Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SiS is back: A third Vid card competitor?

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Sis
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 16, 2002 2:32:16 PM

If someone has read the CeBIT Day 4 article, they said SiS has a new video card.
I can't find out if that is powered by ATI, or is it that SiS is really entering the card wars?
I would love it, since it's pretty empty with 2 competitors, however the current card doesn't look too much exciting, given it has 1 pixel/vertex shader, and I'd say that is targetted at Radeon 8500 or Ti500 competition. Still, one can only hope!

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!

More about : sis back vid card competitor

March 16, 2002 5:59:10 PM

Equal on paper, on any case that will be a good low cost card.

cheap, cheap. Think cheap, and you'll always be cheap.AMD version of semi conducteur industrie
March 16, 2002 6:33:51 PM

Third? Don't you mean fourth? I know the Kryo cards haven’t made a huge impact on the market, but they do get their piece of it. Then there's this whole Creative + 3DLabs thing.

I hope SiS do bring their own card to the market, but I doubt it will have a huge impact (at first anyway). After all, they're known for their low performance graphics so why should Joe Average think this one is any better?

"Ignorance is bliss, but I tend to get screwed over."
Related resources
March 16, 2002 7:49:23 PM

I'm lloking forward to seeing what the hell parhelia is from Matrox.

Sig of the week.
March 16, 2002 8:01:28 PM

I thought matrox pretty much pulled out of the 3D graphics card market. Of coarse I could be wrong

"Why can't I be the man? I mean, I DO have harmony balls..." -epoth
March 16, 2002 8:02:32 PM

It looks like the graphics card market <i>could</i> get really interesting over the next year or so. Even if the Kryo III, SiS336, and the Creative and Matrox cards all fail it will keep ATI and NVidia on their toes.

Just looking at the specs of the SiS336 written in that picture it looks like a high end card, which is exactly what the market needs more of (IMO). 300Mhz core, 128MB 275Mhz RAM, AGP 8X, and DirectX 8.1 support. It may perform like crap for all we know, but it certainly looks like they're aiming for the high end.

"Ignorance is bliss, but I tend to get screwed over."
March 16, 2002 8:09:31 PM

and then u realize it's got a 512 bit RAM and processor:)  j/k. Parhelia was supposed to be higher than 256 bit.

Sig of the week.
March 16, 2002 8:26:29 PM

I found this at <A HREF="http://www.vr-zone.com" target="_new">Vr-Zone</A>;

<i>"The internal test conducted by SiS shows that SiS332 outperforms the GeForce4 MX440 in the 3DMark2001 score (5200 vs 4800 3DMarks). The main reason is that GeForce4 MX440 doesn't have full DirectX 8.1 support such as PixelShader while SiS33x series have."</i>
They also said it would be out April '02.

5200 isn't great, though it depends on the rest of the platform I suppose.
Perhaps it's more of a mid-range card.

Edit: Just realised that the SiS332 benchmarked above is a lower clocked version of the SiS336 that they are going to release.

SiS336 : 300/275Mhz Core/Mem Clock, 0.15 micron, max 128MB DDR SDRAM, 9.6GB/s memory bandwidth, TV/DVI Out, April '02
SiS334 : 250/250Mhz Core/Mem clock, 0.15 micron, max 128MB DDR SDRAM, 8.0GB/s memory bandwidth, TV/DVI Out, April '02
SiS332 : 250/200Mhz Core/Mem Clock, 0.15 micron, max 128MB DDR SDRAM, 6.4Gb/s memory bandwidth TV/DVI Out, April '02

"Ignorance is bliss, but I tend to get screwed over."<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by somerandomguy on 03/16/02 06:47 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
March 16, 2002 8:49:06 PM

Hmm, if it performs that poorly, I fail to see how it will sell much.

Sig of the week.
March 16, 2002 9:23:02 PM

Well I guess that depends on the price. A low cost DirectX 8.1 card that outperforms the GeForce 4 MX 4400 would sell pretty well (if it wasn't for SiS's reputation for low performance graphics).
Oh well, I guess we'll find out eventually.

"Ignorance is bliss, but I tend to get screwed over."
March 16, 2002 9:49:48 PM

SiS's price against the GF4 MX440 will probably be even lower, considering they have the lowest prices after ECS.
This may prove nice to OEMs looking to cards that don't show names to recognize.
However it requires 8X AGP for its best, while that isn't even out, so for all we know, it may have some secret waiting in 8X?

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
March 16, 2002 11:01:26 PM

doubt it...RAM's pretty slow.

Sig of the week.
March 16, 2002 11:22:22 PM

275Mhz isn't slow.
Look at the bandwidth figures in the edit I made on an above post. 9.6GB/s of memory bandwidth shows that it's 550Mhz DDR (2x275) rather than 275Mhz DDR (2x137.5).
Note: The Geforce 4 Ti 4600 has something like 10.4GB/s of memory bandwidth with 650Mhz DDR RAM.

"Ignorance is bliss, but I tend to get screwed over."
March 16, 2002 11:26:01 PM

Hmm could SiS's solution do more bandwidth per RAM clock?
Also do video cards use Hyper Transport?
If not, then why hasn't it been tried?
I know Nforce/ Xbox uses it.

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
March 16, 2002 11:38:07 PM

Quote:
Hmm could SiS's solution do more bandwidth per RAM clock?

You're right, 9.6GB/s is more bandwidth than 550Mhz DDR RAM should be able to offer. I think it must be a typo. Either the bandwidth should read 8.8GB/s, or the clock speed should read 600Mhz (300x2). I think it's the latter, hang on and I'll see if I can find out.
<b>Edit: No, the picture of the Gigabyte card shows 275Mhz RAM, so I guess that bandwidth figure should read 8.8GB/s.</b>

Quote:
Also do video cards use Hyper Transport?
If not, then why hasn't it been tried?

No, if a card is plugged into an AGP slot, then it uses the AGP to transfer data. I'm not certain if it's even possible to create a Hyper Transport Port that you could plug a card into.

Quote:
I know Nforce/ Xbox uses it.

That's because the GPU in the XBox is intergraded into the chipset.

"Ignorance is bliss, but I tend to get screwed over."<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by somerandomguy on 03/16/02 08:41 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
March 17, 2002 1:36:57 AM

Well simply put, it might be a better bandwidth per sec clock speed RAM! I doubt it's a typo that everyone could see and no one would ever bother to say anything!

As for HT, how does Hammer use the HT on AGP? I mean how does it work and what improvements might we see for AGP and gaming through HT?

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
March 17, 2002 1:43:20 AM

Maybe they list effective bandwidth when using their HSR?

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
March 17, 2002 2:07:03 AM

You know, once RAM becomes fast enough, ie 1GHz DDR (oh man, at that speed I'd be drooling), then GPU could easily just become like a bios chip, except only larger, or maybe like a 2nd cpu slot.

Sig of the week.
March 17, 2002 4:05:13 AM

oooh wouldn't it be cool if GPUs became like CPUs and had their own multipliers, voltages, etc.

"Yea I just dropped in my new Geforce 6 GPU today, raised the multiplier and voltage to crank out 800 MHz from 600 stock"

ooh to cool, and what if you could have dual GPUs!! I can see it now, single CPU dual GPU motherboards :smile:

"Why can't I be the man? I mean, I DO have harmony balls..." -epoth
March 17, 2002 5:20:02 AM

It doesn't seem likely since all the other SiS cards listed (which have the same core) have the normal amount of bandwidth for their clock speed.

"Ignorance is bliss, but I tend to get screwed over."
March 17, 2002 3:05:31 PM

Ah, 3d s max would be a dream then.

Sig of the week.
!