ATI unveils 'world's first' strained silicon GPU

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/09/24/ati_unveils_mobile_gpu_updates/

Finally some information about the mysterious MR X1700, MR X1450, and MR X1350. As speculated all three's design is exactly the same as their predecessors. The only difference is the manufacturing process. While nVidia went with TSMC's 80nm process ATI decided to use a 90nm strained silicon process which is a first in GPUs. The article mentions TSMC being the manufacturer, but it was previously known to be UMC. Since TSMC is focusing on 80nm now, it's very likely that it was a typo and it is UMC and that would explain why UMC is calling their 90nm process "improved".

We know that the MR X1700 doesn't offer much better performance than the MR X1600 and even ATI's own benchmarks show that. The selling point is that they offer that little boost with the same or lower power levels so there is an improvement in performance/watt.

 

An update. I found the ATI's Presentation slides for the MR X1700, MR X1450, and MR X1350.

http://www.elitebastards.com/cms/in...sk=view&id=155&Itemid=29&limit=1&limitstart=0

From the way things are phrased it looks like the 90nm strained silicon process is only used in the MR X1700 not on the MR X1450 or MR X1350. What has changed in the later 2 models is unclear. Probably nothing. Any benefits is just from improved yields due to a mature process rather than a new process.

On to the MR X1700. It looks like it's manufactured by TSMC afterall despite reports of production at UMC. Anyways, ATI claims that the MR X1700 scores 4500 in 3DMark05 while the MR X1600 scores 4200. However, in actual games the advantage doesn't show through. They have a deceptive scale and in actuality the biggest difference is a 8 fps increase in Quake 4. However, no settings or resolutions are listed. Besides, an 8fps increase in Quake 4 could just as easily by ATI's continued OpenGL enhancements in their drivers.

While ATI may play up strained silicon, I'm betting the improvement actually isn't that significant. Their slide actually gives more focus on Back Bias which the MR X1600 already has and actually gives a 20% figure for the benefit to the MR X1600/MR X1700 while no flashy numbers are associated with the strained silicon advantage.

They also advertise the W3P as the first notebook carrying the MR X1700.