facebook rss twitter

HEXUS.beans :: ATI X1800, X1600, X1300, GTO, GTO2? Confused? Not us!

by David Ross on 8 September 2005, 00:00

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qabra

Add to My Vault: x

SKUse us....



Whilst I have been awaiting Fanny getting back from the USA, I thought I would share this bean with you. HEXUS has heard lots about R520 (Real Codename - Raptor), and its brothers and sisters. ATI will be introducing this in the middle of October this year. We have some specifications for you but that can wait for another day.

The name of this new card will be X1800, which we have seen on the 'net already today. But the real juice of this bean is that ATI have some more SKUs coming and they will have the following names:

X1800 which is based on the R520 VPU.

X1600 which is their mid range SKU based on RV530.

X1300 is their low-end SKU based on RV515.

Of course with any new generation comes new mobile parts, we believe this will be in the form of the X1400.

Other news we are hearing is that ATI love their GT brand so much there will be the GTO and GTO2 launched very soon. Essentially the GTO is a 12 pipeline GT, and GTO2 is X800XL (16 pipeline GT). They have decided that the XL and 850s will be gone for good. So the new lineup will be X800GT, GTO, GTO2, and their new VPUs.

ATI have also essentially end-of-lifed their X800 series on AGP. The highest AGP card which you can get now is X700. I am sure if the demand from the channel and partners occurs ATI will use their bridge chip and create a new SKU. But, to be fair the rapid shift to PCI-Express has shocked everyone.


HEXUS Forums :: 15 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
X1800 which is based on the R520 VPU.

X1600 which is their mid range SKU based on RV530.

X1300 is their low-end SKU based on RV515.


Why does the X1600's VPU have a higher number?
Deleted
Why does the X1600's VPU have a higher number?

I agree it should have a lower number, but note that the X1600 is based on the RV530 where V stands for “value”.
Does seem a bit odd, id of thought rv530 would be more powerfull than rv520, hmm maybe andrzej can shed some light on this
IIRC, the chip number has nothig to do with the level of tech or anything. Its more an indication of when it was designed in the scheme of things.

R=Radeon
V=Value
###=Chip design ID

So R520 was designed before RV530 (which is therefore assumedly a simplified, cheaper to produce R520). Whereas RV515 is probably based on a re-engineering of an R4## chip. Probably a marrying of the X300 and X700 or there abouts.
None: By simplified I mean its a smaller sized chip with lower transister counts due to less technology support, fewer pipelines, simpler memory controller. I.e. anything that makes the die smaller and easier to produce.