AnandTech's R520, RV530 and RV515 Pre-NDA Extravaganza
by Kristopher Kubicki on September 13, 2005 9:24 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
ATI's RV515 aka Radeon X1300
ATI's internal roadmap reveals that the RV515 (X1300) is the follow up to RV370, and will come in three main variations with several HyperMemory options and differing core clocks as well. Our previous roadmaps have revealed that RV515 is exclusively a single quad design, with memory interfaces from 32 to 128bits. Even the low end RV515 cards will utilize some form of H.264 decoding and/or HDCP support, making these cards extremely attractive for DVR machines.
|
ATI RV515 Roadmap
|
||||
| Card | Pipes | Std Core Clock | Std Memory | Memory Width |
| X1300 Pro | 4 | 550MHz | 500MHz | 128-bit |
| X1300 LE | 4 | 450MHz | 400MHz | 128-bit, 64-bit |
| X1300 LE HyperMemory | 4 | 450MHz | 500MHz | "64-bit" |
HyperMemory versions of RV515 will utilize a 32-bit memory bus, but since they utilize the system memory they use a different system of determining the "Supported Memory" configurations as follows:
|
HyperMemory "Supported Memory"
|
||||
| Card Memory | System Memory | "Supported Memory" | ||
| 32MB | 256MB | 128MB | ||
| 64MB | 256MB | 128MB | ||
| 128MB | 256MB | 256MB | ||
| 32MB | 512MB | 128MB | ||
| 64MB | 512MB | 256MB | ||
| 128MB | 512MB | 256MB | ||
Wrap Up
Among other noteables in the roadmap, some of the more prominent features of R520 included HDMI over Silicon Image's WALDO interface -- all other cards in the roadmap that feature HDCP but not HDMI will use TI's TFP513PAP. On low profile RV530 cards, HDMI connectors are supported directly on the PCB, while analog and DVI connectors are attached via a ribbon cable to a daugther card. For users looking to set up a cheap TV-only DVR, the daughtercard is completely optional - saving money and space.
In the roadmap we also saw some new SKUs from the X550 line and X600 line supporting HyperMemory. With NVIDA's quasi-TurboCache GeForce 6500, an X600 HyperMemory card could put a real advantage of low end video processing back in ATI's court.
X800GTO is also going to be hitting the shelves soon with street prices of $159 for the 128MB version and $179 for the 256MB version. You might want to check our previous roadmap on this particular product, since everyone (including ATI) expects a sub $200 12 pipe R420 to really become the de facto midrange option. A low volume sixteen pipe version will show up for select vendors in select regions.
We go under NDA in the near future for many things ATI, so get ready for AnandTech's upcoming coverage come launch time!
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
65 Comments
View All Comments
Cybercat - Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - link
This is false. There are actually quite a few improvements and optimizations to the efficiency of the engine in the R420 over the original R300 architecture. The basic principle and design is still there, but you have to take into account other smaller features that make no small difference altogether.Jep4444 - Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - link
either way the level of improvements made from R300 to R420 since they are based upon the same architecture is likely to be smaller than that from R420 to R520, also factor in the move to SM3.0(and consequently the move from FP24 to FP16/32) and we'll definitely see changes in performance on a pipeline levelarturnow - Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - link
no, you're tring to tell me, that 32 pipeline card will always be better then 16 pipeline and it's not true :] In that way making R520 16-pipeline would be suicide :]KHysiek - Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - link
Before game devs bumb up game requirements to these absurdal prices.wien - Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - link
Any game-dev that did that, would be a complete idiot. The graphics high-end account for a small fraction of the market. Why whould they make a game only for that small fraction, when they can lower the requirements, and sell millions upon millions?imaheadcase - Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - link
That sums it up, used to be 6 months after a top of line card was released, you can get it for $200. Now if you look at it you will see you have OVER a year to get that same price vs performance.Seems like ATI and Nvidia are going backwards imo...who cares about performance when its adding %30+ onto a cost of a PC to build. The whole idea about hardware is that even if performance doubles, price should not.
A case in point, i run a 9700 Pro, used to be the best card, when it first came out it was $350, i got mine for $120 about 6months after launch. When your best card now is topping out around $500-600, and 6 MONTHS after release your seeing less than $20 than that something is wrong
Just my 2 cents
yacoub - Thursday, September 15, 2005 - link
Totally agree. Prices are ridiculous.AnnoyedGrunt - Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - link
I have a hard time believing you got a 9700pro for $120 six months after launch, unless you bought it used.I got a 9700pro in Jan 2004 for $180-190 (purchased thru newegg), and that was more than a year after launch if I recall correctly.
Aside from that minor quibble, I do agree with your overall point. It does seem as though the vendors are much more slow in lowering the price of previous gen "high-end" cards to bring them to the mid range. Instead, they release faster cards that are also much more expensive.
I will admit that I got my first 2nd and third 3d card (Voodoo 1, GF 1 SDR, GF3 Ti200) for about $200 each. The first two cards were definitely high end at the time, while the GF3 was second in line to the Ti500. It does seen somewhat odd that graphics cards are about the only computer compenent that has seemed to get higher and higher in price, instead of lower and lower like most other parts. On the other hand, I think the performance of the GPU has increased at a greater rate than that of the CPU over the last few years, so maybe the higher cost is somewhat justified (but it definitely is annoying).
I'm currently using an X800XL which I bought for $300 when they first arrived, and I don't plan on upgrading for at least another year, so I'll be interested in the next, next gen from NV and ATI.
-D'oh!
100proof - Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - link
I'm of the same opinion.. It used to be the CPU was the most expensive part of an build from a buyers standpoint, but over the past three years that has changed entirely.. Video cards manufacturers have consistently increased prices to the point that it's not affordable for most people to purchase a current generation card.. If ATi and Nvidia think that they continue this present trend of pushing MSRPs to new levels, they'll eventually find they've priced themselves out of most consumer's budgets..Sh0ckwave - Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - link
The fastest CPUs are still more expensive then the fastest graphics cards though (4800 X2 $880, FX57 $1000).