Slashdot Mirror
ATI's Athlon 64 Chipset with Integrated Graphics
EconolineCrush writes "ATI has released the first Athlon 64 chipset with DirectX 9-class integrated graphics and PCI Express. The Tech Report has an in-depth review of the Radeon Xpress 200 that highlights the chipset's impressive performance and surprisingly competent integrated graphics. It looks like the Radeon Xpress 200 could be the missing link that helps AMD crack Intel's dominance of the consumer and corporate desktop markets."
I've been waiting for some time for this. I hope I'll be able to use this with FreeBSD without resorting to half-assed proprietary drivers (like the nforce case) and getting a decent 2D image quality (something nvidia really sucks at.)
ATI makes video cards. The average office has no need of a high end video platform for their desktops. This is going to appeal to geeks that make their own machine and finally have an excuse to go 64-bit.
It looks like the Radeon Xpress 200 could be the missing link that helps AMD crack Intel's dominance of the consumer and corporate desktop markets
No, what would crack intel's dominance would be Dell carrying AMD-based computers, which Dell has refused to do. AMD has the superior product in the Athlon 64 and its just a matter of getting IT managers to put faith in AMD and not go with Dell to buy their next big purchase.
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
It looks like the Radeon Xpress 200 could be the missing link that helps AMD crack Intel's dominance of the consumer and corporate desktop markets.
First off, AMD already has cracked Intel's dominace in the consumer and corporate markets.
Secondly, it's no "missing link", it's just another chipset. Like nForce. Only from ATI.
I guess everything posted to slashdot has to be about taking down the big bad (microsoft, intel, whoever else is the bad guy ATM).
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
I don't think that's the missing link. The missing link are the IT decision makers sitting around in their own electronic kingdom, who are the missing link(s). I've dealt with a number of them and almost all of them pick Intel above AMD, quoting obsolete (if they even were correct!) reasons (number one is stability, and secondly compability).
The only way I think this will change is by having the Big Guys pushing AMD, and have just as many AMD servers as Intel, then you can at least pin AMD's credibility on IBM et cetera.
If ATI puts out Linux MB drivers for this, I hope they're better than their graphics card drivers, but I don't hold out much hope.
NVIDIA has done an excellent job on Linux drivers for their products, so it CAN be done.
Sure, it already has.
Look at the XBox, PS2 or GameCube. No AGP or PCI-E ports, no need to upgrade every 6 months.
Ever notice that EB Games has aisles and aisles of PS2, XBox and GCN titles, but only about 4 different PC titles stuck on a little shelf off in the corner?
As for the PC market, I don't think so. Games have to push the "cutting edge", and the video card you buy today is obsolete six months later.
My Radeon 9800 is virtually unsupported at this point, with all the driver fixes and enhancements aimed at their latest chipset.
I'd sure hate to have to pitch the entire motherboard every time a new game comes out.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
AMD needs to make their own mobos and chipsets like Intel does.
Manager types like to see the same logo on everything, and frankly in my experience, all-intel systems have been the most stable, as in not being prone to crazy hardware incompatibilities.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
... is ATI finally coming with decent Linux drivers?
I mean -- my first thought was that this could be in my next system -- but then I remembered that ATI Linux driver support is much behind NVidia. As everybody seems to be buying AMD64 systems to run 64-bit Linux, there is hope that this might change?
Btw, the article seems to be 100% about windows software. Does anyone have any Linux experience with this chipset/system?
Auferre trucidare rapere falsis nominibus imperium, atque ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
I agree with you on one point - the motherboard situation was horrible at first... and still is if you buy a motherboard with a VIA chipset on it. Then again, I had the exact same problem with Intel based boards using VIA chipets. Just google for "via 686b" and you'll be bombarded with horror stories and "bios fixes" to get around that awful south bridge.
I do however disagree with you on the performance ratings. Almost every time AMD rates a chip, it outperforms the Intel counterpart, depending on benchmark ofcourse. I'd like to see some evidence of where you say their PR ratings didn't live up to expectations. I can't think of any examples right now where they didn't. I can think of the first Athlon XP chips hitting the market with these ratings, and how the 1800+ crushed the Pentium 4 1.8 GHZ. I also know that my XP 2500+ dominates a P4 2.4 ghz - but that's where things get messy. For starters, the P4 2.4 came in many different flavors, some with a 533 FSB while others have 800. So, the 2.4 P4 can and does beat the Athlon XP 2500+ in some situations. I don't think AMD has misled anyone though, their processors are either right on par with Intel's, or even ahead in some cases. It all just depends on how you bench them, and what steppings, drivers, etc you use.
AMD bashers really don't have a leg to stand on. It's been shown since the early days of the Athlon Thunderbird that the chips are reliable - and I have yet to hear about AMD refusing to recall chips that wouldn't do floating point operations properly ala Intel.
VIA was *the* chipset for gamers before the nForce started adding features and improving speed. As long as someone bothers to use something other than the first revision drivers, they've been solid in all the six years I've been building systems with them. (In fact, the latest system uses an nForce chipset, and it displaying odd 'input slow-mo' behavior under heavy load, something which never happened with VIA-based systems I built.)
The problems with instability often come from incompetent people who think they know how to put a computer together from parts pulled from dumpsters or low-sellers on pricewatch after eating chocolate cake with their fingers...
A separate high-end graphics card offloads far more of the graphics drawing functions for very complex 3-D graphics in both OpenGL and DirectX operations than onboard graphics, which means less CPU cycles needed for complex graphics operations.
Even ATI's new chipset for the Athlon64 CPU won't process graphics as fast as ATI's higher-end graphics cards, that's to be sure.
What's the matter with everybody nowadays? The Radeon xPress launch is just a regular product launch, not a friggin "missing link". Pray explain which "paradigm" has "shifted" or which gestalt has been redefined. I can look the other way when marketing suits come up with this kind of hyperbolic garbage, but /.? No way, man.
I'm ripping my hair out and wishing it was nvidia because of ATI's atrocious lack of linux support.
"He's a real midnight golfer"
Eh, when did AMD processors not perform up to their numbers? The last ones I remember were the 200 and 233 MX chips, now long lost in history. Yes, there were some problems with chipsets, but that is history as well - my VIA based motherboards have been performing pretty well since some initial USB problems at the very start, thank you. I've got three running (1400, 2400XP and Via EPIA) right now.
:)
The best thing speaking for Intel now is just their name and their chipsets. In the desktop and maybe server processor branche their is little to gain for them:
- more expensive CPU's
- more heat (thus more noise)
- less power
- less headroom
- more memory bandwith needed (expensive memory)
On the chipset side though:
- PCI-X
- Well performing GB ethernet
- Integrated (well performing) S-ATA (RAID)
- Their new onboard sound system coming up
- BX form factor
So I think that AMD can make a bit of a difference by providing a nice cheap all-round solution which packs some/all of these features.
When the chipset advantage of Intel removed they've got little left. Unless they come up with something smart, e.g. from their mobile processors.
I wouldn't want to see either Intel or AMD disappear from the scene just yet. Lets hope they will get out of this mess. When the market is 50/50 or so
While it may outperform Intel's integrated graphics solution, it is outperformed by even the cheapest discreet cards. Anandtech's review shows it outperformed by ATI's own x300 SE, which is the cheapest pci-express card out there.However, going this route probably will be quite a bit cheaper. The x300 SE is selling for $66 on newegg, while mobos with integrated graphics don't seem to sell for too much of a premium over those without, so this could be good for buisness buyers who use apps that mildly push graphics chips. However, this is not news for gamers, as many games will be unplayable on the integrated graphics, with low framerates and poor rendering quality compared to what most gamers are used to.
ATI doesn't pay much attention to the minority. They made promisses of future improvements in the dev of the drivers but it will take a while.
As for their 200 xpress chipset, I'l wait to see a few more reviews (not Toms Gayware) to be sure this chipset is what these benchmarks show.
The Dell rep that I talked to (definitely not a sales driod) told me that Dell has regular meetings with AMD. Dell hasn't picked up AMD stuff yet simply because they can't really produce the quantity. Dell is all about quantity not quality, and headed more and more that direction everyday. AMD simply can't pump out the quantity of chips that Intel can and that's why Dell hasn't picked up AMD yet.
Aren't we forgetting somthing here?
NVidia's nForce chipset came out quite a long time ago and had a very good integrated AGP video card in the northbridge (ie, good enough for high-end gaming).
It didnt sway Intel users to change to AMD in any way.
ATI's new chipset will be no different.
The nforce2 IGP had limitations. Most of the integrated graphic cards could not run when the FSB was 400mhz, either causing malfunctions or dead mainboards. I can't remember if they rectified the issue though.