Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GRRRR ATI 9700 reviews

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GRRRR ATI 9700 reviews

    littletoms

    Anandtech


    The Specs:
    The rest of the R300 specs are as follows:

    • 0.15-micron GPU
    • 110+ million transistors
    • 8 pixel rendering pipelines, 1 texture unit per pipeline, can do 16 textures per pass
    • 4 programmable vect4 vertex shader pipelines
    • 256-bit DDR memory bus
    • up to 256MB of memory on board, clocked at over 300MHz (resulting in a minimum of 19.2GB/s of memory bandwidth)
    • AGP 8X Support
    • Full DX9 Pixel and Vertex Shader Support
    • Single Full Speed 165MHz integrated TMDS transmitter


    It seems that ATI uses a quad channel 256 bit memory bus
    It uses 4 memory controllers and 1 crossbar memory controller
    ** Does the parhelia has a crossbar controller ?

    As you can see the Hyperz III seems to be pretty important unit in the R300

    - The R300 will run at 325Mhz !!
    - Nice heatsink too, can anyone tell me what the sizes are of the heatsink of the Parhelia ?

    - It has 8 ?? yes 8 pixel Render Pipelines, but each has only 1 texture unit ?
    Yep only one, so pixel fillrate is the same as the texture fillrate around 2600 mpixels a second. Quite a different approach
    not sure that it will matter in future games, but as you know in fillrate eating games like Quake3 etc it does matter (but that isn't really important)
    Don't know how many textures the texture unit can process . I thi
    nk 2, because they say it can do 16 textures per pass

    - It supports pixelshader 2.0, with Floating Point Precision Color
    the pixelshader supports 160 instructions
    "Each pixel shader program can do up to 32 texture sampling operations on up to 16 different texture maps and an additional 64 color operations per pass" what ever this wanna say, dunno

    - Then some blabla about the HyperZ III , Z-compression looks interesting though

    - Their Smoothvision 2.0 - FSAA , looks interesting

    - It has a "video shader", I think the Parhelia has something similar

    - It will support 10 bit per color and has a 400mhz 10bit ramdac
    - Didn't find any info about the alpha channel


    - The new Vertex Shader specification also allows for up to 1024 instructions in a single pass. The Parhelia only 512

    found some interesting explaination for the vertex shader throughput with the Parhelia:
    "The R300 features four programmable vertex shader pipelines, much like the Matrox Parhelia. The difference between the R300 and the Parhelia is that the R300 has a much improved triangle setup engine, so while the Parhelia can boast incredible vertex throughput rates, the GPU is still limited by its triangle set-up engine. This reason is why, in games with very low triangle counts, that the Parhelia was not able to outperform even the GeForce4 with fewer vertex shader pipelines; with a triangle set-up engine no powerful than the GeForce4’s, and running at a lower clock speed, the Parhelia did not have the triangle throughput power to backup its vertex shader pipelines. "

    - Anandtech has a nice screenshot of an example with Floating Point Color


    oh and don't look at the benches on anandtech
    Last edited by CaineTanathos; 18 July 2002, 04:07.
    Hey! You're talking to me all wrong! It's the wrong tone! Do it again...and I'll stab you in the face with a soldering iron

  • #2
    Isaw the benchmarks from Annand but why did he not include the parhelia in the last set of benches?

    Comment


    • #3
      dunno, I don't think he had an 9700, I think it was on that presentation where he could try it out, like tomshardware did
      Hey! You're talking to me all wrong! It's the wrong tone! Do it again...and I'll stab you in the face with a soldering iron

      Comment


      • #4
        The new Radeon 9000 (R250) uses the same method of 1 texture unit per pixel pipeline. It seems they managed to make this 1 on 1 work faster than the original Radeon 8500 1 on 2.

        Comment


        • #5
          I think it looks great for matrox, that the r300 has multiple pixel/vertex shaders, it means that future games will be optimized to take advantage of multiple pixel/vertex shaders, meaning it WILL beat any gf4ti in future games.
          atleast, thats what I am guessing.
          This sig is a shameless atempt to make my post look bigger.

          Comment


          • #6
            You know what doesn't look great, that the ATI outperforms the GF4, that the 9700 runs at 325mhz and the P at 220

            Matrox should also release a Parhelia with an extra power connector on
            Hey! You're talking to me all wrong! It's the wrong tone! Do it again...and I'll stab you in the face with a soldering iron

            Comment


            • #7
              ehh!
              don´t tell me you expected the r300 to be slower than the parhelia.

              personally I expected the r300 to beat all current gpus, with ease, it is after all meant to play dx9 games.
              only time will tell if it can do that at playable speed.

              To me, the r300 seems to be almost ridicules fast, and that speed will probably be nice, in a few years, but I don´t think the parhelia will be too slow either(atleast not in the near future), especially if multiple shaders will be supprted.
              I still consider the parhelia to be the most promising dx8 card, it can after all handle very complex dx8 shader programs better than other dx8 gpus, atleast thats how i understand it, and since the r300 can do it even better(and hopefully the upcomming nv30 too), it is something we will see in the parhelias lifetime.
              I am not sure the r300 owners will see all the r300 features being used to its fullest, before it will be too late.

              that being said, the r300 is one hell of a card, ATI deserves credit for that atleast(being the first with a dx9 gpu), I still want a parhelia though.
              Last edited by TdB; 18 July 2002, 09:30.
              This sig is a shameless atempt to make my post look bigger.

              Comment


              • #8
                when I'm done eating my hats (1 is not enough....), I will press the "order" button on my favorite webshop...

                so long matrox g400 max, it was very nice working with you, I will never forget you

                Comment


                • #9
                  ATI's engineers do deserve credits. Let's see if their coders are up to the task. I've never seen any ATI drivers getting close to even beta stage regarding stability. (in my opinion that is)
                  Let those who want to be simple, be simple.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    gs2k1:

                    Let me know if you'll be getting rid of that g400 max, I'm looking high & low for one....
                    Blah blah blah nick blah blah confusion, blah blah blah blah frog.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ssin
                      ATI's engineers do deserve credits. Let's see if their coders are up to the task. I've never seen any ATI drivers getting close to even beta stage regarding stability. (in my opinion that is)
                      Very true. ATI has exceptional hardware at least since the first Radeon, but the driver always lacked. They're not really lacking in points of stability or compatibility here, but speedwise I'm sure the NVidia driver team would get like an additional ~15-20% out of the same hardware
                      But we named the *dog* Indiana...
                      My System
                      2nd System (not for Windows lovers )
                      German ATI-forum

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        umm.. my only question is.........how can ATI can get 300+ mhz from a larger gpu from .15 micron and M get 225+-
                        P4 1.6A @ 2.24 ghz
                        MSI 645 Ultra
                        256 Samsung PC 2700 DDR
                        Matrox Marvel G200
                        etc...
                        ect....

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          With CPUs, this is achieved by, besides other things I don't have the slightest clue about, longer pipelines - just look at the P4. I'm sure Wombat could tell you much more about this, if he thought anyone here understood what he says

                          But really, there is more to a chip's clock speed than just transistor count and process. But of course there's more to a chip's speed and features than just clock speed.

                          And people, comparing R300 and P at the same clock speed doesn't make ANY sense, since you just CAN'T get P to that high speeds.

                          You can't say a cheetah is slower than a 60GXP, because at the same RPM the latter wins. This is absolutely irrelevant, as it can't reach 15,000 rpm.

                          AZ
                          There's an Opera in my macbook.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I think the main reason why is because the GPUs use different packaging. Parhelia uses Ball Grid Array (BGA) while the R300 uses Flip-Chip Ball Grid Array (FCBGA). The difference between them, is that the core has been flipped on to the other side of the chip. So the core is directly in contact with the HSF. This would allow better cooling and a higher clock.
                            I should have bought an ATI.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              the Texture unit of the R300 is even Trilinear, the parhelias texture units only bilinear ... , WHYYY
                              Hey! You're talking to me all wrong! It's the wrong tone! Do it again...and I'll stab you in the face with a soldering iron

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X