What do you think are the options GPU wise on the alleged January PowerMac G5 updates? Anything new from ATi or nVidia or the "old" FX5200/9600/9800 ones?
ATI and NVidia will introduce their next generation of GPU later.
I have just read that the next ATI core in his high end version will feature 200 millions of transistors, and that a 90 nm version will arrive late 2004.
Hmmm. I heard ATi had a 'next gen' product ready to go against whatever Nvidia put out this quarter. But they didn't because it would have ridiculously outperformed the opposition.
I guess ATi need to eek out those profits.
But the XT series more than comfortably held its own against whatever Nvidia threw at them.
Spring 2004. March latest. We usually hear about next gen' stuff by then. You get the usual big tech' shows where the big boys strut previews of their stuff... Nvidia and Ati will start the battle anew.
Considering what the XT can do, the next gen' ATi card will be frightening. Nvidia really dropped the ball on this generation of cards. They really let Ati back in. It's nice to see Ati come back at them when everybody (myself included) had written them off. Nice to see them innovating.
They're already near enough throwing umpteen polygons per second with programable shaders on ridiculous bandwidth.
Heh. And that still aint enough for Half Life 2. Gulp. Roll on next gen'!
About the post about having the mac versoin of Video cards downclocked compared to pc versions. Why do they do that? Do they not think our hardware can use all the power?
About the post about having the mac versoin of Video cards downclocked compared to pc versions. Why do they do that? Do they not think our hardware can use all the power?
It maybe due to the relatively narrow bandwidth on those pre-G5 hardware.
About the post about having the mac versoin of Video cards downclocked compared to pc versions. Why do they do that? Do they not think our hardware can use all the power?
They do it because of limited yields of working GPUs at the PC frequency. The mac market is much smaller than the PC market, and therefore, the price to develop a mac version of the drivers and firmware is for the chip vendors more expensive. In order to keep the total cost of the boards down to an acceptable level, they reduce the clockfrequency slightly, to where yields are higher - more chips are produced, which makes each chip (and then board) cheaper.
2003 was a pretty quiet year alright -- nVidia misfired in 2002 seriously with the geForceFX going off the rails and not arriving until 2003... and being a complete bust for months until the finally got it straightened out.
In 2004, however, ATI is poised to deliver the R4xx chips which are the next step up. nVidia will no doubt have their next chip ready too, I doubt we'll see them screw this one up as badly as the last. Going forward I suspect this will be the pace they can sustain, unlike the frenetic pace of the late 90's / early 2K's. This is a good thing because software will have a chance to catch up somewhat, scaling more in terms of performance than features.
They do it because of limited yields of working GPUs at the PC frequency. The mac market is much smaller than the PC market, and therefore, the price to develop a mac version of the chip is for the chip vendors more expensive. In order to keep the price of the boards and chips down to an acceptable level, they reduce the clockfrequency slightly, to where yields are higher - more chips are produced, which makes each chip cheaper.
um, no. the chips are the exact same as the PC version (just slower). The only cost of dev of the mac version is in the drivers and firmware. there's NO reason for them to call it a 9800 PRO but clock it down. I feel like a bunch of G5 buyers should look into a class action lawsuit. ATI markets the cards as the same as the PC ones, but quietly down-clocks them. Pisses me off.
What I would like to see is a low profile retail Mac card that would fit in my Cube. I think that it would be a big hit with Cube owners, who are paying a premium for used cards that will fit in them, and they will still fit in a Tower as easily as a Cube. I don't understand why ATI hasn't been doing this all along.
What I would like to see is a low profile retail Mac card that would fit in my Cube. I think that it would be a big hit with Cube owners, who are paying a premium for used cards that will fit in them, and they will still fit in a Tower as easily as a Cube. I don't understand why ATI hasn't been doing this all along.
Because from ATi's perspective the number of Cube owners who want to upgrade their video cards is incredibly small?
It would be nice if the Radeon 9800 XT became the high end card. Then the middle end... Radeon 9600 w/ 128 MB of VRAM instead of 64 MB? Maybe 9600 XT or GeForce FX 5700? Low end could stay the same, FX5200.
Because from ATi's perspective the number of Cube owners who want to upgrade their video cards is incredibly small?
Then they haven't visited http://www.cubeowner.com/ and looked at the Forum's, there are lots of "flashing" sections for ATI and nVidia PC cards, as well as lists of which OEM cards that will fit in a Cube. A quick look at ebay shows that the OEM cards that will fit in a Cube are holding their value extremely well. Sure, there are a limited number of Cubes out there, but the owners of these computers are very devoted to keeping their computers alive and well as long as they can, which is exactly what upgrade manufacturers are looking for in customers.
Then they haven't visited http://www.cubeowner.com/ and looked at the Forum's, there are lots of "flashing" sections for ATI and nVidia PC cards, as well as lists of which OEM cards that will fit in a Cube. A quick look at ebay shows that the OEM cards that will fit in a Cube are holding their value extremely well. Sure, there are a limited number of Cubes out there, but the owners of these computers are very devoted to keeping their computers alive and well as long as they can, which is exactly what upgrade manufacturers are looking for in customers.
It is still a piddly number of computers from ATI's point of view.
They do it because of limited yields of working GPUs at the PC frequency. The mac market is much smaller than the PC market, and therefore, the price to develop a mac version of the chip is for the chip vendors more expensive. In order to keep the price of the boards and chips down to an acceptable level, they reduce the clockfrequency slightly, to where yields are higher - more chips are produced, which makes each chip cheaper.
That's a crock. Nvidia's GPU is crossplatform. What ever they produce can work in both Mac and PC.
It is still a piddly number of computers from ATI's point of view.
My point is that the cards that fit in a Cube will work in a tower as well, with no modification. All ATI needs to do is take existing low profile designs from the PC side, and sell them on the Mac side. The design work is already done, the boards are in production, and the software is written. All they need to do is offer 2 Mac models, a low end and high end where the low end model is a "flashed" low profile design from the PC side and the high end is a full size card of their best GPU.
Comments
ATI and NVidia will introduce their next generation of GPU later.
I have just read that the next ATI core in his high end version will feature 200 millions of transistors, and that a 90 nm version will arrive late 2004.
They are basically the 9600 Pro and 9800 Pro, except faster with a few optimizations (especially in memory bandwidth and the Z-buffer).
Barto
Originally posted by Barto
ATi has just introduced the "XT" series of Radeons, I would be disappointed if they weren't included in the next Power Mac update.
They are basically the 9600 Pro and 9800 Pro, except faster with a few optimizations (especially in memory bandwidth and the Z-buffer).
Barto
Considering that the current Radeon 9600 and 9800 pro are downclocked compared to the PC version, i will not expect to see this version in a mac.
I guess ATi need to eek out those profits.
But the XT series more than comfortably held its own against whatever Nvidia threw at them.
Spring 2004. March latest. We usually hear about next gen' stuff by then. You get the usual big tech' shows where the big boys strut previews of their stuff... Nvidia and Ati will start the battle anew.
Considering what the XT can do, the next gen' ATi card will be frightening. Nvidia really dropped the ball on this generation of cards. They really let Ati back in. It's nice to see Ati come back at them when everybody (myself included) had written them off. Nice to see them innovating.
They're already near enough throwing umpteen polygons per second with programable shaders on ridiculous bandwidth.
Heh. And that still aint enough for Half Life 2. Gulp. Roll on next gen'!
Should go down very nice with a G6.
Lemon Bon Bon
cheers.
Originally posted by Altivec_2.0
About the post about having the mac versoin of Video cards downclocked compared to pc versions. Why do they do that? Do they not think our hardware can use all the power?
It maybe due to the relatively narrow bandwidth on those pre-G5 hardware.
Originally posted by Altivec_2.0
About the post about having the mac versoin of Video cards downclocked compared to pc versions. Why do they do that? Do they not think our hardware can use all the power?
They do it because of limited yields of working GPUs at the PC frequency. The mac market is much smaller than the PC market, and therefore, the price to develop a mac version of the drivers and firmware is for the chip vendors more expensive. In order to keep the total cost of the boards down to an acceptable level, they reduce the clockfrequency slightly, to where yields are higher - more chips are produced, which makes each chip (and then board) cheaper.
Nothing dramatic since the 9700 Pro in 2002.
In 2004, however, ATI is poised to deliver the R4xx chips which are the next step up. nVidia will no doubt have their next chip ready too, I doubt we'll see them screw this one up as badly as the last. Going forward I suspect this will be the pace they can sustain, unlike the frenetic pace of the late 90's / early 2K's. This is a good thing because software will have a chance to catch up somewhat, scaling more in terms of performance than features.
Originally posted by Zapchud
They do it because of limited yields of working GPUs at the PC frequency. The mac market is much smaller than the PC market, and therefore, the price to develop a mac version of the chip is for the chip vendors more expensive. In order to keep the price of the boards and chips down to an acceptable level, they reduce the clockfrequency slightly, to where yields are higher - more chips are produced, which makes each chip cheaper.
um, no. the chips are the exact same as the PC version (just slower). The only cost of dev of the mac version is in the drivers and firmware. there's NO reason for them to call it a 9800 PRO but clock it down. I feel like a bunch of G5 buyers should look into a class action lawsuit. ATI markets the cards as the same as the PC ones, but quietly down-clocks them. Pisses me off.
Originally posted by @homenow
What I would like to see is a low profile retail Mac card that would fit in my Cube. I think that it would be a big hit with Cube owners, who are paying a premium for used cards that will fit in them, and they will still fit in a Tower as easily as a Cube. I don't understand why ATI hasn't been doing this all along.
Because from ATi's perspective the number of Cube owners who want to upgrade their video cards is incredibly small?
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
Because from ATi's perspective the number of Cube owners who want to upgrade their video cards is incredibly small?
Then they haven't visited http://www.cubeowner.com/ and looked at the Forum's, there are lots of "flashing" sections for ATI and nVidia PC cards, as well as lists of which OEM cards that will fit in a Cube. A quick look at ebay shows that the OEM cards that will fit in a Cube are holding their value extremely well. Sure, there are a limited number of Cubes out there, but the owners of these computers are very devoted to keeping their computers alive and well as long as they can, which is exactly what upgrade manufacturers are looking for in customers.
Originally posted by @homenow
Then they haven't visited http://www.cubeowner.com/ and looked at the Forum's, there are lots of "flashing" sections for ATI and nVidia PC cards, as well as lists of which OEM cards that will fit in a Cube. A quick look at ebay shows that the OEM cards that will fit in a Cube are holding their value extremely well. Sure, there are a limited number of Cubes out there, but the owners of these computers are very devoted to keeping their computers alive and well as long as they can, which is exactly what upgrade manufacturers are looking for in customers.
It is still a piddly number of computers from ATI's point of view.
Originally posted by Zapchud
They do it because of limited yields of working GPUs at the PC frequency. The mac market is much smaller than the PC market, and therefore, the price to develop a mac version of the chip is for the chip vendors more expensive. In order to keep the price of the boards and chips down to an acceptable level, they reduce the clockfrequency slightly, to where yields are higher - more chips are produced, which makes each chip cheaper.
That's a crock. Nvidia's GPU is crossplatform. What ever they produce can work in both Mac and PC.
Originally posted by Programmer
It is still a piddly number of computers from ATI's point of view.
My point is that the cards that fit in a Cube will work in a tower as well, with no modification. All ATI needs to do is take existing low profile designs from the PC side, and sell them on the Mac side. The design work is already done, the boards are in production, and the software is written. All they need to do is offer 2 Mac models, a low end and high end where the low end model is a "flashed" low profile design from the PC side and the high end is a full size card of their best GPU.