ATI Radeon (and others) comparison

[Hammer]

SHADES wrote:
A G4 should have plenty of muscle for any ATI graphics card.
May have some bandwith problems on the 2x AGP port and I think the memory is only SDRAM. DDR would be much better and 4X AGP would suffice nicely. I don't know any cards thant reqire the bandwith of an 8x AGP card.

For UT2003 benchmarks and PPC G4 @1.4Ghz PowerMacs performance with ATI Radeon 9800 refer to http://www.barefeats.com/p4game.html

It also shows that the CPUs has influence some in FPS scores.

The G5 @1.8Ghz with Radeon 9600 VS G5 1.6Ghz with Radeon 9800 indicates that the slower CPU is the CPU is holding the Radeon 9800’s potential.

PS; Ignore X86 scores since it’s outside this topic’s context.  But for completeness, refer to a similar UT2003 benchmark @ 1024x768 for AthlonXP 2500+/nForce2 @DDR333 FSB http://www.kickassgear.com/Reviews/NV%20vs%20ATI.htm

[Hammer]

@SHADES

Yes, some influence. Which would be minimal.

I wouldn't say the influence is minimal in regards to FPS score.

I have tested Geforce 4 TI 4600 (AGP4X) with MSI-6330 (VIA KT133A) V3.6 via a range of CPUs i.e.
1. Athlon TBird 1.1 Ghz, DDR266 FSB, 512Mb PC133.  
2. Athlon TBird 1.33 Ghz, DDR266 FSB, 512Mb PC133.
2. Athlon XP ~1.5 Ghz, DDR266 FSB, 512Mb PC133.  
4. Athlon XP ~1.6 Ghz**, DDR266 FSB, 512Mb PC133.  

Then again for, but with ASUS AN78X Deluxe V2.0 (nForce2 400 Ultra)***.
1. Athlon XP* ~1.1 Ghz****, DDR266 FSB, 512MB/1GB PC2100.
1. Athlon XP* ~1.5 Ghz, DDR266 FSB, 512MB/1GB PC2100.
2. Athlon XP* ~2.1 Ghz, DDR266 FSB, 512MB/1GB PC2100.
3. Athlon XP* ~2.09 Ghz, DDR333 FSB, 512MB/1GB PC2700.
4. Athlon XP* ~2.2 Ghz, DDR400 FSB, 512MB/1GB PC3200.

* Barton core was not used in the test i.e. only with TBred-B or/and TBred-A cores.
** With MSI-6330 (VIA KT133A) V5.0. MSI-6330 (VIA KT133A) V3.6 can run Athlon XP 1900+ unofficially (with luck).

*** Plan to test with Gigabyte's GA-7N400PRO2 (nForce2 400 Ultra) some time in the future.
**** I do have access to multiplier unlocked Athlons to conduct the tests for lower Mhz speeds (i.e. down to ~800Mhz).  

Everything increases including the fetch and refresh of memory. Athlon 2.6 Vs 3.0 also has "influence" on framerate.

Athlon 2.6?? Have you done some test yourself i.e. establish a common HW platform with different CPU speeds?

Front side buss to memory etc when CPU handles other "aspects" of games. Of course there is a difference. But that's not to do with graphics card.

Of course it’s has nothing to do with graphic card i.e. the issue about "influence" refers to CPU.  

[Hammer]

Recently I saw 350Mhz machine tested against multi Ghz machine. the 350Mhz machine (when given a good GFX card) could reach very playable framerates, even though the multi Ghz machine had more FPS

That would be 3DMarks benchmark (synthetic)  vs UT2003’s benchmark (a real life game) as I recall.
The real life gaming benchmarks pointed to FPS scaling with the CPU scaling**.

350Mhz X86 machine was powered by Intel’s Pentium II (presumedly supported by the Intel’s 440BX chipset).

**Reference
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1650&p=1

PS; Note that ATI Radeon 8500 flatten out @1.2GHz.

[Hammer]

 

but is now proven to increase perfomance, so much so that Athlon have done away with the FSB and gon on die. with their latest offering.

Actually, AMD’s K8 Athlon 64/Athlon FX/Opteron still has Northbridge <> CPU FSB which is highlighted via AMD's own document materials.

Reference
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485_9488^9494,00.html

"Integrated Northbridge |   Yes, 128-bit data path @ CPU core frequency". - Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.

 

To pass blame that the G4 CPU is to blame for the bottleneck is not entirly true and an unfair statement to make for the G4.

Note that when one discusses about the CPU, it’s Northbridge <> CPU FSB limitations must be taken into an account since this is part of the CPU’s characteristics.

[Hammer]

On a side note, good developers will strive to minimize AGP traffic once the program is running, and utilise every last byte of fast RAM on the card before falling back to much slower main memory.

One should be realistic than idealistic in regards to programming scenarios.  

Therefore AGP 8x (or even 16x) doesn't mean an awful lot if the only intensive traffic across the
bus is during the initialisation stage.

AGP8X and AGP texture memory is use  as an insurance for running future and more complex games.

When GPU’s memory has been exhausted, faster AGP bus benefits AGP texture fetching features.  The benefits of AGP can be maximise when has it’s own allocated bandwidth; as in nForce2’s 128bit wide bus i.e. 64bit for CPU and rest for AGP/IGP/APU/’etc’ consumption.

[Hammer]

What's your point? Is'nt this what I was trying to say anyway? I thni my previous points were to that not too many new computers or graphics cards use the bandwidth of 8x at this point,

The importance of AGP8X is greater in the mainstream/ GPU solutions** i.e.
1. nVidia's IGP (e.g. the integrated Geforce 4 MX 420 in nForce2 chipset; uses 128bit shared memory architecture).
2. Limited onboard graphic memory e.g Geforce 4 TI 4200 64MB.

**For fleet OEM PCs.

As for the Athlon, I was mearly stating that FSB speed has increased and has improved throughput to memory and thus speeded up applications and games whatever needs shunting around ? isn't this what you have just agreed with me?

I don’t agree with "no FSB" statements.

Nicknamed "Hammer" but now called opteron multi-processor systems includes local memory on elach CPU so that the other CPUs can access the mmory of these CPUs via the HyperTransport bus.

“Sledge Hammer” refers to the current Socket 940 K8 core. The "Claw Hammer" refers  to the current Socket 754 K8 core.

Mind youl, the integration of the memory controller on the die can be considered to be kind of a limitation on flexibility, as it's not going to be expanded by a purchase of a new chipset (motherboard) to run with.

Slightly off topic, with K8, memory controller is upgraded with the CPU.  ASUS nForce3 150 (Socket 940**) supports PC3200 registered ECC RAM via Athlon FX 51. Note that Opteron 146 also supports PC3200 registered ECC RAM.

AMD has stated that motherboard vendors can turn off the on-die memory controller and go for the traditional CPU <> External Northbridge <> Southbridge relationship.  

From my personal experience, I have upgraded  CPUs more than motherboards i.e. I have unused Athlon Tbird @1.4Ghz**.

**Waiting for K7 motherboard hand-me down.

Still slinging around facts allready wel documented about doesn't cahnge the fact that a G4 still has plenty of muscle and with the right arcitecture around it to compliment what it is capable of would make it not a problem to run even the high end graphics offerings.

The PowerMac G4 @1.4Ghz with ATI 9x00 VPU will show you the results of such a setup since it's the closest to the ideal A1XE G4 @1.0Ghz with ATI 9x00 VPU.

[Hammer]

What sets the graphics cards apart is what their GPU can do with shaders. Shaders on modern graphics cards (Radeon 9800 or greater and GeForceFX 5x00 and above) is that they contain their own vector processor units.

What about the other ATI's DirectX 9 class products (e.g. 9700 Pro, 9600XT)?

As far as bandwidth goes, have you all checked out PCI Express?

I didn’t say AGP8X be the end of the evolution...

[Hammer]

I never said AGP 8x wasn't of importance, I even gave links to info on it LOL

"Importance" was referring to "not too many new computers or graphics cards use the bandwidth of 8x at this point".

I thni my previous points were to that not too many new computers or graphics cards use the bandwidth of 8x at this point,

There are many computers that use AGP8X bandwidth due;
1. nVidia's IGP (e.g. the integrated Geforce 4 MX 420 in nForce2 chipset; uses 128bit shared memory architecture).
2. Limited onboard graphic memory e.g Geforce 4 TI 4200 64MB.

On die is always going to be quicker and you can't graft more bus lines to a chip once its made,

Why would you graft more bus lines? Note that you still  have a hyper-transport link @DDR1600.

Apple are wll known for doing things "their way"

Usually, one could re-flash the x86 gfx card’s ROM with a Mac version...

[Hammer]

That's 1 chip manufacturer. Read the first sentance, where does it say none? I think it says not many. It's still a very new standard. How many computers do not use 8x...........

In regards to "many"; Are you claiming ATI’s Radeon 9800/XT and NVidia’s Geforce FX 5800/5900/5950 as their mass market products?

To continue...
3. Intel's Extreme Graphics.
4. VIA 's Integrated Savage GPU.
5. ATI's Mobile integrated Radeon GPU.
6. SIS’s Xaber with its limit onboard memory.

The results without AGP8X refer to
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12428
http://www.cadonline.com/reviews/hardware/1103workstation/

Rankings;
1. Xi Computer's Xi MTower 2P64 Opteron (with NVIDIA Quadro FX 3000)  system
2. Polywell Xeon system (with NVIDIA Quadro FX 3000)  
3. Monarch’s Opteron system
4. ‘etc’
10. Lucky last, an Athlon MP system due to missing AGP8X capabilities.

The Athlon MP system came in a very poor last, but it was the only system that didn't support AGP 8x graphics.

- www.theinquirer.net 2003
NVidia's Quadro FX 3000 didn't rescue the Athlon MP system from being last.

[Hammer]

You don't have to, thats fine. All I said was that speed improvement to HW of this nature has impacted on bandwidth, hence speed in a major way. You want to call it a FSB, go for it. I like memory controller. But whtever.

In addition to my previous post, one shouldn’t decouple CPU <> Northbridge bandwidth issues with the CPU core. The PowerPC G4 refers to the chip and its inheritance limitations i.e. the G4 based solution.

Apple are wll known for doing things "their way"
 

Such statements are not substantial enough to warrant a dismissal.  Define doing things "their way".  Note that Apple boxes are running one of the latest games (e.g. UT2003).

Are you implying A1XE @1Ghz (with ATI Radeon 9800) will beat  a PowerMac G4@1.4Ghz (with ATI Radeon 9800)?

[Hammer]

@SHADES

Information in relation to GPU market share refer to http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/20031029073519.html