Jump to content

Talk:R600 (ASIC)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sat84 (talk | contribs) at 06:51, 26 July 2007 (→name on the article). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

THE ARTICLE'S NAME IS GOING TO REMAIN THE R600 SERIES, IT IS NOT GOING TO BE NAMED HD 2900 PLease Remember this, and remember to post new comments on the bottom. Thanks The Walkin Dude 13:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

cleanup-rewrite outline

I think this thing is in chaos, mostly I fouund it hard to edit as they are in bullet points, and as most of you can see, the article is 35 kilobytes long, therefore a complete cleanup and rewrite is needed to improve the article. I think the below is a list of improvements to this article, they are:-

  1. Rewrite according to the style in Radeon R520 OR
  2. at least rewrite the bullet points to paragraphs AND
  3. remove any outdated information about R600, such as the old architecture highlight AND
  4. remove any unreferenced claims/rumours AND
  5. replace the list in "possible naming and lineup" section to a simple table AND
  6. for each of the variant, use a simple paragraph to introduce the chipsets, including the video RAM support and the UVD/AVIVO, etc.
 -It would be better just to wait for NDA's to expire and true information on the R600 to appear. There's too much misinformation and rumors flying around right now to rewrite the article.

The final thing should look like this:

Article title: Radeon R600

TOC:

  1. Developement
    1. The start of the project
    2. The expected release date
    3. The delays with reasons -> include the respin and shrinks from 80 nm to 65 nm, and official "Alignment of visions"
    4. The final release date as of today
  2. Lineup
    1. X2300 (RV610)
    2. X2600 (RV630)
    3. X2900 (R600)
  3. Chipset table/Table of models
  4. Future releases/successors
    1. Rev. A15
    2. R680/R700
  5. References
    1. For <ref></ref>, either <references /> OR {{reflist|2}}
  6. See also (Interwiki links)
  7. External Links

Please comment for any mistakes/additional ideas below, so that I can start the rewrite soon, thanks. --202.71.240.18 11:16, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

backup stuff

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=362&Itemid=1 R600 is as loud as X1950 XTX --202.71.240.18 07:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The DailyTech article

So far only the DailyTech article mentions that R600 will have 320 stream processors (the high end card), but this is not confirmed by other news outlets.--Ghaib 13:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The same article states it's now Radeon HD. Should we move the wiki to the new name or just leave it Radeon R600?--Gamer007 01:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should keep it like Radeon R600, at least until AMD's launch party later this month, where everything will be revealed (supposedly). --Ghaib 13:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've set up Radeon HD to redirect here for now; we can always swap the pages round if we need to. It might not be necessary however, as the latest rumour seems to be that while the R600 and RV630 will be called Radeon HD2900 and Radeon HD2600 respectively, the RV610 might just be called the Radeon 2300, as it can't output 1080i/p. --DaveJB 16:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Could the article be stating 320 instead of 80 four-way SIMD stream processors? Is it really 320 four-way stream processors?--67.187.220.208 01:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The high-end R600 has 320 Stream Processors running at 650 Mhz, while Nvidia's GeForce_8800GTX has 128 Stream Processors running at 1350 Mhz.--Ghaib 17:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ATI Radeon HD 2900XT

the r600 was renamed the ATI Radeon HD 2900XT, can someone plz change the title? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eric C (talk • contribs) 01:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

AMD is running quite a weird PR campaign, or lack of the same. They only revealed the name of the high end card, R600, or 2900XT, you can't change the article title since it covers all the R6xx series.--Ghaib 20:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then Rename it the Radeon HD2K or HD2000 series, because there is R6xx and RV6xx in the series, so R600 is inaccurate and keeping it seems to be a pride issue at this point now that the cards are announced and launched with the Radeon HD 2000 series name, as noted in the press release contained within the wiki itself http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543~117414,00.html. God Schmod, I want my Monkey-Man !! 09:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note on the Fudzilla.com articles

The R600 page cites Fudzilla quite a few times. Please not that the site (Fudzilla) never cites or reveals any sources, so it can only be taken as specualtion, at best. --Ghaib 20:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, same as citing The Inquirer and other sources, as they do not disclose any "named" sources either, so remove all "unnamed" citations, okay? BTW, I must point out something that without all that "anon" sources report from every single website reporting the R600, including the Chinese sites and vr-zone and the'INQ and FudZilla, they all did not disclose any sources, and that the so called "secret" source is either an AMD/ATI employee or signed NDA. And thus, everything on the R600 page is pure speculation and yes, they are not trustworthy, and thus the best way is to remove everything that is speculation according to the definition you said, as WP:NOT, wiki is not a crystal ball, but that leaves the only intro line as "The Radeon R600 is ATI's unannounced DirectX 10 line of graphics cards which is due the second quarter of 2007. Speculations and rumours are floating all over the web." and then the only true named sources, such as prelimilary benchmarks from websites such as DailyTech or TG Daily and AnandTech (show as examples only, I know they do not have those cards for benchmarks) as they have "named" their sources. But it is also true that those "speculations" eventually came true, as the UVD, and the core/memory clock speeds, which the citations are mostly made to the web first from the two webs, The Inquirer or FudZilla, a website by Fuad Abazovic - formerly one of The Inquirer writer for graphics section. So yes, remove all The Inquirer and Fudzilla citations and infos and leave a clean page. --202.40.137.201 02:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
done on removing all "unnamed" sources. This is a clean page.--202.40.137.201 03:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2900 XTX?

From the article in the confirmed details section...

"The only known variants for performance segment was the Radeon HD 2900 XT with GDDR3 memory and the Radeon HD 2900 XT with GDDR4 memory as the R600 featured support for both GDDR3 and GDDR4 memory interface, with the mainstream and value segment products being inadequate to be compiled."

I was going to change the GDDR4 version of the XT to the XTX because I'm fairly sure thats what it was called but I'm guessing you have left it like that due to lack of sources. The daily tech article calls it an XTX but has anyone got anymore info/sources on this?--Sat84 15:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply] 


- More info -

The "Radeon HD 2900 XTX" tested in the daily tech isn't in fact what it claims to be. It's an early sample of the "Radeon HD 2900 XT 1024 GDDR4", a product that probably won't see the day light since it's cost/performance ration dosen't makes any sence.

The current "Radeon 2000" series of graphics processing units coupled with 1024 megabytes of GDDR4 planned is the "Radeon HD 2950 XTX", based on 65nm technology, this chip is supposed to deliver 20% more overall perfomance over the XT card and will compete directly with the 8800 Ultra.

So please, make the proper corrections. 

- Me again -

Sorry ATI, I didn't mean to blast you disinformation strategy ;). I'll leave the "XTX" brand name there and stop telling the thruth. As Nvidia needs to think that the sample of 1024 they have in hand is the actual "XTX" version. OK, OK sorry my fault...

Uh got any sources for that claim? Whether you are right or not the confirmed details still has the GDDR4 version as an XTX but in the chipset table as an XT --Sat84 13:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing is confirmed before the 14th, link this page as the source ;) lol

Make changes after May 14, the "confirmed" (paper) launch for R600, period.

Evil took on the lock on radar feature.

HD 2600 and HD 2400 series

The mid-range and entry-level series will arrive in late June according to the AMD/ATI press release: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543~117414,00.html --Gemini2525 06:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

name on the article

shouldnt the name be changed from radeon r600 to radeon hd2000 series?

I don't think so because the radeon articles are all named by their codenames but we could begin formatting it like Radeon R520 when we have some more info on the midrange etc.ATM we have the features just referring to the 2900XT and not the architecture in general--Sat84 08:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Time to rename it to the Radeon HD2K or HD2000 series. R600 article should not contain RV6xx series information if we're going to get picky. Official press release for the series was HD2000 series, the article should reflect that name. God Schmod, I want my Monkey-Man !! 09:32, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but all previous ATI card line articles are named by the codename of the release GPU eg Radeon R520, Radeon R420. Not sure why but probably because of the fact that previous architecture chips were marketed under new architecture brands eg X600 cards. So if u wanted to change it to HD radeon whatever it is then we would have to include the mobility radeons which are DX9 and maybe change the older articles.--Sat84 06:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Custom filter AA and image quality

Reviews and image comparisons (i.e. the one on [H]ardOCP) all point out the effect CFAA has on image quality. The act of using samples from adjacent pixels has a detrimental effect on clarity, resulting in a loss of finer details. This also impacts textures, resulting in an overall blurred scene. I think this needs mentioning, and there are many sites to reference from. -Skorpus McGee 09:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yet some reviews like the TheTechReport prefers CFAA in some situations. Content should describe the methods, not include people's perceptions of the results. [H] is far from a dispassionate source anymore after Kyle's rumour mongering prior to the R600's launch. If you were to include [H]'s comment on CFAA, then you'd have to include their comments on CSAA poorer quality as well "ATI’s 8X MSAA mode is superior to NVIDIA’s 8X CSAA mode, but once you set the level to 8xQ which is NVIDIA’s 8X MSAA mode the image quality is similar." http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM0MSw1LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==. Technical descriptions of the methods are best without commenting on perception. God Schmod, I want my Monkey-Man !! 09:43, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:R600_(ASIC)&oldid=147173472"