ATI's Late Response to G70 - Radeon X1800, X1600 and X1300
by Derek Wilson on October 5, 2005 11:05 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Final Words
Today's launch would have been more spectacular had ATI been able to have parts available immediately. Of course, that doesn't mean that their parts aren't any good. As we can easily tell from the feature set, ATI has built some very competitive hardware. The performance numbers show that the X1000 series are quite capable of handling the demand of modern games, and scaling with AA and AF enabled are quite good as well.The one caveat will be pricing. The 7800 GTX is already available at much less than where the X1800 XT is slated to debut. Granted, the 7800 GTX fell from about $600 to where it is today, but the fact of the matter is that until ATI's new parts are in the market for a while and settle into their price points they won't be viable alternatives to NVIDIA's 6 and 7 series parts.
After market forces have their way with ATI and prices come out more or less on par with performance characteristics, the new X1000 lineup will have quite a bit of value, especially for those who wish to enable AA/AF all the time. While the X1800 XL can be competitive with the 7800 GT, it won't matter much if the street price remains at near the level of the 7800 GTX.
Yes, the X1800 XT is a very powerful card, but it won't be available for some time now. With its 512MB of onboard RAM, the X1800 XT scales especially well at high resolutions, but we would be very interested in seeing what a 512MB version of the 7800 GTX would be capable of doing. Maybe by the time the X1800 XT makes it to market we will have a 512MB 7800 GTX as well.
In the midrange space, the X1600 XT performs okay against the 6600GT, but it is priced nearer the 6800 GT which performs much better for the money. Again, testing the lower clocked or smaller RAM parts would give us a much better idea of the eventual value of the X1600 series of parts.
Until we test the extremely low end X1300 parts, we can't tell how competitive ATI will be in the budget space. It certainly is easier to make a card perform worse, but again the question is the price point ATI can afford to set for their parts.
As far as new features go, we are quite happy with the high quality anisotropic filtering offered by ATI and we hope to see NVIDIA follow suit in future products as well. As for ATI's Adaptive AA, we prefer NVIDIA's Transparency AA in both quality and performance. Unfortunately, Transparency AA is only available on NVIDIA's 7 series hardware while Adaptive AA is able to run on all recent ATI products.
In case we haven't made it quite clear, the bottom line is price. The X1600 and X1300 cards will have to sell for much less than they are currently listed in order to be at all useful. API support is on par, but as developers get time with hardware we will be very interested to see where the performance trend takes us. The features both parts offer are quite similar with the only major advantage in ATI's court with their angle independent AF mode. CrossFire won't be here for at least another month or two, but when it does we will certainly revisit the NVIDIA vs. ATI multi-GPU competition. The newer version of CrossFire looks to fix many of the problems we have with the current incarnation.
103 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
Hence, the non-existence of 7600 and 7200 (or whatever) cards from NVIDIA. But ATI needed to get SM3.0 into budget and mid-range cards - not because it's tremendously useful, but because they're losing the marketing campaign on that item.Phantronius - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
Wheres the fucking Battlefield 2 numbers?????Dudeeeeeee - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
What about testing this card with games we actually play? Good game...KayKay - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
I read most of the r520 reviews this morning and I decided to read anandtech's review, since i trust yours over most others. I was rather disappointed with the layout and choice of tests.All around the web, the result i gathered was that the x1800xt was definitely better than the 7800gtx in a number of areas and if i had read anandtech's review first, would have been totally misled.
I am an NVIDIA user probably for LIFE but this review didn't seem to do ATI justice
bob661 - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
Reviews aren't supposed to be favorable they're supposed to present facts so that WE the consumer can make informed purchase decisions. And right now, ATI doesn't present a good bang for the buck.KayKay - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
the review wasn't structured in a way to present a fair comparison of the cards is all im saying. look no further than some of the other websites that reviewed todays launchbob661 - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
It was easy for me. What are you looking for? The X1xxx's were compared to the 7xxx's. Are you looking for an ATI landslide or are you looking for a comparison?Chadder007 - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
I was hoping that the X1600 would perform better, but for the price 6600GT and X800GTO >>>> X1600 parts. Sad. :(Griswold - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
Probably the weakest review i've seen here at AT so far. The benches are more than just confusing. Some benches only show the XL, some only the XT and some both. Not good.DigitalFreak - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
Agreed. I'm not a stickler for perfect grammer, but the grammer & spelling quality of AT articles has gone down hill tremendously in the past year!Seems you guys have just been throwing stuff together at the last minute to try and make a deadline. Anand - you need to step in here and get these guys back on track. It's hurting both your and your sites reputations.