New Details on R600 emerging - ReScheduled to MAY Launch

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

nrb

Member
Feb 22, 2006
75
0
0
Originally posted by: Gstanfor
VSA100 + derivatives came after the arrogance & FPS focus had already fatally wounded 3dfx and were the (poor) beginnings of a frantic effort to dig themselves out of the hellpit they had dug for themselves. The damage however was already done.

The Voodoo 4 series showed just how unsuited VSA100 was to a company wide recovery.
CAUTION: Off-topic post follows.

3dfx did an awful lot of things wrong. They were also somewhat unlucky (and, it has to be said, fantastically lucky at the start).

The original voodoo 1 ought not to have been a success. It was originally envisaged as a $400 niche product. Then there was a massive (and unexpected) crash in the price of fast EDO RAM which meant that it could actually sell for $299, and that made it affordable. All of the other manufacturers had come up with products that would have been affordable without the RAM price crash, and were thus leagues behind 3dfx in performance terms. (This, incidentally, is why John Carmack did a native version of Quake for the Rendition Verite, but not for the Voodoo - without the RAM price change, no one would have bought a Voodoo card, so he imagined there would be no market for it.)

3dfx's next move was to try and produce a combined 2D/3D card by using something resembling a voodoo 1 core, combined with a 3rd party 2D chip. The Voodoo Rush was a disaster, and no one wanted it.

Voodoo 2 was 5 months late, but still about a year ahead of anything else, and Voodoo 2 SLI kicked arse.

Six months later Voodoo Banshee was a step in the wrong direction, though; good 2D performance (unlike the 3D-only Voodoo 2) but usually much slower in 3D. Nobody liked it.

Voodoo 3 wasn't a bad card, except that by that time consumers had started to get used to 32-bit colour. 3dfx assumed that a 16-bit-only card would be acceptable. It wasn't. Nvidia (after some truly godawful early products - anyone remember the original Riva? let alone the NV1!) had finally come out with the really rather good Riva TNT2.

3dfx also made the (with hindsight) very bad decision to buy up card-maker STB, and only sell voodoo 3 chips on cards that they'd made themselves rather than selling to third party board-makers.

They were unlucky in losing the contract to supply the graphics chip in the Sega Dreamcast to PowerVR at the very last minute. (They later successfully sued Sega for breach of contract, but they'd have made more money if Sega hadn't welched on the deal).

Voodoo 5 could have held its own quite well against the original GeForce 256 (Nvidia dropped the ball on that one - they were aiming for a 200MHz clock speed, but had to drop it to 120MHz to get it stable). But Voodoo 5 was so badly delayed that, by the time it was out, it was competing against GeForce 2. And, while the T-Buffer was an interesting idea, what customers really wanted by then was onboard geometry acceleration.

And that was it. It's sad that 3dfx went under when it did, though - apparently their next chip, the Rampage, was only 2 or 3 months from being launched at the end, and the rumours made it out to be an absolute killer.

Ah well, Requiescat In Pace, and one hopes that the cooler features of Rampage eventually made it into Nvidia products.


 

Cookie Monster

Diamond Member
May 7, 2005
5,161
32
86
Nice post nrb. I have little knowledge back past the FX days, so you just gave me a simple history lesson in that era of GPU history.

Back to topic.

LInk

We showed you an illustration of the R600 card a week ago and we can confirm that the real card looks pretty much the same. To be exact, it is 34cm long with the fan/blower and handle at the back. The only difference we can spot is the power connectors where it has dual 6-pin instead of one 8-pin + one 6-pin. The cooler plastic encase is black in color. More later.

34cm is 13 and 1/2 inches long.

Looks like the fastest XTX version could be OEM only while the other lesser versions (9inch PCB) i.e XT, XL etc will be sold in the retail market.


 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,171
13
81
An OEM-only XTX? I find it hard to believe that. More likely (to me, anyhow) is that they're only getting a look at the OEM card and that a 9" XTX will surface for retail sales.
 

MTDEW

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 1999
4,284
37
91
13 and 1/2 inches long
WOW thats HUGE!



And nrb,
Thanks for the flashback a memories of feeling so ripped off buying my Sierra Screamin' 3d card at the suggestion of PcGamer back then.
(the Screamin' 3d was a Rendition Verite card, which i STILL have...LOL)
 

Cookie Monster

Diamond Member
May 7, 2005
5,161
32
86
Originally posted by: crazydingo
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Looks like the fastest XTX version could be OEM only
Ew! Fresh smell of bull ****.

Its only my guess for now. 13 and 1/2 inches wont fit in many cases, and people with GTX are already having some problems due to its size. (its around 11 inches as a reference). OEMs dont have to worry about case size as this could be very well bundled with for instance the latest ailenware computer. (the alienware case itself is big enough to host these beasts)

We will have to wait and see though.

The retail version of the XTX could be the bery well based on the A15 silicon rumour that is flying around the internet (rumoured to increase the clocks of R600 by 1ghz). So i would rather have them release something much shorter (>10inches) than 13 and a half inch long card if vr-zone's claims are true. Similiar to the 7900GX2 (OEM only - very long 12 inches i believe it was.) --> 7950GX2 (retail - 9 inches).


 

crazydingo

Golden Member
May 15, 2005
1,134
0
0
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Originally posted by: crazydingo
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Looks like the fastest XTX version could be OEM only
Ew! Fresh smell of bull ****.

Its only my guess for now. 13 and 1/2 inches wont fit in many cases, and people with GTX are already having some problems due to its size. (its around 11 inches as a reference). OEMs dont have to worry about case size as this could be very well bundled with for instance the latest ailenware computer. (the alienware case itself is big enough to host these beasts)

We will have to wait and see though.

The retail version of the XTX could be the bery well based on the A15 silicon rumour that is flying around the internet (rumoured to increase the clocks of R600 by 1ghz). So i would rather have them release something much shorter (>10inches) than 13 and a half inch long card if vr-zone's claims are true. Similiar to the 7900GX2 (OEM only - very long 12 inches i believe it was.) --> 7950GX2 (retail - 9 inches).
Have you seen the 7900GTX from Dell? OEMs use the extra long bracket to hold the card much more securely. Mainly due to warranty reasons. Its not the same case with the retail version of the 7900GTX was it?

So yeah bull ****. :laugh:

 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
here's the *competition* G81

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37199

Next Nvidia high end chip will be the G81

Rumoured in Asia at 65 nanometre


THE G80 replacement looks like it might be known as G81, and it appears that Nvidia will take the radical step of making it at 65 nanometre. That is what's been rumoured in China and Taiwan and according to sources close to or inside TSMC.

Nvidia holds the crown with G80 and the R600 is still over a month away. R600 won't win in all categories, so Nvidia might still be fine with an overclocked G80. Overclocked G80s are coming in volumes and we got a hold or few that we are testing at press time. Unfortunately, EVGA doesn?t offer overclocked G80s in its step up programme.

G81 might not show its face that soon, but Nvidia is at least experimenting with a new process. We would be very surproised if we see high end 65 nanometre before the end of the second quarter but more realistically later than that. However, Nvidia has surprised us more than once in the last few quarters. Both Nvidia and DAAMIT need to shrink to 65 and we know that this step is a difficult one. AMD barely managed to move its CPU production to this shrink up and GPUs are far more complex and difficult.

we'll probably see G80x2 also announced if r600 is what is expected


 

Nightmare225

Golden Member
May 20, 2006
1,661
0
0
Since when did we start quoting theinquirer on a regular basis as if it was god?

2:1 shader ratio anyone?
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Since when did we start quoting theinquirer on a regular basis as if it was god?

2:1 shader ratio anyone?

since it became *reasonably accurate* in predicting ATi products when they are a few weeks from release ... not so accurate on nvidia predicitons.

DO you have a better source?

if so, share it

i might ... but i am not posting it --to be ridiculed also
:roll:
 

DeathReborn

Platinum Member
Oct 11, 2005
2,757
753
136
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
The INQ seems to be on a roll with nVIDIA rumours. G81 is 65nm, G83 and G86 etc

The good old scattergun approach, sooner or later one bit of info will be right. In general they peddle rumours as fact (to some people vr-zone does it to a lesser degree).

I could see G81 as 65nm (considering July/August (roughly) release).

As for R600XTX, 34cm is a bit on the Voodoo5 page of PCB design.
 

StopSign

Senior member
Dec 15, 2006
986
0
0
We would be very surproised if we see high end 65 nanometre before the end of the second quarter but more realistically later than that.
My predictions so far:

R600 = late February / early March :thumbsup:
8600 (and other 8000 series) = mid March (?)
8900 = July :thumbsup:
G90 (?) = September 2008 (?)
R700 (?) = late October 2008 (?)

...assuming all this info is true.
 

Cookie Monster

Diamond Member
May 7, 2005
5,161
32
86
Heres the pic of the fan on the XTX!

Link

The 34 cm XTX version does exist and will be for OEMs. Apparently the retail version will be 9 inches. Dont make much sense but looks like more pics will be leakedsoon enough.
 

crazydingo

Golden Member
May 15, 2005
1,134
0
0
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
The 34 cm XTX version does exist and will be for OEMs. Apparently the retail version will be 9 inches. Dont make much sense but looks like more pics will be leakedsoon enough.
It doesnt make sense because your wishful thinking gets into the way.

Told you that your hunch smelled like fresh BS. :laugh:
 

Cookie Monster

Diamond Member
May 7, 2005
5,161
32
86
What is your agenda crazy dingo?

I mearly said that it didnt make any sense because why on earth would OEMs prefer the longer XTX. The OEMs should just use the retail version unless theyre worried about heat for example. About 3 inches of the 13 and a half inch XTX is just the cooling fan on the back.

It doesnt make sense because your wishful thinking gets into the way.

Im getting tired of being hounded. Crazy Dingo, please stop.

Or im going to sort this out with the help of the mods. Its a warning.
 

crazydingo

Golden Member
May 15, 2005
1,134
0
0
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
What is your agenda crazy dingo?

I mearly said that it didnt make any sense because why on earth would OEMs prefer the longer XTX. The OEMs should just use the retail version unless theyre worried about heat for example. About 3 inches of the 13 and a half inch XTX is just the cooling fan on the back.
The OEM version of the 7900GTX was also 3-4" longer than the retail version. This is because the OEMs dont want the cards to dislocate when moving due to the dual slot cooler. Their main reason is warranty issues. I told all this to you earlier to which you had NO response. I wonder why. :laugh:

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Im getting tired of being hounded. Crazy Dingo, please stop.

Or im going to sort this out with the help of the mods. Its a warning.
lol you are getting hounded by a lurker. christ. I havent see a bigger drama queen than you here on AT.

You are welcome to approach the mods because I'm not the one wrong here.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
What is your agenda crazy dingo?

I mearly said that it didnt make any sense because why on earth would OEMs prefer the longer XTX. The OEMs should just use the retail version unless theyre worried about heat for example. About 3 inches of the 13 and a half inch XTX is just the cooling fan on the back.

It doesnt make sense because your wishful thinking gets into the way.

Im getting tired of being hounded. Crazy Dingo, please stop.

Or im going to sort this out with the help of the mods. Its a warning.

can you please take *your differences* and *bickering* to PMs

like gentlemen?

 

Munky

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2005
9,372
0
76
65nm g81? Yah, right... And I have a 32-pipe g71 sitting on my desk now
80nm sounds more believable, but I don't see any high end video card being released using 65nm within 6 months.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
G81 might not show its face that soon, but Nvidia is at least experimenting with a new process. We would be very surproised if we see high end 65 nanometre before the end of the second quarter but more realistically later than that.

theIng's *conclusion* doesn't agree with their own *headline*

after Q2

of course, the '65 nm headline' is for 'page hits'
:roll:

i hope you enjoyed their other headline ... the *95% accuracy claim*

NOTHING in the "article" about it

i read theInq and post the crap so you don't have to
:Q

less advertising revenue *for them*



more for *us*

 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |