Asus 2600XT and 2600Pro - ATI mid range performance
Test Setup and notes
Published: 17th August 2007 | Source: Asus | Price: |
CPU: Intel Core2Duo E6700 @ 3.33Ghz
Motherboard: XFX 650i Ultra
RAM: 1gb Mushkin XP2-5300 4-4-4-12
Sound: Creative Labs X-Fi fatal1ty FPS
HDD: OS - 160gb Hitachi Deskstar SATA II
HDD: Gaming - 2 x 40gb Hitachi Deskstars in RAID 0
Power: Silverstone Zeus 560w
Case: Silverstone TJ09
Cooling: Scythe Infinity
I am using a manual run-through of the games listed, exactly the same as in previous reviews, but doing it slightly differently to get some consistant numbers. Notice that for all games I ran through at 1280 x 1024, with the same amount of AA and AF on each game. For all of the 3Dmark benchmarks I did two runs. One run was with the stock settings that the free version of the benchmark comes with and one was with 2 x AA @ 1680 x 1050.
For installation I have installed the cards as usual with the normal PCI-E power dongle (or not as required), checked that the card is seated correctly and powered on.
I am using a clean install of Windows XP Professional SP2 with all the latest patches.
nVidia drivers used were 158.22
ATI drivers used were Catalysts 7.7's
Cards
Asus EAH 2600 XT Core Speed: 800. Memory Speed 1400 (700). Stream processor Clock: 800
Asus EAH 2600 Pro Core Speed: 600. Memory Speed 1000 (500). Stream processor Clock: 600
XFX 8600 GTS "XXX" Edition Core Speed: 730. Memory Speed: 2260 (1130). Stream Processor Clock: 1595MHz.
Foxconn 8600 GTS Core Speed: 675. Memory Speeds: 2000 (1000). Stream Processor Clock: 1450MHz
XFX 8600 GT "XXX" Edition Core Speed: 620. Memory Speeds: 1600 (800). Stream Processor Clock: 1355MHz
Most Recent Comments
The first thing I thought was, Ouch...
That's a nice review kemp, and i'm pretty surprised by it.
That's a nice review kemp, and i'm pretty surprised by it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='MikeEnIke'
The first thing I thought was, Ouch...
That's a nice review kemp, and i'm pretty surprised by it. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='Kempez'
Surprised at the performance?
|
poor AMD lolThey suck hard.
Shame really.
Edit: I'd just like to add this came as no supise considering this whole 2900 fiasco. This generation of gfx card ahs been a failure for AMD.
Shame really.
Edit: I'd just like to add this came as no supise considering this whole 2900 fiasco. This generation of gfx card ahs been a failure for AMD.
When the words Bad, Shame and Awful are in a review it cant be good.
Lol ok gonna have to read this review just for kicks now :P
thats depressing tbh
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='markkleb'
When the words Bad, Shame and Awful are in a review it cant be good.
|
No one is mentioning the fact that the 2600 is available in AGP and the 8600 is not. I dont use AGP but if you go to Valves system information page you will see that close to 40% of all the people using Valve still use a video card plugged into an AGP slot.
The fact that the 2600 comes in AGP is a HUGE advantage that Nvidia is simply overlooking.
The fact that the 2600 comes in AGP is a HUGE advantage that Nvidia is simply overlooking.
Honestly? I'd prefer an older DX9 card over the 2600 series
CSS Valid
Tell us what you think. ATI not done enough on this gen or are we overstating the case?