backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 50 comment(s) - last by sonichedgehog3.. on Oct 3 at 4:12 PM

ATI Radeon HD 2900 PRO 512MB   (Source: PowerColor)

Sapphire HD 2900 Pro  (Source: Sapphire)
ATI adds value priced HD 2900 PRO 512MB and 1GB graphics cards to lineup

AMD today quietly announced a new graphics card that fills in ATI's high-end offerings just below the Radeon HD 2900 XT. ATI claims the new Radeon HD 2900 PRO has the same system requirements as the HD 2900 XT graphics cards, but sports lower core and memory clock frequencies.

The first of the HD 2900 PRO cards features 512MB GDDR3 and a 9-inch fansink. The card will include two DVI-I to VGA adapters, one component HDTV adapter, an ATI DVI to HDMI adapter, and one 9-pin VIVO adapter and a CrossFire bridge interconnect.  AMD claims this card will hit store shelves at $249.

The second card in the HD 2900 PRO series features 1GB GDDR4 and is available with two different sizes of fansinks. One version of the card has a 9-inch fansink and another version has a 12-inch fansink.

Usually, the "long" versions of graphics cards form ATI and NVIDIA are sold as OEM-only components for Dell and HP to use in custom gaming machines. There is no word from ATI on if the 12-inch version of the 1GB HD 2900 PRO will be an OEM part only at this time. The 9-inch revision of the 1GB card will retail at $299.

Both the 12-inch and the 9-inch versions of the 1GB card will come with two DVI-I to VGA adapters, a component HDTV adapter, an ATI DVI to HDMI adapter, a 9-pin VIVO adapter and a CrossFire  bridge interconnect.

PowerColor lists the 512MB version of the HD 2900 PRO on its website with 320 stream processors, a 600 MHz engine clock and a 800 MHz GDDR3 memory clock. Pricing is expected to be $299 for the 1 GB version and $249 for the 512 MB card.

However, it appears as though vendors have some play in the actual clock frequencies.  The official ATI guidance claims the core-clock is locked at 600 MHz, though PowerColor engineers claim some of these cards can be "clocked much higher."  The 1GB variants top out at 742 MHz, according to the same guidance.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
HD2900pro bechmarks
RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By Expunged on 9/25/2007 6:07:58 PM , Rating: 5
It looks like the version tested was a 512 GDDR3 version with 600/800 clocks. It did quite well in some of the benchmarks and if you take a look at Page 4 in what you cited, when overclocked, it wiped the floor with everything tested.

Looks like a $299 GDDR4 1GB card with some overclocking optential could be a good alternative to the $500 cards everyone seems to be flocking to these days. If you're all about 150 FPS rather than 90 then it's not your cup of tea but if you're about saving a few hundred bucks this doesn't look too bad.

It'd be nice to know when it will hit store shelves...


RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By rdeegvainl on 9/26/2007 7:00:12 AM , Rating: 2
Also the cost of the video card offsets the money to get water cooling, and that helps everything else too. That is the option i am looking at now. Cheaper card, plus water cooling and then over clock everything. maybe, i still have to save up a couple thousand more first.


RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By dubldwn on 9/25/2007 6:13:30 PM , Rating: 3
Thanks for the post.
quote:
It seems that HD2900pro performs worse than 8800GTS 320MB

Still, it doesn't suck...and it's cheaper. I just hope they improved the noise.


RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By fk49 on 9/25/2007 7:29:19 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
Still, it doesn't suck...and it's cheaper


Exactly. Could be cheaper by than the 8800gts by $50 or more..and it beats the 8600gts by a wide margin as well.


RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By Regs on 9/25/2007 9:15:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Exactly. Could be cheaper by than the 8800gts by $50 or more..and it beats the 8600gts by a wide margin as well.


Good to see AMD's marketing team doing something. Wedge it somewhere between a 8800GTS and 8600 and sell it for less.
Now only if it was a single slot solution!


RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By Joz on 9/25/07, Rating: 0
RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By mcnabney on 9/26/2007 1:19:24 AM , Rating: 4
You are comparing the MSRP of the AMD card with the best available discounted and/or rebated online price of the Nvidia card.


RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By NaughtyGeek on 9/26/2007 12:44:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You are comparing the MSRP of the AMD card with the best available discounted and/or rebated online price of the Nvidia card.


While your statement is correct, I'd bet money that this creates a price drop for the 8800 GTS to bring it in line with the ATI offering. This is what a lot of us have been waiting for, competition in the mid range sector. Finally we'll see decent DX10 performance for <$300. 2 or 3 months and I bet we're looking at a $200 price point. Looks like I'll get to play Crysis in DX10 after all. :D


RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By herrdoktor330 on 9/26/2007 11:55:44 PM , Rating: 2
What would be cooler is if they would off-set the HD processing load to this card, then it would be even more attractive than the 8600GT or it's 2600 and 2400 siblings.

But it's still not to shabby. Now once they get the Open Source drivers worked out, this will make a very attractive buy.


RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By Captain Orgazmo on 9/26/2007 9:35:05 PM , Rating: 2
Ditto on the noise. My (non-overclocked) 2900XT spins up like a jet engine whenever I play a 3D game, and even when I run Vista's Media Center. I piddled with it using AtiTool to see how noisy it could get overclocked, and I swear, my vacuum cleaner is quieter then the 2900's fan at 100%. Anyone know how to limit framerate in Media Center or something to shut the card up when I am trying to watch a movie or TV?


RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By lumbergeek on 9/27/2007 10:23:56 PM , Rating: 2
Yup - Buy a 2600XT card with a passive heatsink. Silence is Golden.


RE: HD2900pro bechmarks
By Captain Orgazmo on 9/28/2007 12:22:47 AM , Rating: 2
I didn't know there is a passive 2600... could you post a link?


does size matter?
By neezee on 9/25/2007 5:42:31 PM , Rating: 2
is there any significant difference between OEM and the Retail besides the length?




RE: does size matter?
By murphyslabrat on 9/25/2007 5:51:54 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, the fact that you can't purchase the OEM model through normal channels. Which is a shame, as the 12-inch fan/heatsink probably moves a decent amount of heat compared to the 9-inch model. Either that, or it is a single-slot card. I guess we just have to wait for pictures.


RE: does size matter?
By KernD on 9/25/2007 6:33:42 PM , Rating: 5
Usually when it's an OEM card it's longer because it's cheaper to make that way, with a longer card, you can have a longer cooling equipment.

I've seen a Mac Gf6800 that was made to fit in a G5 case, it's the largest card I've ever seen, all because the G5 case is huge, so they had room to make a huge cheaper card.


RE: does size matter?
By Operandi on 9/25/2007 9:38:50 PM , Rating: 2
Why would a longer card be cheaper to make?


RE: does size matter?
By shaw on 9/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: does size matter?
By KernD on 9/25/2007 11:43:47 PM , Rating: 1
I don't know exactly why, usually what is longer is the part with condensator, maybe they use cheaper component that need more room.


RE: does size matter?
By mcnabney on 9/26/2007 1:15:37 AM , Rating: 4
The larger a video card or motherboard is the fewer layers are needed to construct it. Increasing the number of layers in PCB board construction drastically raises the price. For example, if the smaller card is a 5 layer design and shifting to a card that is 50% larger can reduce the number of layers to 3, the fabrication costs will likely drop in half. That is just the card fabrication, the chip and memory costs never change. But it still might save $20 per card, which is a lot.


RE: does size matter?
By DeepBlue1975 on 9/26/2007 8:36:59 AM , Rating: 2
Plastic for PCB is very cheap when it's empty.
The costly items are those that are placed across the PCB: memory chips, GPU, communication lanes.

On a smaller space you probably end up needing more PCB layers because of the "higher component integration".
You end up having a higher component/surface density, higher heat output per unit of surface, higher crosstalk problems and so, higher interference shielding requirements and higher efficiency cooling solutions, aggravated by the fact that cooling solutions get more costly as you need them to keep the same efficiency but occupying a lower surface.

OEMs can cope easily with 12" cards because they have their custom cases and layout the inside of a PC according to what they put inside.
You can do the same on the DIY market but most people out there won't like at all having to deal with a card that goes across and over the full width of your motherboard and then some, interfering with whatever has to be connected beneath that card.

An 8800GTX is already brutally huge for my taste, though I'd buy it if I were a hardcore gamer a