Ati ~ Amd?

B

Bona Fide

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
2,382
This thought just struck me while reading one of the [many] benchmarks that compare the X1K series to nVidia's 7 series.

ATI is reminding me more and more of AMD with each passing day. First off, the obvious. They are the underdog. No question about it. nVidia, like Intel, holds a considerable share of the graphics market. Not to mention they are, on the whole, a much LARGER company than ATI.

Also, ATI is heading in new directions. AMD stopped playing the gigahertz game with Intel and instead went to creating an onboard memory controller and more efficient design. That's just what ATI did here. Which is why, with less pixel pipelines, it can keep pace with the best nVidia has to offer. Some people may point out that ATI's cards are clocked much higher than nVidia's. Well, that is just a tribute to the efficiency and capacity of ATI's new memory controller, as well as their speed-binning process.

Does anyone else see this connection? Or am I just crazy...

I think I want to trade in my 7800GT for an X1800 XL. Think it'll happen? :D
 
ATI and nVidia are both dwarfed in the 3d accelerator market by Intel - both very similar in size in comparison. Not to mention that ATI pwnX0rs nVidia in the integrated market when directly compared.

IIRC., last I'd seen, Intel still "owned" the market, with ATI the next largest (at, like, 20% the market share of Intel), with nVidia trailing just behind ATI.
 
I can see your connection, but I've recently been thinking about ATI as Intel because of the very high clockspeeds their chips use to compete with the lower clocked nVidia chips.
 
Elias said:
I can see your connection, but I've recently been thinking about ATI as Intel because of the very high clockspeeds their chips use to compete with the lower clocked nVidia chips.
Click to expand...
Yes me too. I'm also thinking that ATi is like Intel because of the heat output of their chips, even though I couldn't prove which company's (ATi or nVidia) cores put out most heat.
 
If you want to compare ATi to anyone it would not be AMD. Instead it would be intel. ATi and Intel have had a long history together and infact ATi will be making alot of the entry Intel boards from now on.
 
I personally think as a company ATi is very similar to AMD however their architectures resemble Intel, but then I see the potential with the C1 and think AMD again ;)
 
Sentential said:
And C19 is better?
Click to expand...
Who buys Intel desktops (for gaming)?

Yes, I would rather have an Intel nVidia board than an ATI board with an ATI southbridge (with current problems).
 
wow i just love it when people do the whole OMFG ATi&AMD ARE LIKE MARRIED or NVIDIA&AMD ARE MEANT TO BE TOGETHER thing. its stupid really. people who love nvidia or ati always affiliate the gpu company, which they pledged their life to, with AMD, seeming that AMD is dominating the high end cpu market right now and growing exponentially. just stop, really.

no one cares that ATI and AMD both start with 'A' and have 3 letters, and no one cares that nvidia and AMD accomplish more in one clock. this isnt a goddamn soap opera and no company is magically going to have sex with another
 
Bona Fide said:
Not to mention they are, on the whole, a much LARGER company than ATI.
Click to expand...
Not really, and not even near the scale of Intel vs. ATI

Bona Fide said:
Also, ATI is heading in new directions.
Click to expand...
You mean like SM3.0, HDR, SLI....those are not very new.

Bona Fide said:
AMD stopped playing the gigahertz game with Intel and instead went to creating an onboard memory controller and more efficient design.
Click to expand...
Actually ATI is playing the megahertz game by using fewer pipes and a much higher clock speed.
 
Big Fat Duck said:
wow i just love it when people do the whole OMFG ATi&AMD ARE LIKE MARRIED or NVIDIA&AMD ARE MEANT TO BE TOGETHER thing. its stupid really. people who love nvidia or ati always affiliate the gpu company, which they pledged their life to, with AMD, seeming that AMD is dominating the high end cpu market right now and growing exponentially. just stop, really.

no one cares that ATI and AMD both start with 'A' and have 3 letters, and no one cares that nvidia and AMD accomplish more in one clock. this isnt a goddamn soap opera and no company is magically going to have sex with another
Click to expand...

Your point? I was trying to hold a civil discussion. :)
 
Big Fat Duck said:
wow i just love it when people do the whole OMFG ATi&AMD ARE LIKE MARRIED or NVIDIA&AMD ARE MEANT TO BE TOGETHER thing. its stupid really. people who love nvidia or ati always affiliate the gpu company, which they pledged their life to, with AMD, seeming that AMD is dominating the high end cpu market right now and growing exponentially. just stop, really.

no one cares that ATI and AMD both start with 'A' and have 3 letters, and no one cares that nvidia and AMD accomplish more in one clock. this isnt a goddamn soap opera and no company is magically going to have sex with another
Click to expand...

Everything this man said is the gospel truth. This thread has absolutely no point.
 
PRIME1 said:
You mean like SM3.0, HDR, SLI....those are not very new..
Click to expand...

How about programmable MC? FP16HDR with AA? A more useful VFT workaround known as R2VB...ATi certainly isn't lacking 'innovation'

Edit: Add AVIVO to that list
 
tornadotsunamilife said:
But they're both very different implementations...
Click to expand...

And their GPU's also vary in design, but the final output is very simmilar in 3D.
So is the output of AVIVO and Purevideo enhancements on ATI's X1x00 series and the NVIDIA 6x00 and 7x00 series 3D-cards...

Terra - But Purevieo was introduced over a year ago, AVIVO has just been released ;)
 
tornadotsunamilife said:
FP16HDR with AA?
Click to expand...
It isn't usable for new games. As I stated in the other thread, current drivers and performance with a single X1800XT on Far Cry (released March 2004) is poor (30-40fps @ 1280x1024).

It is about as usable as SM2.0 on FX cards when they released - performance just gets worse on new games.

That said, it is a great step forward and Crossfire may show it as being playable. But it isn't something to tout as well implemented (yet).
 
Despite never saying it was well implemented the performance is as good (if not better) than the original 6800's performance with HDR in Far Cry, also consider it's a beta patch and there are no WHQL drivers at the moment that officialy support the X1x00 series, we may see tweaks in performance before the official release of either software...
 
AVIVO is a response to Purevideo, sorry
Click to expand...
While it does have many PureVideo Elements it adds thing Pure Video doesnt have. The 10bit advancement for newer monitors is something PureVideo cannot do in Software.
 
Terra said:
AVIVO is a response to Purevideo, sorry ;)

Terra...
Click to expand...

other way around, ati has always had better (actually existing) hardware decoding. AVIVO isn't really anything... it's just giving a name to their new implementation...

Terra do you posess nvidia (NASDAQ : NVDA) stock ?
 
Bona Fide said:
This thought just struck me while reading one of the [many] benchmarks that compare the X1K series to nVidia's 7 series.

ATI is reminding me more and more of AMD with each passing day. First off, the obvious. They are the underdog. No question about it. nVidia, like Intel, holds a considerable share of the graphics market. Not to mention they are, on the whole, a much LARGER company than ATI.

Also, ATI is heading in new directions. AMD stopped playing the gigahertz game with Intel and instead went to creating an onboard memory controller and more efficient design. That's just what ATI did here. Which is why, with less pixel pipelines, it can keep pace with the best nVidia has to offer. Some people may point out that ATI's cards are clocked much higher than nVidia's. Well, that is just a tribute to the efficiency and capacity of ATI's new memory controller, as well as their speed-binning process.

Does anyone else see this connection? Or am I just crazy...

I think I want to trade in my 7800GT for an X1800 XL. Think it'll happen? :D
Click to expand...

Allright i think you are contradicting yourself here...

ATi has to increase the speed on its cards to keep up with NV geforce 7. this is a simillar situation where Intel has to increase their chip's GHz speed to keep up with more efficient AMD64 chips.

Also i believe NV and AMD have much stronger relationship than ATI and AMD.
 
swatX said:
ATi has to increase the speed on its cards to keep up with NV geforce 7. this is a simillar situation where Intel has to increase their chip's GHz speed to keep up with more efficient AMD64 chips
Click to expand...

Neither have to keep up with either, they're both just different solutions...
 
tornadotsunamilife said:
How about programmable MC? FP16HDR with AA? A more useful VFT workaround known as R2VB...ATi certainly isn't lacking 'innovation'

Edit: Add AVIVO to that list
Click to expand...
The programmable memory controller has done what so far? (except increased time demo scores on an unreleased card). This may be the one innovative thing ATI has done in the last 3 years but it’s still in beta.

FP16 HDR. So almost 2 years after NVIDIA has FP16 HDR they added AA not really an innovation.

VFT is the spec and it's used in the Xbox 360. Their workaround is probably slower and has yet to be proven or even used.

Minor updates to innovations that have been out for almost 2 years is not innovation it's more of a "minor upgrade"
 
PRIME1 said:
The programmable memory controller has done what so far? (except increased time demo scores on an unreleased card). This may be the one innovative thing ATI has done in the last 3 years but it’s still in beta.
Click to expand...

So increased X1800XL performance doesn't count? I'm sure the programmable MC won't be seen in next-gen cards, because it's clearly useless :rolleyes:

PRIME1 said:
FP16 HDR. So almost 2 years after NVIDIA has FP16 HDR they added AA not really an innovation.
Click to expand...

It was something that was really lacking from FP16HDR

PRIME1 said:
VFT is the spec and it's used in the Xbox 360. Their workaround is probably slower and has yet to be proven or even used.
Click to expand...

True it is unproven however what evidence have we of it working? Pacific fighters. What is the performance hit (percentage if you want) from a card that supports the feature (such as a 7800gtx)?
 
tornadotsunamilife said:
Neither have to keep up with either, they're both just different solutions...
Click to expand...


well true but in am just saying how ATI recent events are more simillar to Intel's move granted now that intel is moving away from " higher Ghz # = more performence".

personally i cant wait till R600 when the real fight begins with Geforce 9 maybe !?
 
swatX said:
well true but in am just saying how ATI recent events are more simillar to Intel's move granted now that intel is moving away from " higher Ghz # = more performence".

personally i cant wait till R600 when the real fight begins with Geforce 9 maybe !?
Click to expand...

Here's hoping they don't skip a generation and choose GeForce 8 :p
 
I see ATi as being more innovative than Nvidia this generation. Part of the reason why I went with an x1800xl over 7800gt.
 
kcthebrewer said:
Who buys Intel desktops (for gaming)?

Yes, I would rather have an Intel nVidia board than an ATI board with an ATI southbridge (with current problems).
Click to expand...


do we not remeber how badly nvidia sucked during the nforce 1 days... it was slow.. buggy and generaly a bad move, this is ati's first try at a chipset, its hard to get it right on the first try (hell pakard bell never got it right) not saying be kind and by there product , what im saying is that the next gen (if they release one) will have the lessons learned, and (most of) the bugs worked out.

thore
 
If anything the ati chipset with new uli southbridge is fantastic, generally better overclocks and with good performance. Just because nforce4 is so good everyone expects ati to get it right straight away
 
tornadotsunamilife said:
everyone expects ati to get it right straight away
Click to expand...
I don't 'expect' them to get it right straight away. However, they should develop their chipsets until they are stable, because the motherboard market is extremely competitive. There is no room for an unstable solution. Look at the Frag Box 2 review. There is absolutely no reason why anyone should buy an ATI chipset mobo (north and southbridge). There are too many other stable chipsets available. There is no one to blame but ATI that their chipset solution is not up to snuff.
 
you forgot ati owns a nice part of the mobile graphics cards behind intel's interGAYed.
 
Everyone knows the ATI vs NVIDIA feud will settle once the Voodoo 6 comes out. 3Dfx ftw :rolleyes: :D ;)
 
Clicky: January 25 2005 Market share figures, from Mercury research data posted at Xbit:

Overall: Intel's share isn't actually listed, but I'd bet it's over 40%.
ATI: 27%
NV: 18%

Discrete Desktop market (the one we care about, this is the category for stand alone graphics accelerator boards in desktops):
ATI: 51%
NV: ~45%

Discrete Notebook:
ATI: 69%
NV: 20-25%
 
Stereophile said:
I see ATi as being more innovative than Nvidia this generation. Part of the reason why I went with an x1800xl over 7800gt.
Click to expand...

innovative? care to explain ?
 
DougLite said:
Clicky: January 25 2005 Market share figures, from Mercury research data posted at Xbit:

Overall: Intel's share isn't actually listed, but I'd bet it's over 40%.
ATI: 27%
NV: 18%

Discrete Desktop market (the one we care about, this is the category for stand alone graphics accelerator boards in desktops):
ATI: 51%
NV: ~45%

Discrete Notebook:
ATI: 69%
NV: 20-25%
Click to expand...

Thats changed quite a bit from first quarter to 3rd quarter

http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2004/mft04110517.htm

This quarter's highlight was that NVIDIA recaptured the high-end desktop graphics processing units (GPUs) segment. According to Mercury Research's Third Quarter PC Graphics Report, its market share grew from 26% to 64%.
Click to expand...

stand-alone desktop segment, rival ATI Technologies (Nasdaq: ATYT) grew its share by 17%, and NVIDIA's share fell by 16%. This is by far the largest market and thus the most important battleground.
Click to expand...

Most of these sales are from OEMS (namely Dell) which they don't have anymore. And the 3 months of the gf7's are in the forth quarter. The x1800's won't show up till the first quarter of next fiscal year.

Meanwhile Intel has 45%+ of over all graphics solutions.
 
Elias said:
I can see your connection, but I've recently been thinking about ATI as Intel because of the very high clockspeeds their chips use to compete with the lower clocked nVidia chips.
Click to expand...

yup ditto, i think ATI is more like Intel since they are ramping up the clock speed while Nvidia has went the other way with more pipelines but lower clock speed and they perform the same, just like a 3200+ performs almost the same or better then a 3.2ghz p4
 
razor1 said:
Thats changed quite a bit from first quarter to 3rd quarter

http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2004/mft04110517.htm





Most of these sales are from OEMS (namely Dell) which they don't have anymore. And the 3 months of the gf7's are in the forth quarter. The x1800's won't show up till the first quarter of next fiscal year.

Meanwhile Intel has 45%+ of over all graphics solutions.
Click to expand...

If I recall correctly, Mercury's definition of High End was anything that had over 115Million (around there) transistors. This means ANY 6600 (LE/Vanilla/GT) counted towards that. While ATi's counterpart for a remainder of the year (X600, 9600's) did not. Thats a big chunk of the percentage. There was a thread over at Xbitlabs.com a while ago about it.

EDIT:

Xbitlabs said:
Mercury’s estimates on DX9 and DX9c accelerators differentiate value and performance by transistor count, with devices at and about 100 million transistors being considered as “performance”. Since enthusiasts and media typically consider pricing and performance as two main measurements of a products’ market positioning, Mercury’s estimations may be regarded as not precisely reflecting reality.
Click to expand...

From: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/20050502125621.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top