Trident XP4: "Erm... it sucks a bit, huh?"
Home | Reviews and Features | Special Reports | Forums |

Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Trident XP4: "Erm... it sucks a bit, huh?"

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,466

    Trident XP4: "Erm... it sucks a bit, huh?"

    http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...,746233,00.asp

    Yowch! That is very disappointing indeed. I know a lot of people were quite excited about this card.

    MuFu.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,473

    Re: Trident XP4: "Erm... it sucks a bit, huh?"

    Originally posted by MuFu
    http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...,746233,00.asp

    Yowch! That is very disappointing indeed. I know a lot of people were quite excited about this card.

    MuFu.
    Um,
    isn't it primarily a mobile solution? And isn't it still very much in a beta state? I mean, it sucks badly, but so what? As badly as the integrated Savage4 you get with most mobile Athlons?

    Fallguy

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Location
    Grand Haven, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    11,332
    It originally was going to be, but they figured they could hit a few other markets as well. The thing tries to cheap by sharing curuitry between the 4 pipelines. They new this would be at a performance hit from 4 full pipelines, but they figured the space savings was worth it. I also do not think it is a fully floating point pipeline from front to back like what is required for full DX9 compatability (similar to Matrox's Parellia). It is a start and this thing is supposed to be a good budget laptop solution. I also do not think it is a true tile rendering system like STMicro's Kyro I and II. It is some sort of plock paging so it fits into its smaller caches and pipelines, it is not a hidden surface removal system like the Kyro series.

    Speeking of Kyro, I was very bumbed to hear that they had officially killed the Kyro III, but they have not given up. They just did not see it competing well with what was avaluable and they were well along with the replacement, the Kyro IV. The specs for the Kyro III were really looking good. They were basically going to double the pipelines and core speed and switch to DDR memory They were even adding limitted T&L engine. The Kyro2 was about the equal of cards with 4 times the fill rate. Now think if they took that and added DX9 (with its pixel and vertex and hardware T&L). Then throw in 4 pixel pipelines with 2 textures per pipeline and clock it at 300/600MHz with 64MB of DDR. I think even the GeForce4 Ti series would get beat on. I think the Kyro II had only a 125MHz core and used SDRAM running really slow (like 143Mhz) and two pipelines with only one texture. This thing beat the snot out of GeForce2 MX 400 which had much faster core (200Mhz I think) and double the texture units.

    If Tridents card had used the hidden surface remove technique that the Kyro used it would have had a chance. I had hopes for it. I saw numbers for it about 4 months ago. It sucked back then and I did not expect so see a major jump in performance even though they were saying this thing was supposed to score about 2-3 times higher in 3DMark 2001se. I guess they missed the mark a bit.
    AMD Phenom II x4 945 3Ghz | ASUS M4A77TD | 2X WD 1TB SATA 2 hard drive | 2x2GB Corsair XMS3 | nVidia GeForce 8800 GTS | ATI TV Wonder Theater Pro 550 | Antec P-160 case | Antec 650w Earth Watts | LG Blu-ray Super Drive | LG DVD RW | Windows 7 Pro

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Independence, MO
    Posts
    8,071
    Yeah, I loved my Kyro2. I think the clocks were 175/175, and supposedly it would OC to 200/200, but I never did better than 180. The only thing it lacked was onboard T&L, and that was the main reason I got rid of it. Good to see that the concept is still going though. I would probably buy another.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Location
    Grand Haven, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    11,332
    Oops. The Kyro was 120 or 125 and the Kyro2 was 175. They did release a Kyro2 XL or something like that but I think it was only avaluable in Europe. It clocked at something like 200 to 225Mhz. I really hope the Kyro3/4 does OK. I was very impressed with the technology and always like to see more compitition out there. I'm glad nVidia is getting hammered by ATI. They had too long of a run as "the World's Fastest".

    Just out of curiosity I did a seach for that card and found it is called the Kyro2 SE and it runs at 200Mhz. I also found another card I had not heard of called the Kyro Vivid!XS Elite. It is based off the Kyro2 with full DX8.1 features including some sort of T&L engine. It too runs at 200Mhz and uses 64MB of SDRAM. It came out earlier this year. It also looks like they have gotten quite a bit out of the drivers now. I took a quick look at a reveiw and it showed about a 20% boost with the new drivers in a reveiw done last year of the first Vivid!XS based on the Kyro2 (not the SE version) running at 175Mhz. They got some impressive scores for such an outdated card. I'd love to get one of theseVivid!XS Elite just to play around with.
    Last edited by Todd a; December 8th, 2002 at 12:56 PM.
    AMD Phenom II x4 945 3Ghz | ASUS M4A77TD | 2X WD 1TB SATA 2 hard drive | 2x2GB Corsair XMS3 | nVidia GeForce 8800 GTS | ATI TV Wonder Theater Pro 550 | Antec P-160 case | Antec 650w Earth Watts | LG Blu-ray Super Drive | LG DVD RW | Windows 7 Pro

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,466

    Re: Re: Trident XP4: "Erm... it sucks a bit, huh?"

    The review is pretty bad - they seem to think this card is a TBR, obviously misunderstanding the term "Hierarcial Tiling". I am pretty sure the XP4 is an IMR.

    Originally posted by fallguy


    Um,
    isn't it primarily a mobile solution? And isn't it still very much in a beta state? I mean, it sucks badly, but so what? As badly as the integrated Savage4 you get with most mobile Athlons?

    Fallguy
    No it's not primarily a mobile solution - the mobile part was launched a while ago but it is way too slow for desktop use. I agree that judgement should be reserved until we see a final production board, especially since this review seems to set out to slate the card from the start. I really hope the performance of the final board is a world apart from that of this sample. A fillrate of 177 MPixels/s@230MHz is absolutely unbelievable considering the specs - something seems very wrong, although that particular result could just be a benchmark quirk (doesn't explain the dire in-game performance though).

    It wouldn't be so bad if Trident PR hadn't claimed 80% of the performance of a GF4 Ti4600 and 70% of an R9700 Pro a while ago - it's struggling to even say in touch with the Radeon 9000 Pro right now. It's as if they are about to release an 18 month-old, mobile chipset for the desktop market! I am pretty sure Trident can't make the ASIC for less than ATi make the RV250/RV250M either, which outperforms it by well over 50% in most cases and probably doesn't consume much more power (perhaps even less, since ATi have more experience when it comes to power-saving technology). IMO, it is a disappointing showing because it promised so much - "remarkable silicon real-estate savings" etc. Anandtech said it had potential a while back when they had an early sample to test, but things don't seem to have changed much since then. Extreme Tech also seem to think the part is DX9-class, WTF?!

    MuFu.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,466
    Four pixel pipes
    Eight texturing units per pipe
    That would mean this ASIC has the greatest textured pixel throughput per clock of anything available today.

    MuFu.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    cumberland, indiana
    Posts
    67
    well, maybe not... check out this article:
    http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1681&p=1

    it says a little something different... it says that it is a decent card and the top of the line cards might rival the geforce4 ti 4200...
    asus ncch-dl 2 x intel xeon 3.2 (sl7td) @ 3.6 (16*225) 4 x 512 mb corsair pc3200 2.5-3-3-6 ati r9800 pro 256 mb 2 x wd 74 gb raptor (raid 0) winxp pro sp2

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,466
    Yes, that's the article I mentioned in my post. It's 4 months old - since then, the performance of the XP4 T2 seems to have made little or no ground. The Ti4200 and Radeon 9000 are however quite a bit faster now than they were then (thanks to .

    nVidia and ATi will release DX9-class, mainstream cards in the Spring (NV31 and RV350, respectively). Assuming Trident get these cards out by then they are going to face considerably stronger opposition in the sub-$100 sector because of it.

    MuFu.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    cumberland, indiana
    Posts
    67
    Originally posted by MuFu
    Yes, that's the article I mentioned in my post. It's 4 months old - since then, the performance of the XP4 T2 seems to have made little or no ground. The Ti4200 and Radeon 9000 are however quite a bit faster now than they were then (thanks to .

    nVidia and ATi will release DX9-class, mainstream cards in the Spring (NV31 and RV350, respectively). Assuming Trident get these cards out by then they are going to face considerably stronger opposition in the sub-$100 sector because of it.

    MuFu.
    oops... sorry... i didn't realize that it was the same article, just on a different site. the only thing i would imagine these would be good for are oem computers or those on a budget
    asus ncch-dl 2 x intel xeon 3.2 (sl7td) @ 3.6 (16*225) 4 x 512 mb corsair pc3200 2.5-3-3-6 ati r9800 pro 256 mb 2 x wd 74 gb raptor (raid 0) winxp pro sp2

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
  •