Metatron1
2002-11-21, 19:02:05
hi
http://firingsquad.gamers.com/features/comdex2002/page2.asp
Finally, it will be interesting to see what ATI is up to come February. Word on the street is that ATI’s follow-up to RADEON 9700 PRO (codenamed R350) has taped out recently and will be marketed under the name RADEON 9900. We’ve heard conflicting reports on its manufacturing process, we naturally assumed it would be a 0.13-micron part, but we’ve also been informed by another source that the design is 0.15-micron."
... nVidia wird wohl nicht lange "King of the Hill" sein (wenn überhaupt) ;D
"For instance, NVIDIA is proud to claim that GeForce FX boasts pixel and vertex shaders that go beyond DirectX 9.0’s specs, yet a 400-500MHz chip with 8 pixel pipelines running very long shaders would spend all of its time in geometry, bringing frame rate to a crawl. ATI feels that with RADEON 9700’s multi-pass capability, having native support for thousands of shaders is useless, as the RADEON 9700 can loopback to perform those operations. ATI ran a demonstration of a space fighter that was rendered using this technique.
As far as NVIDIA’s bandwidth claims of GeForce FX’s 48GB/sec memory bandwidth, ATI states that the color compression in their HYPERZ III technology performs the same thing today, and with all of the techniques they use in RADEON 9700, they could claim -->bandwidth of nearly 100GB/sec<-- , but if they did so no one would believe them, hence they’ve stood with offering just shy of 20GB/sec of bandwidth"
... soviel zu den 48 GB/s Bandbreite einer Gf FX ;D
In any case, R350 will certainly boast higher clock speeds and performance, so GeForce FX could be in for quite a battle if it slips any further.
Was meint ihr??
Gruß
Meta
http://firingsquad.gamers.com/features/comdex2002/page2.asp
Finally, it will be interesting to see what ATI is up to come February. Word on the street is that ATI’s follow-up to RADEON 9700 PRO (codenamed R350) has taped out recently and will be marketed under the name RADEON 9900. We’ve heard conflicting reports on its manufacturing process, we naturally assumed it would be a 0.13-micron part, but we’ve also been informed by another source that the design is 0.15-micron."
... nVidia wird wohl nicht lange "King of the Hill" sein (wenn überhaupt) ;D
"For instance, NVIDIA is proud to claim that GeForce FX boasts pixel and vertex shaders that go beyond DirectX 9.0’s specs, yet a 400-500MHz chip with 8 pixel pipelines running very long shaders would spend all of its time in geometry, bringing frame rate to a crawl. ATI feels that with RADEON 9700’s multi-pass capability, having native support for thousands of shaders is useless, as the RADEON 9700 can loopback to perform those operations. ATI ran a demonstration of a space fighter that was rendered using this technique.
As far as NVIDIA’s bandwidth claims of GeForce FX’s 48GB/sec memory bandwidth, ATI states that the color compression in their HYPERZ III technology performs the same thing today, and with all of the techniques they use in RADEON 9700, they could claim -->bandwidth of nearly 100GB/sec<-- , but if they did so no one would believe them, hence they’ve stood with offering just shy of 20GB/sec of bandwidth"
... soviel zu den 48 GB/s Bandbreite einer Gf FX ;D
In any case, R350 will certainly boast higher clock speeds and performance, so GeForce FX could be in for quite a battle if it slips any further.
Was meint ihr??
Gruß
Meta