ATI Radeon Xpress 200: Performance, PCI Express & DX9 for Athlon 64
by Wesley Fink on November 8, 2004 6:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Final Words
Round 3 has been the most interesting round of the Athlon 64 chipset wars. VIA was first to demonstrate their PCI Express chipset, but it now appears they may be the last with retail product to the market. nVidia showed their nForce 4 PCIe Reference board just a few weeks ago and we are already expecting production samples from Tier 1 motherboard makers in the next week. ATI was last to announce a PCI Express chipset for Athlon 64, but OEM boards are already starting to ship from makers like MSI. That is not to say that Enthusiast boards based on the RX480 and high-end designs with the RS480 are shipping, as it will still be several weeks until these boards make their way to market.For their first effort at an AMD Athlon 64 chipset, we can only say we are beyond impressed with the ATI RX480/RS480 chipset. No matter how we compare the performance the ATI RX480 is competitive or a bit faster than the best Socket 939 boards we have tested at AnandTech. That in itself would be reason enough to suggest a long, hard look at the ATI RX480 chipset, but there's more. ATI also did their homework in this go round; delivering a board that will excite any enthusiast who gives it a whirl. nVidia got to their position of prominence in the AMD world with solid boards that catered to Enthusiasts. ATI appears to finally understand that pleasing the OEM market is not the same as exciting Enthusiasts. The ATI Bullhead is a monster overclocker with amazing performance, and ATI deserves huge praise for their efforts and their results with their first AMD chipset.
To competitive Athlon 64 performance and demonstrated overclocking abilities, we then add ATI's first DirectX 9 graphics. While the performance of the integrated graphics core can't even beat a X300 SE, ATI does stand alone in offering DX9 graphics compatibility on an integrated Athlon 64 platform. Compared to Intel's GMA 900, ATI's integrated graphics is a step (or two) ahead; add to that the exciting potential of Surround View with 3 or 4 monitors and the ATI RS480 chipset certainly looks like a worthwhile choice.
If we were to compare the very capable Athlon 64 solutions, our choice right now would be the new ATI RX480/RX480, but nVidia threw a significant wrench into the A64 with their simultaneous launch of SLI with nForce 4. Our previews have demonstrated that SLI is a significant boost for graphics performance. Combining two video cards is a solution that will definitely appeal to those aiming for top performance at one end of the spectrum and those seeking graphics upgradeability at the other end. For the rest of the market the ATI Radeon Express 200P and 200 will be a great choice. It is also worth noting that ATI specified that the x16 PCIe graphics slot can be programmed "to drive two devices". ATI shared plans to market their own SLI solution that they expect to launch in early 2005, so SLI will also likely be a choice with ATI in the near future.
We have no hesitation in recommending ATI Radeon Express as either a discrete or integrated solution for a top-line Athlon 64 system. The ATI will not disappoint in either stock performance, features, or overclocking capabilities that top the Athlon 64 pack. Our only concern at this point is that motherboard manufacturers in Taiwan are not accustomed to thinking of ATI for AMD chipsets. This means they may not even consider how really good ATI RX480/RS480 actually are. To them we say please take a closer look. The ATI RX480/RS480 are outstanding performers that definitely deserve a place on some top Enthusiast Athlon 64 motherboards.
Congratulations, ATI, you managed to pull it off! The last announcement of Round 3 of the Athlon 64 chipset wars may turn out to be the most significant introduction of all.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
45 Comments
View All Comments
Sahrin - Monday, November 8, 2004 - link
I'm really excited to see another performance player in the AMD chipset market. Ironically, despite the fact that Intel is considered to have the best quality chipsets, the AMD segment has the most players and the most options. This chipset looks very good to me, especially as an overclocker, but I'm kind of left hanging in the feature set, which traditionally has been the determinant in the A64 market. Sure, 6 SATA ports is nice...etc. etc. but where's my dual integrated GigE LAN? I will take a long hard look at this chipset if SB450 comes out in time, but I think I will likely be going nForce one more generation.SLIM - Monday, November 8, 2004 - link
#6, of course you use an FX with the best gfx card available, he's trying to highlight small differences between chipsets. If you want P4 vs A64 look at a recent cpu review.However one large set of differences were the specviewperf benches? Huge differences when using ati/ati (some good and some bad) but no comments as to wtf is going on. Are those differences related to DX vs opengl, other driver issues, anybody know??
ipoh - Monday, November 8, 2004 - link
Onboard graphics use to be not good but changed since ATi comes out with RS350...and with this RS480 DX9 VGA will be definitely goodCurrently using my RS350 playing Doom3 and still looks good :)
I will spend my money for more HDD :)
Ivo - Monday, November 8, 2004 - link
With DX9 included, the integrated graphics (IG) of RS480 is good. First of all, with guaranteed future OS compatibility, it's very good for the OEM - for both business machines and home-office PCs. Secondly, as stated it the review, it is good enough for high-end 2D users because of the Surround View option. Third, it is a reasonable option for gamers too, as it could serve in emergency cases, when your high-end overclocked graphic card is tired ;-(The IG could be even more interesting for occasional gamers and even business users if, in a thinkable upcoming chipset, the IG is involved in a SLI scheme with one graphic card. In that case the IG will add it's modest 10% to 20% to the overall gaming performance (small, but from heart). This 10%-20% could be interesting for the real gamers too, if the IG is involved in a triple SLI scheme with two additional graphic cards.
My questions to this great article are:
1. What about the Cool 'N Quiet operation - does it work properly on the reference board with all (DIMM etc.) configurations used?
2. What is ATI suggesting about the SidePort - why it is limited to 32 bit and 16MB only?
byvis - Monday, November 8, 2004 - link
It's very impressive. But I have one minor question about the benchmarking. Why didn't you test Nforce4 + X800XT in Winstone and other benchmarks? I see, that you DID test RX480 + GF6800U and RX480 + X800XT. Maybe the margins are very small, but I'd like to see them, I think other people would like that too.deathwalker - Monday, November 8, 2004 - link
ATI might be right in the thick of it based on performance..however...from a marketing standpoint I think they will have a tough road to plow.bearxor - Monday, November 8, 2004 - link
SoldJalf - Monday, November 8, 2004 - link
Onboard graphics makes perfect sense for non-gamers.If they can cram in something that works for normal desktop use, *and* can claim to support DirectX 9 as well, then it's a pretty good deal. It'll serve your needs under normal use, and it'll at least be able to run games, even if they might get an unplayable framerate.
DrDisconnect - Monday, November 8, 2004 - link
I'm surprised that any of you are wondering why they are producing an integrated graphics versio. Haven't you taken a walk through any of the computer superstores lately? Entry level machines from HP etc. are using integrated graphics to hold prices down yet allow users to beef up their machines when they ahve some coin later on.ranger203 - Monday, November 8, 2004 - link
-1st of all, why does anandtech keep benchmarking AMD FX chips, sure they are the fastest hands down, but none of us are buying they. I.e. they are comparing apples to oranges, (FX vs. P4). They need to bench regular A64s!!!!-2nd, Onboard video still really sucks for gaming, but atleast they are making an effort, they should relize that $30 gaming cards are better quality than their onboard video and stop integrating it into their full size atx boards!!! Unless this was just a "show" board of ati's capability, then i could understand....