Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 5 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 237

Thread: ATi R250 (Radeon 8500 MAXX)?




  1. #41

    Default

    None of this all seems relevant when you look at how much of a flop ATi's original Rage Fury Maxx was, plagued with compatibility issues (I had one and never got it to run in dual processor mode......)
    My Box:
    Intel Pentium 4 2.4C @ 2.7
    DFI 875P Lanparty
    512Mb Geil PC3500 Dual Channel (Cas 2-6-3-3 @450MHz DDR)
    Leadtek A280 Geforce4 4200 MyVIVO
    Audigy DE
    1 x 73Gb Seagate fibre channel 10krpm (boot drive) with LSI HBA
    1x80Gig Seagate Barracuda ATA V
    1x120Gig Western Digital 8mb cache
    Spiffy Antec Super Lanboy (LED fan and UV light)

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1

    Default

    the image is certainly a fake, whether the product is not is a different question. But personally, if the image is fake, then i have little faith in the product. Basically, look at the farther GPU, to the right of it is a tall silver component, this component casts a shadow on the PCB, however this shadow suddenly ends. Also, the fan power lead on the first GPU doesnt seem to go over the silver component properly. Maybe its just me being sceptical, but i wouldn't be surprised if ATI never released this product. If HZ3 could indeed do 100% HSR, then they could just release the R200 with HZ3 and it would likely 0wn the ti4600. I think a R200 MAXX would also deprive the R300 of sales, plus, its price point would be ridiculous being that each GPU would need its own memory interface, unless they shared. This would lead to a big memory bottleneck and be equivalent to overclocking an R200 GPU without touching the memory clock, altho HZ3 would help here. I guess im just babbling on because i got all excited and i dont want any heartbreak from reading fake posts:lips:

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    15

    Default

    oh yea.. and why the hell wouldnt they use BGA memory on this card?

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Yep.
    Looks like fake to me. I had a Fury MAXX and it wasn't that big, at least not like Voodoo5 5500. This one on the pic...well I'll give it 3% possibility that it's genuine.
    Anyway, it will be a good idea to release Radeon 8500 MAXX becaus the price of GF4 Ti4600 is quite high, and performance of R200 MAXX shouldnt be bad at all. The price should be around Ti4600. Look at the performance of RageFury MAXX and see the difference compared to regular Rage 128 pro (like Rage Fury Pro).

    My rig:
    P4 1.7ghz Willamette
    512MB DDR
    MSI 645Ultra Mobo
    Ati Radeon 8500 64MB
    SB Live
    WD 40GB 7200
    CDRW&DVD

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    2

    Default

    HEy, I'm just a n00b here, but looking around for info on ATi cards, I bumped into this. I just have one pointer to make, why would ATi revert back to the TSOP RAM instead of the BGA RAM which uses a lot less room (I think it's needed on this card). Plus ATi has been using the BGA RAM on all their 128MB cards, so unless this is a 64MB, it's kinda messed a bit.

    Also one thing that's kinda weird. I don't know too much in this area, but isn't it better for the RAM chips to be placed at the same distance from the GPU(s)? It allows for better latancy and also it syncronizes the tacks so that 2 memory tracks don't have to wait for the other 2? May just be that I misunderstood that, but just wanted to point out a few things.

    BTW, by looking at this baby, I really really want one.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    4

    Default

    A little bird? ehhh.....

    When ATI published Fury Maxx it was a disastrer, this tecnology isn' t good.
    Bohhh i don' t know what think about this.....:rolleyes:

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    3

    Default

    ...if you owned your own website and were given some *exclusive news* which you were fairly certain was true and accurate, you would be silly if you didn't post it which at the very least would give everyone some juicy stuff to read, which I am sure you've all found interesting, right?
    Well said, Cameron. :)

    I'd do the exact same...in fact...I did! :)

    Thanks for getting the scoop on the latest and posting it here!

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    4

    Default

    but in not strange that in a entry level card there is a MAXX version ?
    Becouse those card are for entry level position............

    I think that is a big BOMBA !! BOMBA=fake in italian....

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    2

    Default

    i knew it looked fake, but i just want to proove it to you guys.

    the 8500 press release pics had ESMT memory on them, that was the only time ive ever seen some on an 8500. now, take a look at this press release pic with 4ns ESMT memory on it.





    its a nice try, but it still sucks.

    also, who would put fan pins between 2 memory chips? horrible layout, bad erasing on the edges, bad contrast overall, color doesnt match in several places. bad bad bad.

    plus, whos going to believe ATI would accomplish or think about all this:

    • 100% effective surface removal
    • Better texture handling than everybody else
    • VIVO add on card
    • actually listening to their customers


    peaceout... : peace:

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1

    Default

    If ATI really is making a new MAXX thing, well, it's up to them to better themselves because it is common knowledge that the first MAXX outing didn't actually do too well, since (a) the base hardware was not too great in the first place; (b) the dual configuration confused the heck out of windows; (c) the ATI driver team gave themselves an experiment in progress.

    Now knowing that, it is very possible that they already have learned quite a lot from their mistakes. Windows XP knows the dual chip model of the first MAXX, but support was abandoned from the ATI front. Heck, OpenGL wasn't even give a chace on it in XP. Just goes to show what came of the driver team's experience/experiment with it.

    I had a card based on the first MAXX chip (Rage128GLPro on a Rage Fury Pro VIVO), and i know drivers for OpenGL worked fine with that model.

    As far as the picture is concerned, well, it does seem fake, even if i haven't used Photoshop too often. So there, I'm no expert in photo editing, but i trust my eyes. My eyes tell me to look for *official* proof, so I go with the "wait and see" crowd. A couple of week's worth of wait isn't too much, since i have a relatively long upgrade cycle. I don't rave on the latest and greatest, especially if I don't need it yet.

    Actually, rumor has been circulatiing about a MAXX version of the original radeon, way back when it was first announced (came about when this line appeared: Scalable Core Architecture Supporting ATI's "MAXX" Multiple ASIC Technology. Got that from HotHardware) almost a couple of years back. But it actually never saw the light of day. It may have been done in the ATI labs, but it just wasn't for the press to see, apparently.

    So, what do we do about this piece of scoop? Well, treat it as it is: scoop. It's not news, not yet. Just something to look forward to and be cynical about or optimistic about.
    Don't Mind Me Too Seriously

Page 5 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •