ATI R520 Details


Recommended Posts

lemme guess, you got this from that retard that posted this months ago on [H] forums? besides, it doesn't have a source.

585461622[/snapback]

Curiosity killed the cat. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lemme guess, you got this from that retard that posted this months ago on [H] forums? besides, it doesn't have a source.

585461622[/snapback]

Haha i was just thining the same thing, if this is really what the card is going to be like, good luck 1. affording it 2. finding it for anything below 100 dollars over MSRP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it funny that nVivia's card already have some of those features... like;

FP32 blending, texturing

Shader Model 3.0

Performance: Over 3x Radeon X800 XT

:p lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find no validity in this because of the lack of a source.

Did you's hear about NVIDIA new 6900 Ultra XT 9000 HAL?

96 "Pipelines"

128 Texture Units

413 Arithmetic Logic Units (ALU)

981 Shader Operations per Cycle

4.2GHz Core

9134.7 Trillion Shader Operations per Second (at 4.2GHz)

512-bit 1024MB 2.9GHz GDDR7 Memory

921.6 TB/sec Bandwidth (at 2.9GHz)

1-3 hundred Transistors

1nm Manufacturing

Shader Model 14.0

NVIDIA SuperMemory

NVIDIA Omni Display Gadget (NODG)

Launch: Q3 2005

Performance: Over 200x Radeon 6800Ultras !!! (for single 69UXT9H)

32x Uber FSAA

FP64 blending, texturing

Programmable Primitive Processor/Tesselator

Advanced Artificial Intelligence

Optional Laser Beams

I'm not poking fun (in entirety :p), I'm just illustrating that without a credible source (or any source at all) that there is no validity in this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt it could really be 3X faster than X800XT since it only has a little more than twice the peak theoretical fill rate and 1.5 times the pipeline size would NOT require a 2.2X increase in die size... which would be extremelly expensive to make and would get terrible yields... wel maybe ATI wants another peper launch, like any of their cards with more than 12 pipes

585461535[/snapback]

Actually, double the transitors is feasible if they doubled the pipelines and added FP32, among other things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theyre providing the CPU. ATI providing the GPU.

585461477[/snapback]

Correction, Intel is providing the CPU for the Xbox 2.

IBM, Toshiba and Sony will be making providing the CPU for Playstation 3, So thats a hard one to beat :) :cool: .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correction, Intel is providing the CPU for the Xbox 2.

IBM, Toshiba and Sony will be making providing the CPU for Playstation 3, So thats a hard one to beat :) :cool: .

585472176[/snapback]

Nope.

Will they be Intel, as in Xbox 1?

No, IBM.

Will they be 32 or 64 bit?

64 bit.

Do you have any more information about the processor?

They will be PowerPC 976 chips, based on IBM's Power 5 architecture at 65nm.

Who is the graphics card maker?

ATI

What graphics card will it be?

ATI R500, which is more powerful R400.

http://www.activewin.com/faq/xbox2.shtml

You can dig more sources on IBM providing the CPU for Xbox2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will the R520 be released?

-

Aha, due in 2006 Sometime.  :rolleyes:

585472911[/snapback]

nope the r520 is the next in the product cycle, so 2nd quater this year if they are following the 1 year product cycle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope.

Will they be Intel, as in Xbox 1?

No, IBM.

Will they be 32 or 64 bit?

64 bit.

Do you have any more information about the processor?

They will be PowerPC 976 chips, based on IBM's Power 5 architecture at 65nm.

Who is the graphics card maker?

ATI

What graphics card will it be?

ATI R500, which is more powerful R400.

http://www.activewin.com/faq/xbox2.shtml

You can dig more sources on IBM providing the CPU for Xbox2.

585472199[/snapback]

that is correct

p.s. whoa jerry, 2 correct, unbiased and well informed posts in 1 day!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets consider this a "rumor" until we get a proper source.  :shifty:

585461934[/snapback]

You go ahead and consider it a "rumor."

Until there is a source, I personally will consider it a "pipe dream" (pun intented). Nothing less. Nothing more.

Also in all seriousness, since when are rumors without a source considered credible Back Page news?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.