Heck no. The 95/6/7/800 were nice cards, X8XX were good as well, followed by a late X1800XT. They redeemed themselves with the X1900XT (hot/loud, but not as bad as the FX5800 leafblowers) then proceeded to fall flat on their faces with the 29XX and 38xx lines.
I'll add my two cents!
ATI didn't really have any worthy gaming cards until the radeon 9700 pro. So from the release of their first 3d card (1994) to the launch of the 9700 pro, they were rather lackluster. That'd be the longest period of fail tho. And the original radeon and the 8500 had a lot of promise, at least providing alternatives to nvidia. (though powervr's kyro had more success in the low end I think)
X800 generation was overpriced on the lower end cards compared to nvidia, but ATI still won in performance at the high end. No directx9.0c though, which did effects games within the lifetime of the card.
X1800 was underperforming.
X1900 regained the lead.
Hd2900 barely seemed like an improvement over the x1950xt, while g80 was insanely better. Plus, HD2900 was borked in its AA and anisotropic functionality.
3000 series was an ok mid-range competitor, but more of an original radeon type deal.
4000 and 5000 are complete roll reversals, and the 5000 is looking like it might be a 9700pro repeat, and the 4000 being the first time ati provided a better deal across the line-up instead of just at the high end or low end.