ATI's New Leader in Graphics Performance: The Radeon X1900 Series
by Derek Wilson & Josh Venning on January 24, 2006 12:00 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Details of the Cards
There are actually 4 products being launched today, three of which we were able to get our hands on for this article. We have actually spotted all three of these cards we tested around the internet today, so availability is immediate, and we couldn't be happier. As for pricing, ATI's MSRPs are as follows:
Radeon X1900 XTX -- $650
Radeon X1900 CrossFire Edition -- $600
Radeon X1900 XT -- $550
The CrossFire Edition version of the X1900 is clocked the same as the X1900 XT except for its I/O connectors and compositing engine. The X1900 XT weighs in with some very high clock speeds, especially for the number of pixel pipelines it supports. If you are worried about the CrossFire card bringing down the XTX, don't be. The XTX only sees about a 4% increase in core clock speed and a 7% increase in memory clock speed over the stock X1900 XT.
So, while the price gap between the XTX, XT, and CrossFire versions of the card would seem to indicate sizeable performance differences, we can definitively say that this is not the general case. The XTX is only marginally faster even on paper, and, as we will see, in the real world, real performance is what matters. Our advice is to save your money and go with the cheaper XT. 18% more cost for at best 7% more performance is all that the XTX gives.
There are actually 4 products being launched today, three of which we were able to get our hands on for this article. We have actually spotted all three of these cards we tested around the internet today, so availability is immediate, and we couldn't be happier. As for pricing, ATI's MSRPs are as follows:
Radeon X1900 XTX -- $650
Radeon X1900 CrossFire Edition -- $600
Radeon X1900 XT -- $550
The CrossFire Edition version of the X1900 is clocked the same as the X1900 XT except for its I/O connectors and compositing engine. The X1900 XT weighs in with some very high clock speeds, especially for the number of pixel pipelines it supports. If you are worried about the CrossFire card bringing down the XTX, don't be. The XTX only sees about a 4% increase in core clock speed and a 7% increase in memory clock speed over the stock X1900 XT.
| ATI X1000 Series Features | ||||
Radeon X1900 XT(X) |
Radeon X1600 |
Radeon X1800 XL |
Radeon X1800 XT |
|
| Vertex Pipelines | 8 |
5 |
8 |
8 |
| Pixel Pipelines | 48 |
12 |
16 |
16 |
| Core Clock | 625(650) |
590 |
500 |
625 |
| Memory Size | 512MB |
256MB |
256MB |
512MB |
| Memory Data Rate | 1.45GHz (1.55GHz) |
1.38GHz |
1GHz |
1.5GHz |
| Texture Units | 16 |
4 |
16 |
16 |
| Render Backends | 16 |
4 |
16 |
16 |
| Z Compare Units | 16 |
8 |
16 |
16 |
| Maximum Threads | 512 |
128 |
512 |
512 |
So, while the price gap between the XTX, XT, and CrossFire versions of the card would seem to indicate sizeable performance differences, we can definitively say that this is not the general case. The XTX is only marginally faster even on paper, and, as we will see, in the real world, real performance is what matters. Our advice is to save your money and go with the cheaper XT. 18% more cost for at best 7% more performance is all that the XTX gives.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
120 Comments
View All Comments
photoguy99 - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link
Why do the editors keep implying the power of cards is "getting ahead" of games when it's actually not even close?- 1600x1200 monitors are pretty affordable
- 8xAA does look better than 4xAA
- It's nice play games with a minimum frame rate of 50-60
Yes these are high end desires, but the X1900XT can't even meet these needs despite it's great power.
Let's face it - the power of cards could double tomorrow and still be put to good use.
mi1stormilst - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link
Well said well said my friend...We need to stop being so impressed by so very little. When games look like REAL LIFE does with lots of colors, shading, no jagged edges (unless its from the knife I just plunged into your eye) lol you get the picture.
poohbear - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link
technology moves forward at a slower pace then that mates. U expect every vid card to be a 9700pro?! right. there has to be a pace the developers can follow.photoguy99 - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
I think we are agreeing with you -The article authors keep implying they have to struggle to push these cards to their limit because they are getting so powerful so fast.
To your point, I do agree it's moving forward slow - relative to what people can make use of.
For example 90% of Office users can not make use of a faster CPU.
However 90% of gamers could make use of a faster GPU.
So even though GPU performance is doubling faster than CPU performance they should keep it up because we can and will use every ounce of it.
Powermoloch - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link
It is great to see that ATi is doing their part right ;)photoguy99 - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link
When DX10 is released with vist it seems like this card would be like having SM2.0 - you're behind the curve again.Yea, I know there is always something better around the corner - and I don't recommend waiting if you want a great card now.
But I'm sure some people would like to know.
Spoelie - Thursday, January 26, 2006 - link
Not at all, I do not see DX10 arriving before vista near the end of this year. If it does earlier it will not make any splash whatsoever on game development before that. Even so, you cannot be 'behind' if you're only competitor is still at SM3.0 as well. As far as I can tell, there will be no HARD architectural changes in G71/7900 - they might improve tidbits here and there, like support for AA while doing HDR rendering, but that will be about the full extent of changes.DigitalFreak - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link
True, but I'm betting it will be quite a while before we see any DX10 games. I would suspect that the R620/G80 will be DX10 parts.timmiser - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link
I expect that Microsoft's Flight Simulator X will be the first DX10 game.hwhacker - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link
Question to Derek (or whomever):Perhaps I interpreted something wrong, but is it correct that you're saying X1900 is more of a 12x4 technology (because of fetch4) than the 16x3 we always thought? If so, that would make it A LOT more like Xenos, and perhaps R600, which makes sense, if I recall their ALU setup correctly (Xenos is 16x4, one for stall, so effective 16x3). R520 was 16x1, so...I gotta ask...Does this mean a 16x4 is imminent, or am I just reading the information incorrectly?
If that's true, ATi really did mess with the definition of a pipeline.
I can hear the rumours now...R590 with 16 QUADS, 16 ROPs, 16 TMUs, and 64 pixel processors...Oh yeah, and GDDR4 (on a 80nm process.) You heard it here first. ;)