R520 has 16pipelines

[malG]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
Pipelines doesn't matter if it has the clockspeed to makeup for the loss in fillrate. As long as the fillrate of the 16pipe card is the same as the 24pipe card, the performance should be similar.

Perhaps you're right but how can it be competitive when the R520 (at 700Mhz) is making use of an inefficient design?

high MHz = high heat = dual slot cooling = high power consumption

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
Pipelines doesn't matter if it has the clockspeed to makeup for the loss in fillrate. As long as the fillrate of the 16pipe card is the same as the 24pipe card, the performance should be similar.
The fillrate of the card is calculated by mutiplying the clockspeed by the number of the pipelines, then by the number of TMUs(for multitexturing).

But at what cost? Ramping up the clockspeed introduces new problems as it is not an effective way of increasing fill rate. YOu intorduce Low Yields, Power Leakage, Hihg Power Consumption, High Heat Output.

While in theory it is correct; in reality it is not practical.

-Kevin

 

[Biatche1488]

http://www.leadtek.com.tw/eng/workstati...rview.asp?pronameid=222&lineid=2&act=1
THe picture is small but you can see the dual slot design (550mhz 24 pipe, 470mhz 8 vertex)
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2501
And here for the R520 single slot hope that is clear.

 

[Biatche1488]

I'm just saying that the 7800 ultra (or quadro 4500) will be a dual slot design like the R520xt because i'm tired of people saying that R520 will be soo hot compare the cold 7800gtx.The best G70 card (quadro 4500 or 7800 ultra) is also hot.

 

[Unkno]

the R520 had so much hype...enough that made nvidia fear for the 7800gtx. Well, all i hope right now is for it come out sooner, drive prices down, and a mid range for the 7XXX series

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: Biatche1488
I'm just saying that the 7800 ultra (or quadro 4500) will be a dual slot design like the R520xt because i'm tired of people saying that R520 will be soo hot compare the cold 7800gtx.The best G70 card (quadro 4500 or 7800 ultra) is also hot.

No it isn't. It consumes less power than the last two generations of cards (resulting in less heat output).

Not to say that the R520 will be hot, but if it ramps up in clockspeed, odds are it will run hot and consume a lot of power.

-Kevin

 

[coldpower27]

I believe there is some evidence to support that it is much more favourable to support an increase number of pipelines for increase parallelism instead of increase fillrate thru pure clock frequency.

Compare these two cards X850 Pro vs X800 XL.

There is about a 2.5% difference in their fillrates with the edge going to X800 XL, but the X850 Pro has the advantage in not only vertex shader power due to high clocks, but memory bandwidth as well. Also from the looks of things once 4XAA and 8XAF is enabled the increases parrallelism of the X800 XL helps it out grealy even with it's vertex and memory bandwidth disadvanatage.

Though all this could prove is that pixel shader fillrate is just very very very important. And that even a 2.5% loss can't be observed to have some detrimental effects.

 

[imported_Ged]

Originally posted by: Biatche1488
http://www.leadtek.com.tw/eng/workstati...rview.asp?pronameid=222&lineid=2&act=1
THe picture is small but you can see the dual slot design (550mhz 24 pipe, 470mhz 8 vertex)
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2501
And here for the R520 "XL" single slot hope that is clear.

Fixed.

 

[Munkies123]

what, ati is gettin pwned now

 

[imported_Ged]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: Biatche1488
I'm just saying that the 7800 ultra (or quadro 4500) will be a dual slot design like the R520xt because i'm tired of people saying that R520 will be soo hot compare the cold 7800gtx.The best G70 card (quadro 4500 or 7800 ultra) is also hot.

No it isn't. It consumes less power than the last two generations of cards (resulting in less heat output).

Not to say that the R520 will be hot, but if it ramps up in clockspeed, odds are it will run hot and consume a lot of power.

-Kevin

QFT

 

[lein]

I got a quick question - What is an "extreme pipe"?

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: malG

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
Pipelines doesn't matter if it has the clockspeed to makeup for the loss in fillrate. As long as the fillrate of the 16pipe card is the same as the 24pipe card, the performance should be similar.

Perhaps you're right but how can it be competitive when the R520 (at 700Mhz) is making use of an inefficient design?

high MHz = high heat = dual slot cooling = high power consumption

How is it inefficient? Have you seen reviews? Inefficient could be argued with the X800 vs. the 6800, where two competing GPUs with the same pipes and different clock speeds perform similar.

We don't know if it will be efficient or not with the power it is given. Right now the numbers are close, whether they are in real life is to be determined. You could argue that based on past history, the nVidia parts have been faster clock for clock and thus high MHz for ATI wouldn't be as good but we do not yet know.

Heck for all we know these 16 "extreme" pipes could be extreme not for the clockrate, but for some other reason, perhaps they are more efficient on top of the high clockrate. Right now you're just associated high clock rate with "inefficient" because you somehow think that getting more done with less is the only way; how about getting even MORE done with more?

Right now we do not really know anything more than we did 1, 2, 3, 6+ months ago, because we have no performance reviews or benchmarks to prove otherwise, all we have is speculated specs...

Although I do agree, from what we've been getting used to basing performance on going just by such specs, it is dissapointing to hear "only" 16 pipes. It would be more exciting to hear a for sure 24+ pipes @ 700MHz, becuase that'd be some major performance just based on X800 numbers.

There really is no reason to get dissapointed or excited about anything until we know how the product is actually going to perform based on tests.

 

[lein]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles

Originally posted by: malG

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
Pipelines doesn't matter if it has the clockspeed to makeup for the loss in fillrate. As long as the fillrate of the 16pipe card is the same as the 24pipe card, the performance should be similar.

Perhaps you're right but how can it be competitive when the R520 (at 700Mhz) is making use of an inefficient design?

high MHz = high heat = dual slot cooling = high power consumption

How is it inefficient? Have you seen reviews? Inefficient could be argued with the X800 vs. the 6800, where two competing GPUs with the same pipes and different clock speeds perform similar.

We don't know if it will be efficient or not with the power it is given. Right now the numbers are close, whether they are in real life is to be determined. You could argue that based on past history, the nVidia parts have been faster clock for clock and thus high MHz for ATI wouldn't be as good but we do not yet know.

Heck for all we know these 16 "extreme" pipes could be extreme not for the clockrate, but for some other reason, perhaps they are more efficient on top of the high clockrate. Right now you're just associated high clock rate with "inefficient" because you somehow think that getting more done with less is the only way; how about getting even MORE done with more?

Right now we do not really know anything more than we did 1, 2, 3, 6+ months ago, because we have no performance reviews or benchmarks to prove otherwise, all we have is speculated specs...

Although I do agree, from what we've been getting used to basing performance on going just by such specs, it is dissapointing to hear "only" 16 pipes. It would be more exciting to hear a for sure 24+ pipes @ 700MHz, becuase that'd be some major performance just based on X800 numbers.

There really is no reason to get dissapointed or excited about anything until we know how the product is actually going to perform based on tests.

OK, so these extreme pipes haven't been defined yet, right? (Thought crosses my mind about Hyperthreaded pipes following the prescott analogy made a while ago...)

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: lein
OK, so these extreme pipes haven't been defined yet, right? (Thought crosses my mind about Hyperthreaded pipes following the prescott analogy made a while ago...)

Only ATI can tell us that, and they aren't talking.

 

[xTYBALTx]

Originally posted by: lein
I got a quick question - What is an "extreme pipe"?

This should answer that question.

 

[g3pro]

Originally posted by: Munkies123
what, ati is gettin pwned now

QFT.

 

[fstime]

Originally posted by: g3pro

Originally posted by: Munkies123
what, ati is gettin pwned now

QFT.

Have you finished your R520 testing?

Is it still faster than your GTX?

:laugh:

 

[Overgloc]

32 Pipe
500 core
1400 mem
256/512 ram/bit

 

[imported_Ged]

Originally posted by: Overgloc
32 Pipe
500 core
1400 mem
256/512 ram/bit

Awesome. We can all stop wondering now.

I got a quick question - What is an "extreme pipe"?

My Definition of "Extreme Pipe" would either be a pipe that does more than another pipe - more execution units in the pipe - or a pipe that runs at a higher clock speed because it has more stages and does less per clock. I could see either of those pipes being called "Extreme", but it's all relative. An Extreme pipe this generation will be old hat next generation.

I think the ATI R520 "Extreme Pipe" idea was that 16 R520 pipelines would run like 24 R480 Pipelines or something to that effect. Not sure if by higher clock rate, by increased parallel execution within each of those pipelines (Mini-ALUs and the like), by just higher efficiency (better utilization of the same pipelines, or a combination of the above.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: BouZouki

Originally posted by: g3pro

Originally posted by: Munkies123
what, ati is gettin pwned now

QFT.

Have you finished your R520 testing?

Is it still faster than your GTX?

:laugh:

QFT.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Less pipelines doesn't automatically means it's slower. Perhaps the R520 has some tricks up in its sleeve we still yet don't know about.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
Less pipelines doesn't automatically means it's slower. Perhaps the R520 has some tricks up in its sleeve we still yet don't know about.

Perhaps it doesn't? Would be nice if they'd actually let someone review it.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
Less pipelines doesn't automatically means it's slower. Perhaps the R520 has some tricks up in its sleeve we still yet don't know about.

Perhaps it doesn't? Would be nice if they'd actually let someone review it.

We shall see.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: xTYBALTx

Originally posted by: lein
I got a quick question - What is an "extreme pipe"?

This should answer that question.

id pay for 16 of those badboys....they could do my laundry at the same time, and teach me how to surf.

 

[DidlySquat]

Originally posted by: AmberClad

Originally posted by: malG

Originally posted by: AmberClad

So the R520 is the GPU world's version of the Prescott?

Yep, think "inefficient design"

Well there goes my plans of foregoing the 7800s and waiting around for a 32 pipe R520 . 7800 here I come. I'll still wait a bit until the R520 are actually released. You never know...

Why ? I just bought the XFX 7800 GTX PC (490/1300) for less then $500. Based on price history of the 6800U and GT, I don't think the 7800GTX is going to become much cheaper, especially that it is not threatened by R520 any more. Also I have the SLI upgrade path, just as an option if it ever makes sense to use it.