Slashdot Mirror


ATI Radeon X1800 GTO Launched

SippinTea writes "ATI has also hastened to market with a launch of their own this week, with a new Performance Mid-Range Graphics Card. The Radeon X1800 GTO is a chopped-down version of the Radeon X1800 XL with 12 pixel pipelines and less expensive, lower speed GDDR3 DRAM on board. It compares well with the new GeForce 7600GT but can it compete with a GeForce 7900GT for only a few dollars more?"

16 of 117 comments (clear)

  1. Too many video cards by Beuno · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Is it me or are there just too many video cards out there?

    1. Re:Too many video cards by Ossifer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Is it me or are there just too few silent video cards out there?

    2. Re:Too many video cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      So you start with how the cards fare in FPS type games, then go on to tell people what to look for in linux media servers? This is exactly why there are tons of cards out there, everybody is looking for something different.

      Personally I want a card that can drive my 1900x1200 display in native resolution while I'm playing FPS, so I'm pretty sure that low end card isn't cutting it. Really, I want a card that can run two of them, since I don't want to upgrade my relative new system to one that will properly handle multiple high end cards. Now I know Ionly spend 5 of 1000 hours playing games, its not an economically solid use of my money, etc. But thats what hobbies are for.

    3. Re:Too many video cards by babbling · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yet not enough with free software drivers. If any video card company wants to increase the number of customers that they have and get a competitive edge, they could release technical information that would help free software developers, or write some free software drivers themselves.

    4. Re:Too many video cards by tomstdenis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd say the # of people running 1900x1200 displays is the minority. Specially since most monitors are 1280x1024 or less.

      You can get by with decent gaming on a 6600 which will cost you 140$. You don't need to buy a 7800 for 500$ to play Farcry or something. Filtering like what I suggested will land you a card in the 6xxx series that doesn't cost more than 200$ and will let you play games at decent refresh rates and resolutions.

      So yes, there are a lot of cards out there but it's usually fairly easy to pick out an appropriate card if you know what the issues are.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    5. Re:Too many video cards by commieboyredux · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ground control to major tom! Free OSs are NOT a major share of the graphics powerhouse market, sorry. Linux support isn't the turning point in Nvidia and ATI's stalemate, as much as the slashbots would like it to be. Man, I'm SOOO getting modded down of this....

    6. Re:Too many video cards by Psiven · · Score: 1, Insightful

      But there is a growing need for ultra high resolution capabilities. As soon as the mainstream figures out how immersive ultra wide screen games can be, there will quickly be a major demand for super high resolution capable video cards. I don't think the popular 1280x1024 viewing format will remain the norm for much longer. 3084x1024 will be a major driver for graphics cards sales.

      For more information on what I mean, visit http://www.matrox.com/
      They are releasing an adaptor to turn many video cards capable of rendering a single output over 3 screens.

  2. Can you say "soft launch"? by Calibax · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's one significant difference between the nVidia launches this week and the ATI board launched the same day. The nVidia products were available on launch day from on-line stores but the ATI product won't be available for "a few weeks".

    It looks like ATI wanted to steal nVidia's thunder by announcing their latest product the same day. The small issue of not actually being able to manufacture their product yet doesn't seem to be very important to them.

  3. Linux drivers? by Zugot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The vesa driver is sooooo unacceptable.

    --
    -- Bryan
  4. With all these new mid-range cards out.. by Clockwurk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Its a real shame Apple had to shackle its Pro notebook and consumer desktop with the uninspiring x1600. OS X relies on the graphics card for so much and they give it so little attention. I hope they follow the lead of other OEMs and make upgrades to their products as new stuff becomes available and not delay faster stuff so that Steve Jobs has something to talk about at Macworld or WWDC.

    1. Re:With all these new mid-range cards out.. by MojoStan · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Its a real shame Apple had to shackle its Pro notebook and consumer desktop with the uninspiring x1600.
      I think the Radeon x1600 is a fine GPU for their "professional" notebook and a very good GPU for their "consumer" desktop.

      The Mobility Radeon x1600 in their mid-sized MacBook Pro is ATI's second-best current-generation mobile GPU. The Mobility Radeon x1800 is ATI's current high-end part and the only noticable difference (for most users) between x1600 and x1800 is 3D gaming performance, which is not worth the extra cost for the vast majority of MacBook Pro buyers. The x1800 is more appropriate for Alienware gaming notebooks or giant Dell XPS desktop replacement notebooks.

      I think the (non-mobile) Radeon x1600 in the iMac is a heck of a nice GPU for a "consumer" PC. Any current generation GPU (like Radeon x1300 or GeForce 7300) would be a fine choice IMO because the extra 3D gaming performance would be a waste for the vast majority of iMac buyers. Anyone that needs more gaming power than an x1600 shouldn't be buying an all-in-one computer with non-upgradable graphics. It would be nice, however, if Apple offered a headless upgradable desktop that wasn't a freakin' workstation.

      OS X relies on the graphics card for so much and they give it so little attention.
      Are you talking about stuff like Quartz Extreme and Core Image/Video? I think the Radeon x1600 gives plenty of GPU power for OS X. Heck, Intel's maligned GMA 900 integrated graphics seemed to have snappy OS X performance on the Intel Developer Macs. Core Image only requires a Radeon 9500 or GeForce FX 5200, which are both two generations older than the Radeon X1600.
      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

  5. Oh Yay... by DarthChris · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Another graphics chip, in case the 20+ already out there aren't enough choice for you.

    FTFA:

    Fortunately, years later we find a dramatically different competitive landscape on the graphics card front, as today's mainstream and performance segment GPU's are equipped with the technology and features that would annihilate flagship GPU's from a few short generations ago.

    And then:

    Looking at these basic specifications, it is certainly impressive to think that this is a $249 graphics card that has all of the features and functionality of the Radeon X1800 series of GPU's.

    So first they say what many of us already knew - cards become obsolete in under 18 months - and immediately after say we should spend lots of money on them anyway. Now $250 might now be much to some, but not all of us can afford that, especially for what is effectively a mid-range card.

    --
    Don't you just hate it when people reply to your signature?
  6. Gratuitous product launches by D.+Book · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Am I the only one who suspects the reason we now have a ridiculously confusing range of video chips is less to do with product differentiation and manufacturing efficiency than the publicity that accompanies each new launch? ATI and nVidia seem to have themselves stuck in this game where if one were to announce a new product every month and the other every two months, the relative disadvantage in the reporting on the latter company will result in a significant loss of consumer recognition.

    So they keep coming up with new variations that are trivially different from the existing products - a clock speed adjustment here, a few pipes disabled there - primarily to keep their name in the media. Even the "unannounced" chips are broadly reported, usually with something like "quietly released" in the headline.

  7. New segment in 250US$ range by rahulkool · · Score: 2, Insightful

    well this card is placed really nice in the 200-300 price bracket. if u take a look at the card at that price range 7600GT will be low range and 7900GT will be outta budget. i think its better than nvidia 7600GT(only if 7600GT had 256bit memory bus y nvidia y). the moment nvidia launched 7600 and 7900 products ATi decreased the prices. i don't think we are gonna see the X1800 GTO soon in the market. as all ATi lauches are mostly paper launches. but i think its a good move from ATi they have created a new segment in that price bracket. and actually ATi had a big hole in that bracket specially in SM3.0 compatible cards.

    --
    i work for money, if u want loyalty, Go get a Dog.
  8. These launches are not totally about PR by EMIce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They are about offering more about bang than the other guy for your buck. The midrange $150-$200 range is where you get the most for your money, and each time one competitor offers a better value, the other can't afford to sit back for too long. The midrange GPU segment is one incredibly efficient market and the that is why there are these frequent releases. Each company is fighting to stay ahead.

    One reason for this is that most midrange buyers are enthusiasts, and judging by the # of comments for a product on newegg, one can see that as soon as a better value is offered by a new chip, sales quickly shift towards it. The Nvidia 6800 GS was selling like hotcakes for just the tiny stopgap period it was put out, just to best the ATI x800GTO until the 7600 GT showed up.

    I'm shopping for a card for a friend now, and have noticed that the midrange is good, but for high resolution play at 1600x1200 or 1920x1200, the midrange is barely cutting it now, so it becomes important to get the most bang for your buck, especially if you have an LCD with native high res and want to maintain quality. The new 7600 GT is about 15% faster than the 6800 GS, even w/ a 128 bit memory bus, and definitely hits a sweet spot at $190. It should run most popular titles comfortably at 1920x1200 and has next generation shader 3.0, unlike ATI's offerings below $200.

    Unfortunately for ATI, they haven't offered the best midrange value since their 9xxx line. ATI took Nvidia's crown a while back but Nvidia has had it back for some time now.

  9. Linux drivers?-Less Filling. Tastes Lousy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "ATI's patterns indicate that the Linux driver will deliver substantially fewer features and less performance than its Windows counterpart."

    So does the Linux Nvidia driver support Purevideo(C)? I think you'll find that the Linux drivers overall support less features than their comparable Windows version.