If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Are MSI and Gigabyte the same?
Because the MSI model RX9550-TD128 Radeon 9550 ATI graphics card looks
exactly like a Gigabyte GV-R955128D, except for the colors and heatsinks. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Manufacturers all build their cards based on the same chipset,ATI or Nvidia
design it and the various companies come up with their versions,so there's always a similarity. "larry moe 'n curly" wrote in message oups.com... Because the MSI model RX9550-TD128 Radeon 9550 ATI graphics card looks exactly like a Gigabyte GV-R955128D, except for the colors and heatsinks. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Gojira wrote: Manufacturers all build their cards based on the same chipset,ATI or Nvidia design it and the various companies come up with their versions,so there's always a similarity. These don't have just the same chipset, but every tiny surface mount resistor and capacitor is in the same location. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
larry moe 'n curly, 10/5/2005,6:05:05 PM, wrote:
Gojira wrote: Manufacturers all build their cards based on the same chipset,ATI or Nvidia design it and the various companies come up with their versions,so there's always a similarity. These don't have just the same chipset, but every tiny surface mount resistor and capacitor is in the same location. I have seen this with some other video boards that were based on the Nvidia GeForce 4200 chipset. One was blue (Albatron) and one was gold (Chaintech). They looked exactly the same except for the fan and the board color itself. -- No matter what happens someone will find a way to take it too seriously. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 22:09:40 +0000, badgolferman wrote:
larry moe 'n curly, 10/5/2005,6:05:05 PM, wrote: Gojira wrote: Manufacturers all build their cards based on the same chipset,ATI or Nvidia design it and the various companies come up with their versions,so there's always a similarity. These don't have just the same chipset, but every tiny surface mount resistor and capacitor is in the same location. I have seen this with some other video boards that were based on the Nvidia GeForce 4200 chipset. One was blue (Albatron) and one was gold (Chaintech). They looked exactly the same except for the fan and the board color itself. The chip people provide reference designs, if the boards are identical then both board manufacturers just took the Nvidia reference design and used it. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On 5 Oct 2005 15:05:05 -0700, "larry moe 'n curly"
wrote: Gojira wrote: Manufacturers all build their cards based on the same chipset,ATI or Nvidia design it and the various companies come up with their versions,so there's always a similarity. These don't have just the same chipset, but every tiny surface mount resistor and capacitor is in the same location. It is quite common for many companies to use the exact same reference design and PCB layout. However, some manufactures, in recent years more often Asus and MSI, tended to deviate from the reference designs early on in a GPU's product cycle while other manufacturers, especially 2nd tier, seemed to wait until nVidia was clearing out chips cheap, to produce different lower cost designs more optimized to lower clockspeed. Then again, it could be that nVidia also released these lower speed designs in some cases, similar to what was done for GF4TI4200 vs. GF4TI4400/4600 though 4200 came into the market earlier than many clock-reduced designs seem to. While it would be common for more than one manufacturer to have same locations and "sometimes" even same capacitor values, it is rarer for more than one to use the exact same capacitor makes and models- something harder to discriminate with cards using surface-mount caps than those with leaded electrolytics. I have not heard of any Gigabyte and MSI boards being "exactly" identical, but then I'd never looked into it either. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
kony, 10/5/2005,8:34:31 PM, wrote:
similar to what was done for GF4TI4200 vs. GF4TI4400/4600 though 4200 came into the market earlier Can you explain this please? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On 06 Oct 2005 00:59:29 GMT, "badgolferman"
wrote: kony, 10/5/2005,8:34:31 PM, wrote: similar to what was done for GF4TI4200 vs. GF4TI4400/4600 though 4200 came into the market earlier Can you explain this please? Ti4400/4600 used one nVidia reference design while 4200 used a different nvidia reference design. At this point I don't remember who, if anyone had also produced a non-reference layout for either of these. With the 4200, nVidia was selling them as a primary mid-level product alongside the other two. If you look at other chips like TNT2, it was at least a couple of years later than the technology was recycled into M64 and Vanta. More recently there were chips like the FX5900 later turned into FX5900XT. I think it was more a matter of timing than anything, that TI4600 PCB was a huge and expensive layout and they needed something in the mid-level right away but where phasing out GF3 already and nobody really took a liking to GF4MX since it was only a DX7 part. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|