 600W PSU when at full load.

Of course, one of the bigger problems it has isn't power consumption, but rather the fact that at 12.5" long, it won't fit in most people's cases.

Ubiquitous wrote:I take it for the same price as buying one of these I could buy myself a next-gen console?

That's pretty much the way it's always been with bleeding-edge video cards, yes.

It's capable of more than a next-gen console's video card, I believe.

Why does it have a handle in the back . . ?

InnocentBystander wrote:Why does it have a handle in the back . . ?

So you can do curls with it, thus improving your bicep strength.

Ypoknons wrote:It's capable of more than a next-gen console's video card, I believe.

Yep.

The Xbox 360's graphics chip is the closest to it, as it is meant to be a cut down version of the processor on this card, much like the graphics chip in the PS3 is a cut down 7800GS.

If I recall correctly the one in the xbox is about 2-300mhz slower in raw clock speed compared to the R600, and has less RAM assigned to it. Anyone know of any differences in the architecture of the two chips?

I officially disbelieve these rumors, particulary the one about the power consumption. As pointed out, 240+ Watts isn't even possible with the observed number of power connectors. It does appear that it really will have a 512-bit memory bus and be a monster, though. Honestly, I wouldn't be at all surprised if this thing was the next FX 5800 Ultra. The 8800 series came out of nowhere and made everything that came before seem mollusk-like, so unless ATI's card was already going to be better, there's not a whole lot they can do to counter it in the short run. It takes years to develop a new architecture, after all.

InnocentBystander wrote:Why does it have a handle in the back . . ?

All full length PCI form-factor cards (which includes PCIe and PCI-X) have the handle in the back. In a case designed full length PCI cards (such as rackmount cases), the handle would slide into a notch, keeping the back of the card secure, so it won't bend, warp or flop around.