bit-tech News: ATI RV770 architecture analysis - 09/02/08 02:49 PM
Hi all,
We have just published our *ATI RV770 architecture analysis* that was
unfortunately delayed at launch because of a family emergency - I know
we're pretty late to the game on this, but if you could post a link on
your site that would be very much appreciated!
*Link:*
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/09/02/ati-radeon-4850-4870-architecture-review/1
*Picture:*
http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2008/09/ati-radeon-4850-4870-architecture-review/fp_img.jpg
*Quote:
*/One of the biggest improvements has to be anti-aliasing performance --
it's nothing short of incredible and it takes AMD (or ATI of old) back
to where it used to be. The Radeons always used to make more efficient
use of AA than Nvidia's equivalent products and with the Radeon HD 4800
series, that has made a comeback in style.
Obviously there was a fairly low barrier for entry when it came to
improving the situation, but AMD has gone well beyond improving it --
the architects have gone from zero to hero almost as quickly as you can
say just that. Improving the render backend throughput in certain
scenarios was a clever way to improve anti-aliasing performance and I'm
sure that GDDR5 has had an influence as well.
That's not to say that the Radeon HD 4850 is starved of bandwidth though
-- its anti-aliasing performance is better than anything Nvidia has to
offer at the moment. The Radeon HD 4870 and 4870 X2, on the other hand,
are just in a completely different league. Playing games at high
resolution with 8xAA enabled is verging on plausible on a card that
costs quite a bit less than £200 (including VAT). And with the Radeon
HD 4870 X2, it's almost the default -- at anything less than 1,920 x
1,200 4xAA, there's simply no benefit to owning the card; it's all about
cranking the image quality right up in today's games.
What's disappointing for me is that AMD sees a future of multiple
'small' GPUs to fill the high end market, when in actual fact we don't
want to be greeted with the headaches associated with today's multi-GPU
technology -- it just doesn't scale well enough across the board. I'd
love to see a bigger chip derived from RV770 with well over 1,000 stream
processors because at that point we'd be seeing some rather crazy and
consistent performance gains.
With that said though, it's very clear that RV770 was all about
architectural efficiency and on that front, AMD has really achieved.
RV770 caught Nvidia by surprise and it wasn't until the company cut its
prices that it became competitive again -- the GTX 260 is an attractive
proposition, but it's still a little too expensive for my liking. It
needs to be on price parity with the 4870 if it's going to steal back
some market share from the big red rose in AMD's lineup./
*
*Cheers guys!
Tim Smalley
www.bit-tech.net
We have just published our *ATI RV770 architecture analysis* that was
unfortunately delayed at launch because of a family emergency - I know
we're pretty late to the game on this, but if you could post a link on
your site that would be very much appreciated!
*Link:*
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/09/02/ati-radeon-4850-4870-architecture-review/1
*Picture:*
http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2008/09/ati-radeon-4850-4870-architecture-review/fp_img.jpg
*Quote:
*/One of the biggest improvements has to be anti-aliasing performance --
it's nothing short of incredible and it takes AMD (or ATI of old) back
to where it used to be. The Radeons always used to make more efficient
use of AA than Nvidia's equivalent products and with the Radeon HD 4800
series, that has made a comeback in style.
Obviously there was a fairly low barrier for entry when it came to
improving the situation, but AMD has gone well beyond improving it --
the architects have gone from zero to hero almost as quickly as you can
say just that. Improving the render backend throughput in certain
scenarios was a clever way to improve anti-aliasing performance and I'm
sure that GDDR5 has had an influence as well.
That's not to say that the Radeon HD 4850 is starved of bandwidth though
-- its anti-aliasing performance is better than anything Nvidia has to
offer at the moment. The Radeon HD 4870 and 4870 X2, on the other hand,
are just in a completely different league. Playing games at high
resolution with 8xAA enabled is verging on plausible on a card that
costs quite a bit less than £200 (including VAT). And with the Radeon
HD 4870 X2, it's almost the default -- at anything less than 1,920 x
1,200 4xAA, there's simply no benefit to owning the card; it's all about
cranking the image quality right up in today's games.
What's disappointing for me is that AMD sees a future of multiple
'small' GPUs to fill the high end market, when in actual fact we don't
want to be greeted with the headaches associated with today's multi-GPU
technology -- it just doesn't scale well enough across the board. I'd
love to see a bigger chip derived from RV770 with well over 1,000 stream
processors because at that point we'd be seeing some rather crazy and
consistent performance gains.
With that said though, it's very clear that RV770 was all about
architectural efficiency and on that front, AMD has really achieved.
RV770 caught Nvidia by surprise and it wasn't until the company cut its
prices that it became competitive again -- the GTX 260 is an attractive
proposition, but it's still a little too expensive for my liking. It
needs to be on price parity with the 4870 if it's going to steal back
some market share from the big red rose in AMD's lineup./
*
*Cheers guys!
Tim Smalley
www.bit-tech.net