ATI pipeline VS Nvidia

[Rifter]

Ok i have a question, ive been out of the loop for a while(3 years) and am building a new comp, i looked at the specs on some new vid cards and noticed ATI's new top card(X1900XTX) has 48 pixel pipelines and the new Nvidia(7900GTX) only had 24. I instantly thought that ATI was the new graphics king since they should be twice as fast as the new Nvidia, or at least 30% faster however from the benchmarks the Nvidia is faster in some tests and not more than 10% behind in others, usualy less. So whats up, is ATI that inefficiant with there drivers yet again? this reminds me of the original radeon days.

 

[Chocolate Pi]

Really long story short, those are just pixel piplines. Both cards have 16 texture units and ROPs, and both have 8 vertex pipelines.

ATI's huge advantage only shows itself when a game is very much pixel-shader limited.

 

[TanisHalfElven]

aren't those 48 vertex shaders ? i am not sure but my months on AT forums tell me they are not pixel pipelines.


the pixel pipeline are only 16 on the x1900xt/x

 

[akshayt]

ati has 16 pipelines and 48 shader units and i think nvidia has 24 pipelines

i would go with a 1900xt over the 7900gtx, as I am doing, you will realize its potential in the future games which are shader intensive

 

[hardwareking]

ati x1800 xt/xl cards have 16 pixel pipelines,16 TMUs and16 ROPs.But the x1900 xt,x1900 xtx and the AIW x1900 have 48 pixel shaders.
That is 3 shaders for each pipeline.
Nvidia cards have 24 pipelines and 24 shaders.Not too sure about TMUs and ROPs.
So its 1 shader for 1 pipeline.
The performance difference comes down to archtiectural differences and clock speeds.But the above mentioned terms also play a part.(a significant one,infact.)

 

[Elfear]

I consolidated the results here if you're interested. The others are correct in that the ATI card has 48 pixel shaders and not 48 pipelines.

 

[beggerking]

Nvidia 7900 cards have 24 pipelines and 24 shaders.
ATI 1900 cards have 16 pipelines and 48 shaders.

In Theory:

Nvidia 7900 is a more balanced approach = faster in older games
ATI 1900 bids more on future games to be shader intensive = maybe faster for future games

In Reality:

7900 does run a bit faster in older games, but not by much. Older games are already running at its ceiling speed.
1900 does run shader intensive titles a bit faster, but not by much. 2x shaders don't yield 2x performance..

so in the end, it all comes down to :

1.Price
2.7900 if you want faster OpenGL performance, 1900 if you want AA+HDR
3.1900 produces better image quality, but probably require a new PSU.
7900 consume less power, produce less heat, very quiet. probably won't require a new PSU
4. 1900 is loud, runs hot. 7900 has image problems.

if you don't game super heavily, and would like a TV tuner built-in, 1900AIW is the only choice.. its cheap too..$299

 

[BenSkywalker]

nV's pixel shader units have two ALUs each, ATi's have one. In terms of ALUs they have the same amount, ATi's have more capabilities though.

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: beggerking
Nvidia 7900 cards have 24 pipelines and 24 shaders.
ATI 1900 cards have 48 pipelines and 16 shaders.

In Theory:

Nvidia 7900 is a more balanced approach = faster in older games
ATI 1900 bids more on future games to be shader intensive = maybe faster for future games

In Reality:

7900 does run a bit faster in older games, but not by much. Older games are already running at its ceiling speed.
1900 does run shader intensive titles a bit faster, but not by much. 2x shaders don't yield 2x performance..

so in the end, it all comes down to :

1.Price
2.7900 if you want faster OpenGL performance, 1900 if you want AA+HDR
3.1900 produces better image quality, but probably require a new PSU.
7900 consume less power, produce less heat, very quiet. probably won't require a new PSU
4. 1900 is loud, runs hot. 7900 has image problems.

if you don't game super heavily, and would like a TV tuner built-in, 1900AIW is the only choice.. its cheap too..$299

pretty good summary. though I thought that ATI 1900 had 16pipelines and 48shaders. Instead of the 48pipelines and 16shaders you put forth. other than that looks fine.

 

[Bull Dog]

Skipping all of the current posts and writing my response.
To the best of my knowledge
The G71 has

24 pixel shaders
24 TMUs (I think)
16 ROPs
08 vertex shaders

The R580 has
48 pixel shaders
16 TMUs (I think)
16 ROPs
08 vertex shaders

now granted threre is a LOT more to video cards than just pixel shaders, TMU, ROPs and Vertex shaders.

 

[BFG10K]

aren't those 48 vertex shaders

No.

ATI 1900 cards have 48 pipelines and 16 shaders.

16 pipelines with 3 shaders on each for a total of 48.

 

[JK949]

Bull Dogs info above on the 2 cards is the correct answer. The X1900XT and XTX also
have a superior memory controller design which gives it an advantage over
the 7900 GTX.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: redbox

pretty good summary. though I thought that ATI 1900 had 16pipelines and 48shaders. Instead of the 48pipelines and 16shaders you put forth. other than that looks fine.

ahh!! Thanks! you are correct.. I typed it wrong..

updated my original post.


2nd on bull dogs post.. but I remember I read somewhere although 1900 has better memory controller, its bandwidth is not yet utilized. Maybe R600.

 

[Drayvn]

ATis Ring Bus Memory Controller is very efficient, its true performance is supposedly when its paired with GDDR4. So we will see.

 

[Munky]

Well, since we're getting all technical, I will mention that unlike the pipes on any other cards, the r520 and r580 cores have the texture units controlled and scheduled independently from the pixel shaders. That means, unlike in a traditional pipe, the shaders on one quad can send and receive data from texture units on another quad, which theoretically increases efficiency by minimizing stalls within the rendering pipeline.

 

[beggerking]

with so many pipelines in todays GPU, stalls within pipeline should be rare..

it does gives R580 the capability to have more shaders than pipelines..

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: munky
Well, since we're getting all technical, I will mention that unlike the pipes on any other cards, the r520 and r580 cores have the texture units controlled and scheduled independently from the pixel shaders. That means, unlike in a traditional pipe, the shaders on one quad can send and receive data from texture units on another quad, which theoretically increases efficiency by minimizing stalls within the rendering pipeline.

Is that why the 1900xt and 1800xt can compete with the 24pipe g7x. I was just wondering what if any performace gains ATI will get if they increase pipes with the R600.

 

[BFG10K]

ATis Ring Bus Memory Controller is very efficient, its true performance is supposedly when its paired with GDDR4.

That and driver tweaks for better load controlling.

ATi has been quietly slipping in performance tweaks in the drivers and the difference between some of the latest benchmarks to when the cards first shipped can be quite remarkable.

 

[redbox]

I don't quite know what you mean here your wording is kinda off can you clearify.