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."

Comments

I wonder

[Gonzman2000]

I wonder if On-Board video will ever replace the need for PCI-E and AGP for gamers. On-board audio now is good enough for most gamers, and we have on-board LAN, etc.

Re:I wonder

[billysielu]

Soon everything will be onboard, didn't you ever see Star Trek ?

Re:I wonder

[stratjakt]

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 Games have to push the "cutting edge", and the video card you buy today is obsolete six months later.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.

Re:I wonder

[drinkypoo]

The last best hope for game consoles that can be used for some basic computer functions is the future of the Xbox. If we can just convince them that being essentially a PC isn't a death sentence if you can prove you have enough developers (developers developers developers developers!) on board, then maybe we can get a system that will allow us to have mice and keyboards and plug in arbitrary HID-compatible input device in general. People will still buy the official controllers like mad anyway, I hate to say it but I have an old microsoft force feedback wheel and it's pretty good.

If the PS2 had more memory, I could have gotten excited about the Linux kit... but it didn't. The Xbox is the first console system worth being a computer, with the possible exception of the Gamecube, which Nintendo has locked up tighter than the first day singing in the choir. I know you can get in through the network (what a dirty little console) but that doesn't do it for me. Then again, I haven't gotten the necessary software for that yet, so I'm not sure just how well it would work anyway.

Anyway I want a game console that I can use as a desktop, but with good graphics. Basically I'd like to put it on a KVM with my PC on my 21" VGA monitor and have it look good. From what I understand, it actually will look okay with a VGA box, so I'm thinking about that one too. It has to also be able to function as a basic computer, browse the web with mozilla (the web is damned annoying without it) and play media.

The future of video is digital, so at least we should all be able to hook our big screens up to our game consoles and get high-quality graphics in short order. I'd really like to get away from using a PC for tasks for which it's not required, though, and just do it all on the game console. If the Xbox had higher resolution I could be happy doing it now... if only I could use a mouse and keyboard playing halo. Is that little kb/mouse adapter any good?

PC Perspective has also done an article on it.

[pacmanfan]

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=88&type=exper t

Hos is this going to crack anything?

[Tim_F]

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.

Not really...

[doormat]

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.

Re:Not really...

[rpozz]

Dell's motherboards (last time I looked) have Intel chipsets on them. They're probably getting both the chipset and the CPU off Intel for an insanely low price. To compete, maybe AMD needs to start producing their own motherboard chipsets too.

Re:Not really...

[ottffssent]

That hasn't worked in the past. AMD's design talent is better spent on CPUs, and the only reason they used to design chipsets was because nobody else would. Back when AMD was making pin-compatible chips, they didn't need chipsets since they used whatever Intel was making. Then along came the Athlon, and AMD needed a chipset. So they made one, and then stopped as soon as Via and SiS started making their (better; cheaper) own. Then came the Athlon MP, and AMD again released chipsets, first the 760MP and then the 760MPX. Both fairly low-performance, low-feature chipsets designed to get some market adoption and convince the real chipset designers it was worth their time.

These days, everybody knows that 1) Athlons rock, and 2) they'll sell. If AMD now produces their own chipsets, they're just competing with their current chipset partners, and diverting talent from CPU design (and flash, and the other things AMD does). Between ATi, NV, SiS, and Via, there's plenty of competition for the Athlon segment and with Intel's recent return to high-quality chipset manufacture, there's competition to produce the best platform. AMD's held up their end of the bargain, and shortly the chipset makers will catch up to Intel as well.

It'd be great if Dell started selling AMD kit. However, that's not going to happen any time soon. Firstly, Dell's getting huge discounts on CPUs and chipsets from Intel. Secondly, even if AMD were to match Intel on price, AMD doesn't have the fab space to keep up. Fab 30 is going all-out, and AMD's in the process of building another one; also working closely with IBM, etc. in an effort to increase that capacity as cheaply and quickly as they can to capitalize on their superior product. AMD's mid-30% market share corresponds to their maximum output. Dell might be able to bump that up to 50%+, but only if AMD brings another fab online. However, AMD has to be careful about investing too heavily in fab capacity they can't use, so they'll only bring online capacity to handle Dell signing on, if Dell agrees to it beforehand which Dell probably won't do, not knowing if AMD really can live up to their end of the bargain later. Kind of a catch-22, but AMD's doing pretty well these days anyway, and the consumer can't really complain either, so it's all OK.

I don't see how this helps them crack anything

[Sycraft-fu]

They've already had a chip like this in the form of the nForce. Integrated graphics AND sound. This is better graphics, and newer technology, but I don't really see any magic bullet that will wow people. Just looks like a good new chipset to me.

AMD's problem in the corperate world is mostly just one of repuation. Corperations tend to like to stay with proven solutions. If something works, don't change to something else. Well, Intel works, and has for a long time, so there is inertia to stick with it.

Also AMD has a really rocky history. For a long time their processors did NOT perform up to their numbers. Also when the Athlons first came out the motherboard situation was abysmal and incompatabilities were rampant. Now granted that's been fixed, but it's easy to break trust and hard to earn it back.

Ultimately, I don't think this chipset will make any large difference. It'll be another nice chipset for AMD chips and more options when you buy one, but it's nothing earth shattering.

Re:I don't see how this helps them crack anything

[hawkbug]

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.

Re:I don't see how this helps them crack anything

[owlstead]

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 :)

WTF?

[stratjakt]

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).

Step in the right direction

[Average_Joe_Sixpack]

I really wish AMD would have developed the 761 further but the nForce and now ATI chipsets should provide a good stable alternative to the VIA/SiS garbage.

I just wish AMD had a motherboard manuf that was as good as Intel. Currently the stability crown seems to be passed back and forth between ASUS and MSI ... which IMO are crap compared to Intel.

Re:Step in the right direction

[stratjakt]

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.

Re:Step in the right direction

[StupidKatz]

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...

Re:Step in the right direction

[Lumpy]

are you nuts??

of all the machines I have here the INTEL motherboards are the ones that are the most unstable.

I have 2 highend workstation motherboards that REQUIRE all usb devices to be removed before reboot or the motherboard will hand during post. Yes, this is a real motherboard/bios issue that intel knows about and who's answer is "wait for the next bios release." which means, for us to sod off.

Intel motherboards in my experience are the most likely to have problems.

Re:Step in the right direction

[Average_Joe_Sixpack]

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...

Yes, well you get what you pay for, and when I pay for an Intel solution I can expect 24x7xYears reliability. When I've gone with Abit/Asus/Gigabyte/MSI/Shuttle it's been a mixed stability bag, that is I might get years of reliability or only a couple of months till a mobo capacitor goes.

Like I said, I love AMD processors ... but their reliance on 3rd party chipsets and motherboards is a major liability.

Which distros?

[Anonymous Cowdog]

I can feel some kind of electromagnetic field emanating from Fry's and pulling my credit card in that general direction...

Which GNU/Linux and especially BSD distros are ready to take advantage of the full power of the AMD hardware offerings these days?

Re:Which distros?

[Anonymous Cowdog]

Right, to clarify, I'm talking about the entire picture, whether each piece of hardware is made by AMD or not. But specifically asking about solutions that involve AMD CPUs and chipsets.

I'd be happy to jump (back) from Intel to AMD processors and chipsets (and compatible hardware) if I knew my OS could take advantage of them. My question is, which of FreeBSD or OpenBSD or any flavor of GNU/Linux are a good choice to use the new performance features like 64 bit architecture?

Linux drivers?

[nonmaskable]

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.

It is decent, but won't change the market...

[Fallen Kell]

It especially will not make any difference in the general corporate world. Most companies are in longtime buying relationships with certain OEM's and will only purchase through them. Performance can and will make a difference (eventually), but that takes a backseat to current vendor relationships. Unless and until all vendors embrace AMD, you will not see a significant number of them sold to large corporations, and will only see small numbers purchased only with intense demand by individual users (typically engineers who follow actual hardware performance and not market speak).

The best thing that AMD can have happen for them on the corporate front would be to get major vendors like Dell, HP, and IBM to offer their chips in their products.

Nvidia's support for SATA is better

[3770]

Hmm...

It is a very interesting chipset. But the Nvidia Ultra 4 seems to have better SATA support.

Nvidia supports 300MB/s while ATI has 150MB/s. Also, ATI does not support Native Command Queue-ing, but Nvidia's chipset does. Nvidia also supports 0+1 RAID while ATI doesn't. They both support both RAID 0 and 1 though.

other reviews...

[demonbug]

Anandtech also has a reveiw up. I haven't taken a real close look, but I think they actually compare performance with the ATI chipset with an early nForce4 board.

Now the big question ...

[zzabur]

... 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?

Unlikely, for this reason:

[MtViewGuy]

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.

Re:actually...

[Laebshade]

Egads, I never though ATi wouldn't have an rpm that is compatible with Xorg. My apologies. Guess that blows my upgrading to SuSE 9.2 (which comes with Xorg) out of the water...

onboards have seperate GPU's

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

They don't steal the CPU's cycles like you think. The GPU of the Nforce motherboards is integerated into the northbridge. It doesn't tie up the CPU any more that a gforce 2 does, Except that it doesn't have its own memory. Thats the killer. It has to share memory with the main system. That might also steal some cpu cycles, but my point is that the cpu isn't doing the graphics work.

Re:onboards have seperate GPU's

[mczak]

The GPU of the Nforce motherboards is integerated into the northbridge. It doesn't tie up the CPU any more that a gforce 2 does, Except that it doesn't have its own memory.

That's true for the nforce2. Note though that any other integrated graphic chip up to now does NOT have T&L (or the "modern version" of it, vertex shaders). That's true for intel's graphic core, Via (unichrome), it's true for ATI's old igp320,340, their newer igp9100, and also this one, the rs480 (some reviews think it has hw vertex shaders, others do not. Based on the vertex-heavy benchmarks I've seen I'd say it has no hardware vertex shaders).
So it will use more cpu power. Not that it really matters, since the cpus which are typically used together with integrated graphics are far more powerful comparatively than those used with a high-end graphic card (since integrated graphic chips are about 10 times slower than high-end graphic cards, but you have trouble finding cpus which are more than 40% slower than the fastest available...)

Re:onboards have seperate GPU's

[Bloater]

There is a lot of "extra" work done on a high end GPU that is not put on a northbridge with integrated graphics. The article even states that ATI did some trial and error to work out how much they could get on the northbridge before it became impractical (look at the size of that heatsink).

By putting a framebuffer on the mainboard, they've even reduced the hit due to shared main memory to almost nothing, but some operations normally done on a high end GPU *are* done on the general purpose CPU.

Re:Good to see some competition

[CoderByBirth]

Wow... You got:
*First post
*The "been waiting for this" jaded thing going on
*The FreeBSD/weirdass OS nobody uses reference
*The word "proprietary"
*A reference to something about nforce thats obviously big news in everybodys world but mine
*The notion that you could actually spot the difference between two graphics cards using the same resolution

If I had modpoints I'd mod you through the roof, but I see you already have a well-deserved "Insightful".

Marketing speak?

[asliarun]

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.

meanwhile

[doorbender]

I'm ripping my hair out and wishing it was nvidia because of ATI's atrocious lack of linux support.

First OB video for x86-64's

[WoTG]

nForce4 chipsets for the Athlon 64's do NOT have integrated graphics, not yet at least. I don't think any of the other chipset mfg's do either. On board video is different on the AMD K8's than other processors, the onchip memory controller is great for the CPU, but it makes shared memory slower for the integrated graphics (ATI has a dedicated frame buffer in this new chipset to more than offset this problem).

So, yes, this ATI chipset could be just the ticket for getting Athlon64's into OEM models - you know, the mass market jobs that corp's tend to buy. Decent video for office apps and good prices, when compared to a system with a separate graphics card.

Haha

[Erwos]

Gotta love "DX9-class". It's missing the vertex shaders, kids. This isn't a DX9 GPU.

-Erwos

Re:Good to see some competition

[Phantom69]

It's called Surroundview and ATi have been supporting it since their integrated Radeon 9100IGP northbridge. It allows the onboard graphics to work with a plug-in AGP card to provide up to three separate VGA/DVI outputs. Press Release: http://www.ati.com/companyinfo/press/2003/4661.htm l

AMD crack Intel's dominance?

[rpdillon]

Huh? AMD was shipping over half the new desktop CPUs last I checked (wasn't this a /. story a few weeks ago?)...this isn't like saying "...help Linux crack Microsoft's dominance..." or something like that.

AMD may be an underdog, but they're competing quite well, and may still be shipping over half the new desktops.

poor graphics performance.

[qtothemax]

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.

like most corporations/companies

[Man in Spandex]

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.

Just built an Athlon 64 Linux box

[freelunch]

I had to do it now. The PCIe wasn't that important to me and support of the current hardware is only now getting halfway decent. I figured I couldn't wait for the new hardware to become mature (no rev 1 for me, thanks!) and for the Linux support.

It took a long time to research the system due to lack of Linux compatibility info. I discovered a lot of info on how well the Athlon 64 CPU overclocks. I mean Really overclocks. There is way more info about OC'ing these chips than running them under Linux.

I haven't overclocked since cranking my Celeron 300 to 366 Mhz in 1999. But I had to give this a shot.. I am typing this from my 1800 Mhz Athlon 3000 90nm cranked to 2430 Mhz with some fast ram. I had it up to 2700 in testing. It screams on Gentoo. I also broke down and splurged on an absurd graphics card, a BFG GeForce 6800 GT. The CPU idles at 36C and the system seems to run much cooler than my nforce2/XP2200. The socket 939 systems feature a dual channel memory controller and the very likely ability to run dual-core CPUs in about a year.

I ended up going with the nforce3 based MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum and an XP-90 cooler. Finding good Linux compatibility info was tough. As for issues, things are pretty good right now. No major gotchas. I would buy that MB again.

My main outstanding issue at the moment is an issue with time ("many lost ticks") and an inability to set the hwclock from Linux. Still need to track that one down.

Obligatory performance numbers.. This system replaced that old Celeron 366. It ran 425 Dhrystone 2.1 MIPS while the new system does 4914.

Stream performance is quite insane:
Function Rate (MB/s)
Copy: 4213.8589
Scale: 4148.7969
Add: 4570.0995
Triad: 4564.9183

Ahem.

[AusG4]

What i'm quite surprised about is that nobody has mentioned the XBox in all of this. If rumors hold true, Microsoft intends to ship the XBox Next (err, XBox 2, err XBox: Reloaded, whatever you want to call it) with a PowerPC 970 CPU and a GPU and chipset provided by ATI.

That said, this may be a relatively decent look at what is to come in the form of the next XBox product.

I know that this chipset is for Athlon 64. Don't point that out in a reply. I said "look at what is to come", not, "this is clearly the Xbox 2 chipset".

At any rate, if I -was- the kind of person who bought PC hardware (which I'm not), I'd be likely to check out this ATI offering. The performance will probably be more than acceptable, and I do think it's important to support companies who have their headquarters within eye sight of your office. :)

Re:Ahem.

[n6mod]

Actually, since both the 970 and the A64 use HyperTransport, you might not be far off the mark.

Doesn't explain the lack of ethernet, though...unless MS wanted that unbundled so they could go wireless.

Re:Ahem.

[TrancePhreak]

I am lead to believe that the GFX chip in the XBox 2 is more similar to ATI's next flagship chip. IE something with shader 3.0 support.

Didn't Nvidia try this and gave up?

[tangent3]

Remember the Nforce2 IGPs? They were the best performing integrated graphics solution and an excellent buy for non-gamers. Yet you hardly see any of them selling. I don't understand why, I've built many office PCs at very nice prices thanks to these things. But somehow it didn't seem such a good idea for Nvidia and they gave up IGP for the Nforce3 and Nforce4, as apparently there is not enough demand in the market for it.

Does ATI really expect something different to happen with their IGP solution?

Re:Didn't Nvidia try this and gave up?

[C_To]

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.