Reading Other Rishonim's Commentaries Instead of Rashi's Commentary

Is it necessary to study specifically with Rashi's commentary, or can one also use other Rishonim's commentaries?

According to Halacha, one should ideally study specifically with Rashi's commentary.

The Shulchan Aruch writes: "If one studies the portion with Rashi's commentary, it is considered as if he has read the translation," end quote. The Magen Avraham (section 3) writes: "that it is primary because it is based on the foundation of the Talmud," end quote. From the words of the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham, it appears that one should study specifically with Rashi's commentary, which is based on the Talmud. However, the source of the Shulchan Aruch's words is from the Rosh [first chapter of Berachot, sign 8]: "And it seems that one who reads with a commentary on the Torah fulfills the obligation of translation, as every word is explained," end quote. From the words of the Rosh, it seems that with any commentary from the Torah commentators, one would fulfill the obligation, and this is also explained in the responsa of the Rama (signs 129, 130). From the words of the Shulchan Aruch, it appears that one should study specifically with Rashi's commentary, Azmera Leshimcha (79-80).