Back to Article

  • volrathy - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    12 pipelines 128 bit memory interface are they 256bit graphics core or 128bit my guess is 128bit ? These things the r530 if they get released like this should bench under a 9800pro

    /me goes and buys nvidia 7800gt
  • steger - Tuesday, September 06, 2005 - link

    I can't remember any graphics card being hyped up and down like the r5xx. Nice to see actual dates on this... Not buying anything until I see some benchmarks. Reply
  • volrathy - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link


    450MHz Core Clock
    800MHz Memory Clock
    256MB Maximum Memory Support
    128-bit Memory
    4 Pipelines
    Maximum 16x16MB 2.5ns GDDR2

    This is shocking it would prolly bench under a FX5700
  • Biatche1488 - Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - link

    Dont forget the new memory controller i hope it will be good Reply
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - link

    But really, do we need faster performance at 1024x768 when you are already getting 100+ frames per second on most games? I am sure there are people that say they "feel" the sluggishness when they are running less than 100 fps, but like me I feel most people think otherwise. Improving 1600x1200 resolution fps is more worth it.

    It is much harder to extract parallelism for general purpose applications that CPUs are used for. Graphics are easier to parallelize. Therefore, this multi-core CPU thing should do a lot more than before if the programmers take advantage of it.
  • KHysiek - Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - link

    I mean that 128bit cards with 1,4GHz memory (?!). That sounds a little odd.
    What is target price range of these cards ?
  • MrOblivious - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Let me get this correct here.....

    ATI High Performance Roadmap
    Core Name Slot Width Launch Date
    R520 "XT" Dual Slot Mid October
    R520 "XT" Dual Slot Early October
    R520 "XL" Single Slot Early September

    These dates are after these dates:

    Core Name Slot Width Launch Date
    RV530 Crossfi Single Slot Late October
    RV515 "XL" Single Slot Late September

    As stated here:

    Since RV530 and RV515 are actually launching first, we have a bit more information about them.

    Last time I checked late October was after Mid or Early as was late september. Maybe you were to good at

    We have obscured the launch times of these cards intentionally.
    even for yourselves?

  • KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    I'll repeat what I said in the forums:


    Youre correct. However, shipping and launching are definitely not the same (particularly for graphics companies). Keep in mind too the dates are just slightly fudged too - usually they launch 3 or 4 cards at a time; you'll have to read in between the lines there.

  • MrOblivious - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link


    Youre correct. However, shipping and launching are definitely not the same (particularly for graphics companies). Keep in mind too the dates are just slightly fudged too - usually they launch 3 or 4 cards at a time; you'll have to read in between the lines there.

    What are you trying to say? Are you saying that the highend will be paper launched? So the low end will launch later but ship first? If so just drop the cloak and dagger is just muddying the water.
  • Cuser - Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - link

    I think Kristpher is being vague for a reason...which he probably cannot state at this moment. So take his advice and "read between the lines". Reply
  • OrSin - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Did someone really complain that these cards are not getting faster fast enough.
    Thats crazy. Don't blame it on the cards blame it on games with not so great graphics, blame the damn programmers. All they have to do is program graphics anymore. All the levels, storyline and AI is all the same. So gaming companies take 2 year to redo what, the graphic engine, only to do that poorly. The CPU is not holding up any of FPS, and these cards that are out now are over kill for any other type of games. Can't believe people want more speed. Give me the same or less speed at a real price. The fact that graphic cards are costing more then whole systems is crazy. Who the hell needs 1600x1200 at 120 FPS, with all the goodies on. You either play the game hardcore and don't have time to see the "neat" stuff or you play slow and watch the damn sunset. People have offical lost it.
  • Rock Hydra - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link


    People have officaly lost it.

    Uh...buying the best of the best is nothing new.

    That's why they call them performance enthusiasts. They're not really concerned about saving money. They want the best they can get.
  • Powered by AMD - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    its good to hear at least something about R520. Personally I think, after reading the article, that It will have 32 pipes:
    "R520 could be much different than what was originally speculated. (In fact, we know it is.)"
    And originally speculated, were its 24 pipes. Maybe its higher clock speed or something else, but I think it will have 32 Pipes, call me crazy if you want :p
  • Spoonbender - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    You mean they just tacked on an extra 8 pipelines, in the middle of their respins to *improve* yields? ;)
    Nah, I doubt that.

    The comment that it's much different from the original specs doesn't have anything to do with pipelines. There are plenty of things to tweak, and most likely, they've only changed stuff like the targeted clock speed, as well as asvarious low-level stuff that does nothing more than move a few wires and components around to achieve better yields.
  • Josh7289 - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    ATI is going for higher clockspeeds and less pipelines, a la Intel-style. Nvidia seems to be more liek AMD, going for generally lower clockspeeds but more pipelines...

    I don't know about the performance of these GPUs compared to Nvidia's, but I'm almost positive they'll run much hotter...

    In the end, it won't matter if these cards are better than Nvidia's if the prices are too high, since ATI is already aggresively cutting prices on their current generation cards and Nvidia's prices are going down, too.
  • Biatche1488 - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Gddr3 1.4ns 512mb i dont know if 512mb will make a diference but if it does on a midrange card r520 will be...I will buy a r530 for my computer its on agp cant wait! Reply
  • shabby - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Isnt it kinda stupid to be using super duper expensive memory on a midrange product with a 128bit bus? Reply
  • Jep4444 - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    You don't know the costs of implementing a 256bit memory interface, it requires more complex wiring amongs other things that could very well mean that 256bit at 350mhz is more expensive than 128bit at 700mhz.

    Now i'm no expert and i don't know which costs more to implement but i doubt ATI would spend more money to produce a card than necessary.
  • DrZoidberg - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    yeah well spotted. RV530 has 128-bit memory, silly to have 512 mb 128 bit memory card cause that will hardly make any difference. I think rv530 is designed to kill the 6600gt cause last year x700 wasnt as good as 6600gt. It will be slower than x800xl or 6800gt. Reply
  • Tanclearas - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    I'm thinking this card is directly targetted at the 6600GT/6800. If ATI can release RV530 at $199 US, it seems like it could do very well. Of course, specs rarely tell the whole story, but the figures match up fairly well with the 6800. Same memory bandwidth (1400MHz 128-bit vs 700MHz 256-bit) and both 12 pipeline. RV530 would definitely have the core speed advantage (600MHz vs 325MHz), but the speed might be overkill for the memory bandwidth available. Reply
  • coldpower27 - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    If the 600MHZ core speed is correct then this card has more then enough fillrate to take on 6800 GT, which I think it would be targeting nevermind 6800 Standard.

    And if it intros at say 199US for the 256MB version, and 249US for the 512MB version it would be pretty sweet indeed.

    Memory bandwiddth limitation will continue to be an issue considering the fact that memory performance increase have not scaled in a 1:1 ratio with the amount of fillrate each new generation brings.

    128Bit was chosen for cost reasons and feasability, as the RV530 may not have the necessary space around it to implement such an 256Bit one.

    But remember Nvidia does have an answer soon, with G72 Core, which is likely to have comparable performance to this very card.
  • Marlowe - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    I think you guys are wrong when you expect these cards to be targeted at the 6600GT/6800 cards, as ATI just released X800GT with this purpose. Reply
  • CU - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    They may have just released a product to compete with the 6600 and 6800, but the specs seem to suggest that it should be faster than a 6800nu and even the 6800GT if the game is gpu limited and not memory bandwith limit. With a fillrate of 7200 a 6800GT would need to run at 450mhz. Reply
  • jonny13 - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Note that is only max memory. That certainly doesn't mean that it will come standard. That just means in a year when the top end cards come standard with 512, they can charge an extra $50 for this low end card with a lot of ram, just like the 6600 with 256 today. Reply
  • Spoonbender - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    yeah, that struck me as odd too. Could it be that this memory is neccesary for the product to compete? 1.4GHz? On a midrange card? If so, it looks bad for ATI. (But then the 128-bit bus makes no sense)
    Or maybe some of the specs got mixed up? That's the only meaningful explanation I can think of. The alternative is that ATI has screwed up big time, which doesn't sound as likely...
  • tuteja1986 - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Just in when i usually buy my Brand NEW Shinny AWesome graphic card. I am hopping the R520 is really supper fast like Rumor Hype it. Reply
  • Spoonbender - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Hmm, 12 pipelines on their next-gen midrange card? That's not a lot. Impressive clock speeds though. :)
    But given this, I highly doubt the R520 is going to be 32 pipelines like some have guessed. 24 sounds more likely. And then it won't be the uber-powerful G70 killer that ATI fans keep hoping for. (Ok, I'm not saying it'll be slower either, at those clock speeds, it seems like it could be a powerful beast still, but I highly doubt it's going to really destroy the G70)

    Am I the only one seeing a similarity to Prescott here? Too much focus on extreme clock speeds, at the cost of an efficient design? (Of course, it's too early to judge actual performance, but we know they're going to need a dual-slot design, while NVidia has actually cut down drastically on heat output with the G70.)

    And sheeesh, an october launch on the R520 cards? ATI, I'm not impressed. NVidia is getting one hell of a head start here.
  • ksherman - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    I thnk that ATI is really tryng to advance the technology. They are using new techs and a 90nm process, trying to cut down on power and heat! Reply
  • Spoonbender - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Cut down on heat? The article says clearly the R4520 requires 2-slot cooling. Compare that to the 7800 GTX which produces less heat than even the last-generation ATI cards. Reply
  • Spoonbender - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Err, and that was supposed to be R520, of course :) Reply
  • R3MF - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    i want a 7800GT competitor pronto so that i can afford to buy one shortly after. :( Reply
  • DLeRium - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link


    Well I hope this will get ATI on track. Be optimistic. But let's hope this won't be a paper launch. On paper these products always look great, but who knows what will happen now. I bought my 7800GT, but I won't be looking back. If ATI buys NV tomorrow, I will not cry.
  • OrphanBoy - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    I bought an X800XL yesterday (off eBay) and I had a minor heartattack when I saw the title of this article! Though I stand by my decision, as there's no way that the R520 XL card will be released as cheaply as you can get X800XLs today, and the RV530/515 cards don't look comparable in performance to the XL... Reply
  • GhandiInstinct - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    I just recently got the XL as well. No sweat man, no game now or the near future will own the XL. Reply
  • UzairH - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Here's hoping the R520 will be a killer, much faster than 7800GTX. I personally feel that GPUs are not advancing quickly enough. ATI had better release real monsters to make up for the very late launch. Reply
  • coldpower27 - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    You think GPU's aren't advancing quickly enough there are other things that don't advance nearly as quick, CPU's for one, Memory is another, HD is one of the slowest of these.

    GPU's are actually one of the things that advance the fastest, due to the ability to scale through clock frequency AND parallelism.
  • Rock Hydra - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Well, I want something that surely justifies the extreme price point. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    GPUs aren't advancing quickly enough!? What about processors? The 7800GTX only benefits relative to many other cards at 1600x1200 or higher resolutions, and SLI doesn't even do that some times. Perhaps if we had even faster GPUs for the mainstream we'd see games increase in graphical complexity, but the CPU is really hurting performance in the latest games when you run G70 cards. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now