• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Radeon HD3400 + HD3600 series

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=10448

Pricing for the Radeon HD 3400 series has been stated within the $49-65 range while the Radeon HD 3600 series ranges in price from $79-99 depending on the amount of memory on the card.

wow wonder what the performance of these things are going to be. thoes are some damn good pricing and the performance will probably be pretty good for the price.... wow did i just say that about something from AMD ??? :confused: wtf just happened to me, what the hell am i doing over here on the ATI side of the fence, i made my once a month appearance a coupla days ago, AHHH SOMETHING IS TAKING OVER! :beer::beer::beer::beer:
 
wow wonder what the performance of these things are going to be. thoes are some damn good pricing and the performance will probably be pretty good for the price.... wow did i just say that about something from AMD ??? :confused: wtf just happened to me, what the hell am i doing over here on the ATI side of the fence, i made my once a month appearance a coupla days ago, AHHH SOMETHING IS TAKING OVER! :beer::beer::beer::beer:

The peformance is rougly the same as the HD2600 and 2400 respectivly but the price is very very nice. It may not be a videocard I would use but certinaly my mom or sister would appreaciate it
 
I'm divided -- all their "new" stuff is basically much less expensive and slightly tweaked respins of their previous line. So the price vs performance is awesome, but the bottom line is that absolute performance has really only gone up slightly.

Is that inherently bad? For the grand majority of computer users (read: people who aren't bigtime hardware enthusiasts) this really is good news. Slightly better performance for WAY less cost. But for those of us who are looking for the next uber-rig, it's a bit disappointing.

In that same vein, the lack of truly faster parts on AMD's side of the fence means NVIDIA doesn't have to move much either. So it stagnates the entire platform, but at the same time, increased price competition drives everyone's prices down.

It's hard to be mad, as you might be able to tell from the pair of 3870's in my signature :beer:
 
mk but still a slightly better HD2600 for less ... that would be a SWEEET! htpc card (untill nvidia comes out with something like the 9600gt) but even then i dont think nvidia will be able to touch that price.

I mean what kinda scores are ppl pullin with the HD2600 in 3dmark06?
 
overall these cards will prob be 4-10% better then their hd2000 series brethren :(. The strange thing is that leaked samples have been drawing slightly more power even after the shirk, hopefully this will change with final hardware. Other then price these cards are not looking good to me at all.

It looks like we are going into a price war similar to the pentium D 65nm shirk days. Cant wait to see what nVidia counters with besides the 9600gt which we already have substantial info on.

It looks like my hopes for a good midrange similar to the pre dx10 days is not comming true. Overall I am quite dissapointed with both ATi and nVidia for their recent midranges. I hope nVidia proves me wrong and releases something as good as the 6600 and 7600 series was in its day.
 
Last edited:
overall these cards will prob be 4-10% better then their hd2000 series brethren :(. The strange thing is that leaked samples have been drawing slightly more power even after the shirk, hopefully this will change with final hardware. Other then price these cards are not looking good to me at all.

It looks like we are going into a price war similar to the pentium D 65nm shirk days. Cant wait to see what nVidia counters with besides the 9600gt which we already have substantial info on.

It looks like my hopes for a good midrange similar to the pre dx10 days is not comming true. Overall I am quite dissapointed with both ATi and nVidia for their recent midranges. I hope nVidia proves me wrong and releases something as good as the 6600 and 7600 series was in its day.

You don't think the 8800GT and the HD3570 are good mid range cards?
 
IMHO they are not midrange cards. Both are biased on of high end cards that have been out for many months and thus are something like the equivalent of a x800gto2 or 6800gs was in its day. Great cards for sure but not midrange. Basically what I am saying is right now if you want a graphics card for gaming you are going to start looking at the 3850 just because all cards below it in price just dont cut it for gaming even at low res IMHO. Because of this you start looking at the $150 mark for a new gpu rather then something cheaper. If you where to start a thread right now saying that you are going to buy a $100 dollar card you most likely would be told by everyone rightly so to blow out the budget and buy a $150 card. Price/performance just doesnt exist like it used to, right now the best price/performance cards are no longer midrange and current midrange cards barely beat out past gen midrange cards.

However this is just my way of looking at the current situation and I could easily see how one would think differently. In the end it has no bearing on anything and I shouldnt have even brought it up as it is somewhat off topic.
 
ati has left open some areas,imo.. like a 128bit 3400 or a 256bit 3600... dosent have to be high end.. just give the lower end at least one card to be worthy of buying in that section.
 
ati has left open some areas,imo.. like a 128bit 3400 or a 256bit 3600... dosent have to be high end.. just give the lower end at least one card to be worthy of buying in that section.

Huh? Why add the cost of 256bit memory interface to the 3600 series? That would mean at least one more PCB layer (if not two) and a requirement for double the memory chips.

Why is 15% less performance than a 3850 unacceptable to you? It spanks the 7900GT, and the 8600GT. What else do you think you want for $120?
 
I bet the OEMs will be all over these for how cheap they are, but I don't OCForums members will find these too appealing, unless it's for HTPC purposes.

ATTACK OF THE REHASHES!
 
Huh? Why add the cost of 256bit memory interface to the 3600 series? That would mean at least one more PCB layer (if not two) and a requirement for double the memory chips.

Why is 15% less performance than a 3850 unacceptable to you? It spanks the 7900GT, and the 8600GT. What else do you think you want for $120?

it was a thought cause the low end sucks way to much...

well if they were using the 64bit ic's then yea they would need double. all in all it would lower overall cost. give the consumer across the board a real bargin to give NV something to do... if your buying 64bit 1.8ghz ics and if for the same cost you or less you could get 128bit at xxx(related speed for corresonding bandwidth), why not? the video card market should really be moving away from 64bit memory on lower end cards,imo.

sometimes Alb peoples needs for a computer change over time, like mine. as im not gaming as much or any at all. imo it would be nice to have a better low end card worthy of my $$. since i consider making a mini computer for dvd/blue-ray and recorded show playback.. the higher memory bandwidth from the 128bit would be nice when using 1080P res.
 
Now, if only a manufacturer would ship one to any one of the tech evaluation entities (tom's MaxPC, etc) so we can really see what they can do. And of course who will be the first to offer one for sale?
 
sometimes Alb peoples needs for a computer change over time, like mine. as im not gaming as much or any at all. imo it would be nice to have a better low end card worthy of my $$. since i consider making a mini computer for dvd/blue-ray and recorded show playback.. the higher memory bandwidth from the 128bit would be nice when using 1080P res.

Playing back BluRay is not bandwidth intensive at all (for a GPU), it's computationally intensive for accelerating H.264 decode. The memory bandwidth could be an entire order of magnitue lower and the bottleneck would still be the GPU itself.

So, that argument is out. $100 is "low end", unless you're scraping the bottom of the barrel for an AMD 3000+ and a $50 motherboard to plug it into. And if you're on that kind of system, then you aren't going to miss the performance of a 256-bit datapath on your GPU.

I dont' understand why it's that difficult to understand...:confused: A tiny bit over $100 right now (not to mention, where that price will be in two months when NVIDIA comes back with something) will get you almost 50% more performance than a 7900GT. So you just came from a $200 video card to a $100 video card, and you're complaining?

I believe the real problem is that you don't understand what you're asking for. You attribute all this board cost to ATI, but you completely ignore the cost for the company who builds the PCB's and ships the boards. The chip itself is not that expensive, perhaps 20-30% of the entire cost of the board (well, until you get to the higher-end GPU's). The vast majority of your cost is from the PCB, all the layers and tracing that make up that PCB, all the supplimentary electronics on that PCB, and then cooling, labelling, packaging, distribution, and advertising.

If you want to reduce cost bigtime, you need to target the PCB costs. And that's where less layers = less traces = less supplimentary hardware = less cost to you. So when you are complaining about lack of 256-bit memory bus, you're also forgettng that in doing so they just saved you probably 30% of the cost of the PCB: three layers instead of four, four hundred less traces, less power supply regulation issues, less ground plane worries, less EMI crosstalk problems that need shielding, the list goes on.
 
Last edited:
what makes it hard for you to understand, that i dont feel the low end with a 64bit path is worth my money? if lower clocks = less heat then how is going to a 128bit vs 64bit that more costly.. ATI addmitted there high end gpu's dont need a 512bit wide memory data path. you talk of costs but if the increase to the card is something on the order of 5-15% its well worth it,imo.

i complety understand what i want, i may not have been able to make it clear. i fail to see how you can tell me what i want to see or dont want to see. i find the lack of any option for something to offer more to the people in low end and mid range segments. i dont see $100 as low end, low end is $50 range.

if the PCB's are there already with the wider path then how is that costing them more money? it wouldnt be that hard to use the 3850 pcb then with just less streams. you tring to add other things that wouldnt matter when they have things already to use in the supply chain. it not about changing the current PCB's but using ones already there to offer a wider range of products. there is always the side that people could buy them and oc to get more from it.. sorry if my thoughts of one card here and one card there has you up in arms..just leave it alone then,ok?
 
Last edited:
You want a $50 video card with a 256-bit memory bus? You sit there and talk about "They can just reuse the 3850 PCB", when it's quite likely the 3850 PCB cost them more than you want to pay for the entire card and the packaging and cooling that must go with it?

I'm ignoring the rest of your post, because if you can't grasp the above, then you won't understand the rest. A PCB is not a $5 part; "already have one" is not a cost-savings function. And if you want a $50 video card that can play back BluRay, then you'd best be prepared to spend $200 on a processor.
 
Back