I agree that something big is wrong. It's more than likely 80nm, but you may well be right in that it's underperforming. It's late, and ATI should just embarass themselves at this point IMO. Time for a new project to work on.Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Even the X1950XTX is an R300 on steroids in its own way.
An 580 is an R300 on steroids eh? Is that how you sorted this out, this time? This can probably be said about X800/X850 series, but nothing beyond that.
As far as I can see R580 was the first real detachment from R300. It may even apply to X1800 for it's intro of the ring bus controller.
If I were AMD/ATI (courtesy for ArchAngel) I would definitely release some sort of benchmarks of R600 to try and put a tournaquite on the bleeding. Like Intel did with Conroe.
Since they have not done so, (leak benches) which is what a good marketing department would do, I'm going to have to assume that they "can't" get it working right, or cannot beat Nvidia's flagship.
I mean honestly, if you have a piece of hardware that was touted to embarrass a G80, wouldn't you show it? Even if the product was not ready for retail yet, wouldn't you show what it can do to quell Nvidia sales that could have been yours?
Something BIG is wrong here.
As for my R300 comment, I've read that the R520 is an enhanced R300, and that the R580 is simply an R520 with far more shaders and a new memory interface. The core GPU components are pretty similar. I'm simply pointing out the lack of ingenuity on ATI's part post R300, which I do feel is valid.
Out of curiousity, why can't they make the GPU at 65nm seeing as AMD is making CPUs with that tech right now?