Gibbo is getting an R600!!

easyrider · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:21

Tom|Nbk said:
Exactly the last minute delay really has helped them turn things around for the better, and everyone can now see why they did it.

I'm just waiting now for the actual results.

Will make a refeshing change having a ATI card.

Last one I had was a 9800 pro

That will shut up all your FB wise cracks

pegasus1 · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:23

Tom|Nbk said:
Everything said so far looks like ATi have a winner, the card has been confirmed to retail at $399, 399.00 USD = 201.230 GBP , then add 17.5% to the Gordon Brown fund = 236.44, then add various other taxes approximate £30? Gibbo would know more im sure , the card should retail for around £260-280 with the cheapest GTS (640) being around £260, and the XT beating both the GTS by a big margin and the GTX by a small margin.

Im sure they will sell them for as much money as they can, why sell it for GTS prices when they can sell it for GTX prices an sell as many as they can produce. people on here will pay GTX prices as they have stated, for the same performance but better drivers. ATI have spent a fair few $'s producing this card so im sure they want a big fat profit.

fornowagain · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:24

JAKUS said:
only optical links which You say are bandwidth limited ?

SPDIF is limited to 2ch PCM or multichannel DD/DTS compressed. HDMI has a much greater bandwidth up to 8 ch's uncompressed audio.

This link describes how I understood the R600 audio/video sync. More than a passthrough, but certainly not standard audio functions.

http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=20005

Furthermore, Bergman gave details about the HDMI digital output interface that is supported by the R600. AMD has chosen to integrate an HD-Audio controller into the GPU, and not into the south bridge chipset as rival Nvidia has announced so far. The essential HDCP encryption keys for reproduction of HD commercial video titles are stored in to the GPU, allowing both HD audio and video signal to be driven to the HDMI output, after the essential synchronization. Note that video and audio signals will be merged only when the HDMI interface is in use.

hohum · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:24

Tom|Nbk said:
Everything said so far looks like ATi have a winner, the card has been confirmed to retail at $399, 399.00 USD = 201.230 GBP , then add 17.5% to the Gordon Brown fund = 236.44, then add various other taxes approximate £30? Gibbo would know more im sure , the card should retail for around £260-280 with the cheapest GTS (640) being around £260, and the XT beating both the GTS by a big margin and the GTX by a small margin. ATi have a true winner for the price/perf side considering the GTX is still fairly close to 400. Im really looking forward to this, I have put £300 as side as I know for a fact the XT won't surpass that

Not so sure on that... prices in the UK are usually hiked aren't they. Sony's PS3 = $599, which equates to about 302GBP exc VAT, yet we are expected to pay £425. Vista Ultimate = $369 ish, which is £186 exc VAT, we pay over £300... etc, etc, etc.

Besides, how do you know for a fact it won't surpass that price?

pegasus1 · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:27

easyrider said:
I'm just waiting now for the actual results.

Will make a refeshing change having a ATI card.

Last one I had was a 9800 pro

That will shut up all your FB wise cracks

Still running one in my lads PC with a 2500 Barton, soon to be replaced by my 'old' 3700SD and 7800gtx.
I wonder if the R600 will be as revolutionary as the 9700 pro.

Vogon · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:28

I suspect they will retail for £275-£300 inc vat, which means I will get one as soon as available, then look to sell it for the XTX when thats out ... or maybe just buy another and Xfire it

If its anymore then £300 inc vat, then I will probably wait for the XTX to be released.

Tom|Nbk · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:32

hohum said:
Not so sure on that... prices in the UK are usually hiked aren't they. Sony's PS3 = $599, which equates to about 302GBP exc VAT, yet we are expected to pay £425. Vista Ultimate = $369 ish, which is £186 exc VAT, we pay over £300... etc, etc, etc.

Besides, how do you know for a fact it won't surpass that price?

It's already been said it will be GTS price and confirmed, prices are hiked but i included all the "hiked" price step ups in a post above.

Jakus · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:54

Vogon said:
Are you also saying that we need new amps ??

Well that's what it's looking like to Me ! Unless regular 5.1 AC3 tracks are available and can be played as an alternative to the lossless HD Audio

I am not fully up to speed HDDVD and Blu-Ray but I believe all the planed protection is not in place yet, But like You said this is not really on topic

fornowagain · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:58

JAKUS said:
Well that's what it's looking like to Me ! Unless regular 5.1 AC3 tracks are available and can be played as an alternative to the lossless HD Audio

Don't worry it will down mix for older legacy amps. IIRC the DTS-HD version has a core channel with extensions, so older decoders can at least be used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_TrueHD
http://www.dts.com/dts-hd/better-sound-today-perfect-sound-tomorrow.php

All HD DVD players can transcode the TrueHD bitstream into a different format (such as DTS), providing a legacy AV receiver a high-quality approximation of the original TrueHD audio over the familiar SPDIF/toslink cable.

All DTS-HD encoded content contains the original DTS 1.5 Mbps core. When played back through your existing DTS capable system, the DTS-HD extension is simply "ignored" and the DTS Core is recognized and decoded.

Just looks like the latest/greatest way to get more money out of you. Doubt my aging hearing can tell the difference.

I was reading this blog awhile ago, explains a lot.

http://whatsonhdtv.blogspot.com/2006/07/hd-dvd-vs-blu-ray-pt-iv.html

Jakus · 14 Apr 2007 at 19:02

fornowagain said:
Don't worry it will down mix for older legacy amps.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_TrueHD

Just looks like the latest/greatest way to get more money out of you.

Thanks for that

Tom|Nbk · 14 Apr 2007 at 19:05

pegasus1 said:
Im sure they will sell them for as much money as they can, why sell it for GTS prices when they can sell it for GTX prices an sell as many as they can produce. people on here will pay GTX prices as they have stated, for the same performance but better drivers. ATI have spent a fair few $'s producing this card so im sure they want a big fat profit.

Because why sell it for GTX price when they can sell 2x the amounts with GTS price and make a whole lot more profit, you do the math's its not that hard to work out :rolleyes:

LoadsaMoney · 14 Apr 2007 at 19:10

Can't sell it at GTX prices, would be a rip off then as its got 256mb less Ram.

Tom|Nbk · 14 Apr 2007 at 19:39

LoadsaMoney said:
Can't sell it at GTX prices, would be a rip off then as its got 256mb less Ram.

And this, it just won't happen. The fact it has less ram than the GTX also means they can sell it for the price of the GTS

LoadsaMoney · 14 Apr 2007 at 19:42

^What he said.

ihatelag · 14 Apr 2007 at 20:18

LoadsaMoney said:
Can't sell it at GTX prices, would be a rip off then as its got 256mb less Ram.

But its faster, no?

jaykay · 14 Apr 2007 at 20:20

ihatelag said:
But its faster, no?

what u mean no?
know one knows if its faster but im guessing it is

Tom|Nbk · 14 Apr 2007 at 20:20

ihatelag said:
But its faster, no?

Yes but when it comes to card prices the amount of RAM is the MASSIVE price factor

Vogon · 14 Apr 2007 at 20:43

Yes and Vram isn't the be all and end all ... as the leaked summaries hint.
It also backs up my statement, that there isn't anything that uses massivley more than 512mb vram ATM, not to make any noticeable difference in FPS at least ... on top of that I think due to ATi implementation, their memory works more efficiently than nvidia's.

I dont think the XT is massivley faster, but if it gives the same performance for less cash, with a LOT more regular driver updates, it can only be a winner, late or not

Gashman · 14 Apr 2007 at 20:52

jaykay said:
what u mean no?
know one knows if its faster but im guessing it is

not really true, check out the thread about gibbo and his R600 test, some dude said how good is it on a scale of 1 - 10, 5 being 8800GTX territory, he said 5/6, so that suggests his 3D mark scores and such showed it as little faster than the GTX, for a large amount less money, can't go wrong really

easyrider · 14 Apr 2007 at 21:01

Gashman said:
not really true, check out the thread about gibbo and his R600 test, some dude said how good is it on a scale of 1 - 10, 5 being 8800GTX territory, he said 5/6, so that suggests his 3D mark scores and such showed it as little faster than the GTX, for a large amount less money, can't go wrong really

Its all speculation.

I think it will be similar in peformance TBH