SiS Releases 0.13-micron Xabre600 GPU

EconolineCrush writes "NVIDIA may be struggling to bring the GeForce FX to market on a 0.13-micron manufacturing processes, but it looks like SiS has beat them to the punch. Tech Report has a review of the new Xaber600, which is the first mainstream GPU that I know of to be manufactured using 0.13-micron process technology. The Xabre600's performance isn't overly impressive, even when compared to a low-end Radeon 9000 Pro, but it's nice to see SiS one-upping the graphics giants when it comes to process technology."

Comments

Are there linux drivers

[cbcbcb]

Do SiS still support the DRI project?

Ummm

[Clue4All]

I'm really confused by this article.

NVIDIA may be struggling to bring the GeForce FX to market on a 0.13-mircon manufacturing processes, but it looks like SiS has beat them to the punch. Tech Report has a review of the new Xaber600, which is the first mainstream GPU that I know of to be manufactured using 0.13-micron process technology.

nVidia's GeForce FX is already in production.

The Xabre600's performance isn't overly impressive, even when compared to a low-end Radeon 9000 Pro, but it's nice to see SiS one-upping the graphics giants when it comes to process technology.

Okay, if it's not that great, and nVidia is already producing theirs, how exactly are they beating them to the punch? It's nice to see another article on the 0.13-micron process, but I really have no idea what your point is supposed to be.

Re:Ummm

[C_To]

Its stating that although the Nvidia GeForce FX is in production, we will most likely not see any version of the card avaliable to consumers until Mid-January to Feburary.

I agree, who cares about the process, but its nice to see an alternative video card that may have some performance for a decent price compared to ATI and Nvidia (who also make quality cards). Sounds like something OEM's might use on some machines for its price.

A matter of time

[GeckoFood]

It is just a matter of time if the bottleneck is in the drivers. It would be great to see SiS get seriously competitive at the top end of the GPU battle and give both nVidia and ATI something about which to worry. If it's in the chip instead, though, all the driver tweaks in the world will not help it catch up.

Quickly supplying Linux drivers is a good move on their part, too. Wait too long, and they will cut themselves out of an important market. Windows ain't the only game in town anymore...

Good luck to SiS!!

Re:A matter of time

[ceejayoz]

Quickly supplying Linux drivers is a good move on their part, too. Wait too long, and they will cut themselves out of an important market. Windows ain't the only game in town anymore...

Sorry, but Windows might as well be the only game in town, at least for graphics cards. What's the main market for graphics cards? Gamers. How many new games come out for Linux? Very few.

Re:Retro upgrades

[archeopterix]

In the same spirit as the transitioning of the underperforming Xabre chip to 0.13u, I would also like to announce that I am beginning work on a 0.13u port of the Riva128, ATI Rage Pro, and the timeless Trident ViRGE. These chips will still perform like 3 legged dogs, but the fact that they are on a 0.13u process seems to be newsworthy these days.

Actually, I'd buy and old underperforming chip in 0.13u technology if it lets me get rid of the noisy fan.

0.13 micron?

[Erpo]

Does this reduction in size really matter? I mean, it's great that graphics companies can use lower quantities of resources to feed consumer demand (the environment, remember?), but does this particular advance really matter? I'll get excited when price points for new high-end graphics cards get much lower, performance significantly exceeds the curve, or a switch is made to a _much_ smaller manufacturing process (e.g. two digit nanometers).

I guess it just has to do with how much you need to have a faster graphics card than all your friends?

Re:A new fabrication process = big whoop

[archeopterix]

Manufacturing processes change quite frequently. Although a .13 Micron process will mean that these companies will be able to yield more chips per wafer, the pricing model on high end graphics cards has remained static over the past few years.

What? I think that .13 micron isn't about more chips per wafer - in fact it yields probably less chips per wafer - the thinner your tracks are, the lower success rate. As far as I know it's all about power consumption and clock rate - the smaller your stuff, the less power needed and the faster it can run without overheating.

great technology, but what about results?

[qoncept]

Sega always had a knack for "beating competitors to the punch." Sega Master System, Genesis, Saturn, and Dreamcast were all the first 8-, 16-, 32- and 128-bit systems, respectively. What they all had in common was that when the competitor came out with their system a few months later, Sega's was never as good (from a technology standpoint, of course; I won't go in to what systems were best).

Only for bragging rights

[BillLeeLee]

If SiS is going to spend millions on the 0.13 micron fab processes, they should really also attempt to make something that can compete with Ati and Nvidia's new cards. As it stands, being able to pump out .13 micron chips seems only like it's for bragging rights, because this chip barely compares with a Radeon 9000, which (I think) is only .15 micron. But hey, maybe SiS really likes spending the money.

Missing the point/performance

[binaryDigit]

I think some people are missing the point of this. Some have said ".13u, big whoop, how does that help me? on such a slow *ss chip". Well the point is that SiS is not trying to compete with the big boys on the high not, that's not their schtick. They want to push motherboards, esp to oems, and this product allows them to offer "higher" end graphics to their customers. It won't be long before they shrink the puppy enough to integrate directly into their chipsets, thereby offering oems an attractive compromise between speed and price.

So in the end, the fact that they can "push the envelope" as far as their production process goes does bode well for the consumer. You just have to look at this product in the context for which it was intended.

More Manufacturers = Better for us all

[Soporific]

Maybe the benchmarks aren't that impressive, but I don't think that's the point. Having a third major manufacturer step up to give ATI and N'Vidia some competition can only be a good thing, if indeed in the future SiS starts making some high end cards. Hopefully it will prevent the others from sitting on their laurels like 3Dfx seemed to do when it introduced the VooDoo 5's and they flopped.

~S

Re:A new fabrication process = big whoop

[jonbrewer]

When the top-of-the-line graphics card costs half of what it does today (heck, say... $150, instead of $300, or even $400), THEN that's cause to celebrate new manufacturing processes.

Funny thing, I just purchased a new AOpen Xabre 400 that performs beautifully (with signed, WHQL drivers that XP doesn't complain about!) - and I paid $105.00. This is a 64MB card with 8x AGP. It also has DVI and SVGA out. This is top of the line, as far as mass market hardware goes.

I looked at the ATI and nVidia based cards and features, and the Xabre trounced them on price/performance. (caveat - I'm not in to FPS) The deciding factor was that it was the cheapest card with 1080*720 resolution DVI output, and OMFG do DVDs look good like this! :-)

Hmmm

[atari2600]

Where do i begin:

The dead horse must be turning in it's grave but do you really want to play games on linux? Sure i ran Soldier of FOrtune and it looked better than it did in Windows and Descent III and UT were awesome. But many linux users(including me) prefer Windows for gaming - why? Because i cannot play Tactical Ops on Linux/any other unix - simple reason - there is not much gaming software available for baby linux right now. I am not trolling but the point is i think SiS can forget Linux drivers and make their Windoze drivers better...alteast for now.

I doubt this card would give the ATI 9000 Pro much of a challenge going by the benchmarks in the article. It did give the Geforce4Mx card a run for its money but thats why the 9000 card from ATI entered the market and the ATI 9000 can be bought for 85$ (64MB version)...so unless this Xabre card costs somewhere around 40-50$, i dont see why someone would want this card as a gamer.

I like to play my games at 1024x768 and 16bit color and they usually run great on my Athlon 900 - what card do i have? nVidia Geforce2GTS with 32MB DDR - Even UT2003 ran great - given a choice, i, a budget conscious gamer would get a card somewhere near 80-100$, which is where the Geforce3 Titanium and the 9000Pro cards are right now. Leave the ti4600s and the 9700Pros to the really rich kids - getting a card faster than your friend's card(s) is a cliche - its how much you can shell out and how much you can extract from the little graphics card of yours. I still remember how my Alliance Promotion SVGA PCI card with 2MB VRAM kicked ass while my friend's AGP Trident 8mb sucked in most software rendering modes :). See the point?

It would be good for sis to bring out this card and price it low enough so they still make a profit - if not, well ATI and nVidia aren't stupid. Although they make a lot of money on their high-end cards, more cards are sold in the 70-100$ price range.

Re:I believe you are wrong

[Pii]

And to continue the point:

The .13 micron process uses less raw materials, which is a cost savings to the manufacturers.

The smaller die also results in a cooler running chip, which can result in a boon for performance.

The trouble, as archeopterix points out, is that this process requires a great deal of precision. Early yields will likely be prone to failures until the kinks are worked out. Once the line has been straightened out, the accountants will be pleased, as will the speed freaks.