Radeon 2 Maxx is going to distory nvidia

Discussion in 'Videocards - AMD Radeon' started by rcf84, Jul 23, 2001.

  1. rcf84

    rcf84 Guest

    Oh yeah <IMG SRC="smileys/smile.gif"> <br>
    <br>
    Look at the spec on the radeon 2 and double it. Also it will work cause it have a bridge chip too make sure it works 2x the speed. Not even the NV25 could touch it. Also Radeon 3 (R300) has started to be worked on. Nvidia is DEAD.
     
  2. pitydafoo

    pitydafoo Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 750 Ti 4GB
    Well, it's good to see ATi is not giving up the way so many other vendors have. However, what is the point of trying to compare things that aren't out yet? Touting vaporware will get you nowhere. When ATi delivers the goods (with good drivers!) then I'll listen. Until then, who cares what they have in store. It's not like all the competition is going to stand still. However, I hope ATi's new cards are as good as you say. A good product is a good product, and good products usually breed better ones to compete <IMG SRC="smileys/smile.gif">
     
  3. Ice Cold

    Ice Cold Guru of 3D Bartender

    Messages:
    6,187
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Abit GeForce 3
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by rcf84:<br>
    <b>Oh yeah <IMG SRC="smileys/smile.gif"> <br>
    Look at the spec on the radeon 2 and double it. <b>Also it will work cause it have a bridge chip too make sure it works 2x the speed</b>. Not even the NV25 could touch it. Also Radeon 3 (R300) has started to be worked on. Nvidia is DEAD.</b><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br>
    lol, then explain to me why the voodoo 5 isn't twice as fast as the voodoo 4 ?
     
  4. rcf84

    rcf84 Guest

    Well there is a Huge Difference between 3dfx's SLI and ATI's Maxx.<br>
    <br>
    Well...<br>
    <br>
    What is Alternate Frame Rendering (AFR) technology?<br>
    <br>
    ATI has developed a multiple chip parallel processing technique that works within MAXX implementation called Alternate Frame Rendering or AFR. In the AFR process, one chip renders even frames while the other chip renders odd frames. Each chip processes triangle setup for its own frame without waiting for the other chip making AFR the more efficient multiple chip processing technique.<br>
    <br>
    ------------------- <br>
    <br>
    How many other multiple chip techniques are out in the market and how does AFR compare to them?<br>
    <br>
    There are 2 other techniques for multiple chip parallel processing:<br>
    3Dfx's SLI - Scan Line Interleave, and <br>
    Metabyte/Wicked 3D's Parallel Graphics Configuration.<br>
    <br>
    3Dfx's SLI's technique:<br>
    One chip draws out even lines of an image and the other chip draws out the odd lines of the image. This technique is inefficient because both chips process triangle set up on one frame.<br>
    <br>
    Unlike SLI, AFR processes separate frames.<br>
    <br>
    Metabyte/Wicked 3D's PGC technique:<br>
    Both chips work on different section of a frame. That is, one chip renders the top half of the screen, while the other chip renders on the bottom half of the screen. This technique has potential for the render loads to be unbalanced between the two chips. One half of the screen can have fewer polygons to render than the other. For instance, a scene with a sky can pose obvious load unbalancing because the sky requires less rendering than what the bottom half would potentially render. Further image tearing, difficulties in DAC calibration also poses inherent problems with this technique.<br>
    <br>
    In ATI's AFR technology, load unbalancing does not occur since each chip processes separate and complete frames. The render load from frame to frame is reasonably balanced unlike the wide variance found within the complexities of a frame.<br><br><i>This message was edited by rcf84 on 24 Jul 2001 04:42 PM</i>
     

  5. rcf84

    rcf84 Guest

    See its running 2x as fast. Rendering 2 Frames at one time. So FPS would double. Note Radeon 2 maxx with have a chipset onboard to make there is no problems (aka not letting window screw it like last time). Also the Rage 128 pro wasn't a really fast chip (tnt 2 class) no t&l. Radeon 2 is different (aka fast as hell).
     
  6. rcf84

    rcf84 Guest

    Also image 2 Pixel Shaders and 2 vertex shader working on 1 program.
     
  7. A. R. Pakdel

    A. R. Pakdel Guest

    Not so simple rcf84... yes in a perfect world the maxx would be 2x as fast but there are other factors at work here. Recall that Rage Fury MAXX also used AFR but it certainly wasn't exactly twice as fast as the normal Fury boards.<br>
    <br>
    Plus Radeon2 MAXX is not in any way officailly announced. We all thought Radeon MAXX was for real untill it got canned and ATI said it was just a rumour.<br><br><i>This message was edited by A. R. Pakdel on 25 Jul 2001 12:05 AM</i>
     
  8. rcf84

    rcf84 Guest

    Well it has a chipset on it to manage it. Not like windows controlled on the Rage Maxx. The Process is hardware not software this time.
     
  9. whoohoo, Canada rocks!
     
  10. Snoopy

    Snoopy Guest

    Well, I'm really smiling my ass off! RCF84 I recommend you getting a taste of reality! I'll tell you why nVidia won't do a dual-graphics-chip configuration! nVidia has no need to do so, because their chips are fast and powerful enough in single-setup and they want to sell them! AFR is a nice feature, but ATI won't use it for the Radeon2 or the Radeon3 because of the higher costs! Nobody will buy a Radeon2(3) card if it costs nearly 1000$$! I remember what my Rage Fury Maxx costed last year! 500$$ here in Germany (including VAT!) meaning 400$$ without VAT! Well now think about what a Radeon2(3) would cost! ATI want's to sell Videocards, not cards standing around in shops with customers looking at them but going for the next generation of nVidia cards! AFR might be good for the FireGL series of videocards, but not for the consumer market! BTW the Rage128(Pro) was the first chipset to introduce a DDR-Memory-Interface, but ATI didn't use it, because there was less to no DDR memory available! Let's talk about facts, not about rumours! Fact is, that ATI is not able to get the same performance out of their chipsets (at the moment) like nVidia does at the moment! This might change when ATI's Radeon2 hits the market, but believe me nVidia's machines are not standing still, nor are their brains on holiday!<br>
    <br>
    Cheers! <IMG SRC="smileys/hot.gif"> <IMG SRC="smileys/hot.gif"> <IMG SRC="smileys/hot.gif"> <IMG SRC="smileys/hot.gif"> <IMG SRC="smileys/wave.gif">
     

  11. rcf84

    rcf84 Guest

    Well why the hell would ATi claim there going to use AMD Hypertransport in some of there video cars. Well did i recall the the price of the Geforce2 Ultra when it come out *cough*. Or even the Geforce 3 *well well*.
     
  12. Snoopy

    Snoopy Guest

    It seems to me RCF84, that you are blended by the shiny Radeon2(3) existing only on the paper! Well nobody got any benchmarks yet, meaning you can believe what ATI says, although nobody really knows the real world performance! Recall that shiny Radeon thing in 2000, where everybody believed that ATI would climb up the top push nVidia away from their throne. What happend was a bad joke! The Radeon was no competition (regarding performance) to the Geforce2-GTS nor to the Geforce2-Pro, neither the Geforce2-Ultra! The Radeon gives you similar performance, like an Geforce2-MX meaning ATI was not able to compete against nVidia nor climbing up to the top, neither pushing nVidia away from their throne! Believe me, most gamers go for performance, not for slow shiny graphics, where they are only able to play in 800x600x32bit with FSAA2x enabled and this 256x anisotropic filtering! I can't believe that anybody would change his Geforce2-Ultra, where he/she is able to play @1280x1024x32bit FSAA2x enabled @60FPS, to a Radeon VIVO 64, just because of 256x anisotropic filtering and vertex skinning playing at 800x600x32bit FSAA2x enabled @30FPS-40FPS! Get a sense of reality guy, this is fact, not just nonsense! I'm out!<br>
    <br>
    Cheers! <IMG SRC="smileys/hot.gif"> <IMG SRC="smileys/hot.gif"> <IMG SRC="smileys/hot.gif"> <IMG SRC="smileys/hot.gif"> <IMG SRC="smileys/wave.gif"> <br><br><i>This message was edited by Snoopy on 05 Aug 2001 05:35 AM</i>
     
  13. Dave

    Dave Don Fredo Corleone

    Messages:
    8,377
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, considering the superior driver system, and support of Nvidia, not to mention the performance track record. I think they understand that people have faith that spending that kind of money on a card of theirs isn't a waste. ATI, hehe, no way!
     
  14. rcf84

    rcf84 Guest

    Waste your money on nvidia then. Well i dont mind having hardware dvd with interlacing. Well i have seen bench's of the Radeon 2 around $250 trust me its way faster then a Geforce2 ultra was $450 around. ATi's Rv200 is there value version thats is fast as the GF2 ultra for around $150.
     
  15. Dave

    Dave Don Fredo Corleone

    Messages:
    8,377
    Likes Received:
    0
    stopped by my local pc shop, they don't have those in stock yet. Apparently no one does <IMG SRC="smileys/biggrin.gif">
     

  16. omegaweapon

    omegaweapon Guest

    I found a benchmark in germany and there should be a link on th headline news about the sunday bit and they will tell you the becnhmark they have on radeon II. Uhh looks like Gefroce 3 and 2 got deTHRONED.<br>
    <br>
    WOW take a lokk. Well Quake III pretty much of its match. Right now I have Geforce 3 card. Still ATI ROCKS!!! <IMG SRC="smileys/cool.gif">
     
  17. omegaweapon

    omegaweapon Guest

    Then why did ATI Radeon 64 DDR VIVO came out in the 3rd place in 3D Mark 2001, whereby I came in the 2nd place which is Geforce 3. All the other were below was.... Geforce Ultra, next is pro, and next is GTS and next is all the crap Mx series, and next is all the old Maxx ATI and Rage pro series, and then the last is crappy TNT series. <IMG SRC="smileys/cool.gif">
     
  18. rcf84

    rcf84 Guest

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by omegaweapon:<br>
    I found a benchmark in germany and there should be a link on th headline news about the sunday bit and they will tell you the becnhmark they have on radeon II. Uhh looks like Gefroce 3 and 2 got deTHRONED.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br>
    <br>
    cool can you find it again.
     

Share This Page