Page 1 of 1

ATI's NEW R520 GFX CHIP!

Posted: 14 Jun 2005, 05:14
by Nemisis
Well i posted before that i was waiting for the new ATI GFX chip before i upgraded and by the look of this little snippet i found, that choice would appear to be a good one!

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23752

Posted: 14 Jun 2005, 09:00
by KODIAK
Jeez! I need to get my head back into all this stuff, R520? :shock: :?
My last recollection of graphics cards was the 6800, ATi receiving 512MB of onboard. And now we're talking R520 & 7800 . . . . . . . . at this rate I best just give my system complete to my boy and buy a new one! :wink:

Posted: 14 Jun 2005, 09:51
by Jedi Master
Depends on your definition of "good choice." Buzz is that instead of 32 pipes, most of the chips aren't passing 24 pipes with some barely having 16 working. There is a good chance the R520 could be ATI's "FX 5800" that never really shows its face.
For something due for launch any day, apparently NO ONE has one yet but the board manufacturers, and when they do come out expect sky high prices like the X800's intro.
I for one am glad I have my X800XT and I can wait till the next cycle.

Posted: 14 Jun 2005, 10:58
by Buffalo Six
ATI vs. Nvidia.....hmmm sort of like Ford vs. Bowties

I got burned several yars ago with a ATi card and since then I've been Nivida all the way. I figure my 6800GTs (256mb) cards on SLI will hold the line for a while longer....

Posted: 14 Jun 2005, 15:12
by KODIAK
I'm the same to a certain degree. My first card for a PC was an ATi, and I had a terrible time of it, and since have only ever purchased anything but - VooDoo3 3000, Gainward GeForce4 4600Ti (AGP), Gainward 6800 Ultra (AGP).
We were considering an upgrade in the near future too, but seeing all the movement going on, I've decided to put the upgrade on hold. Instead, we are going to concentrate on putting a decent box together, to put it all. I'll have access to the sort of thing I'm looking for when I get back to work. Then probably later this year I'll put a spec together and try to purchase it all.

Posted: 14 Jun 2005, 16:38
by Jedi Master
You bought an ATI back when the Voodoo 3's were out????!!?!

That's like comparing a Model T to a Taurus--several generations have gone by in the last 7-8 years for video cards and that ATI and this ATI are nothing alike.

Posted: 15 Jun 2005, 02:41
by KODIAK
Well I DO understand that Jedi. But like anyone who gets bitten in that way, it takes something special to make you change your mind.

Posted: 15 Jun 2005, 05:29
by Nemisis
Well i'm a bit like you Jedi in that you say you have an X800XT and will wait for the next step after the R520.

I'm running on a 9800-Pro at the moment, which runs all my flight sims just fine at the moment but i am looking for a new jump soon and it will probably be with the R520 since i am missing out your Generation of cards and going for the next.

I have seen the article you have read but i think it's purely hear say and based primarily on the fact that ATI delayed the launch of the R520 from it's initial May release, but this has been put down to ATI launching their Version of SLI first and getting that on the market before launching the R520.

As for price well i am willing to pay £350-£400 $630-$700 for my new card which is currently the price of the XT850XT over here so thats not a problem and i'm also willing to wait a while to get it so if it is delayed then im not going to be bothered too much.

Posted: 15 Jun 2005, 05:33
by Nemisis
OOPS double post

Posted: 15 Jun 2005, 13:12
by KODIAK
Aw man, here we go again! I was all but set on buying either the 1MB cache 90nm AMD 64 @ 3700, or waiting alittle longer then getting the FX55. But now they have the X2 chip out, I'm trying to re-think what would the better purchase be on that? Answers on a postcard to . . . . . :wink:

Posted: 15 Jun 2005, 13:19
by Jedi Master
SimHQ did a rundown. Basically, 99% of the games out there do better with a faster single core than 2 slower cores.

The exception is Falcon 4, since it was designed to run the campaign engine on a dual processor machine from the outset. There are some real big gains in performance for F4, and any multitasking or multimedia apps seem to appreciate it as well.

Until more games are programmed to take advantage of them, I'm skipping dual for now. I'm getting a 3700+ San Diego next month. In 18-24 months when I go again, THEN I'll re-evaluate the dual-core sitrep.

Posted: 15 Jun 2005, 15:45
by Hammer
yes - pretty much no point in dual core for a gaming machine...

Posted: 15 Jun 2005, 16:30
by KODIAK
That sounds good enough for me I guess. And being honest Falcon4 is long for this world, no matter what incarnation we're seeing being made available. Fairly soon we will be using something else that's a little more uptodate.