Asus 2600XT and 2600Pro - ATI mid range performance
Game Benchmarks - CoD 2, F.E.A.R. and Oblivion
Published: 17th August 2007 | Source: Asus | Price: |
Call of Duty 2 is a fairly recent game that uses a lot of DirectX 9.0c features, including real time shadows, amazing smoke effects and some nice looking HDR effects. This makes the game very taxing at these high resolutions. I played a fully patched up version of the game. Once again I played through the game with a two minute gaming session including explosions, smoke and also lots of snow.
Note that for this review I played at 1280 x 1024 with 4 x AA, all other settings were on maximum.
Let's see how the cards fared here:

Call of Duity sees the 2600 XT do pretty nicely with a small lead in Maximum and Average FPS. Playing Call of Duty 2 was a decent experience with the cards, although at points there was lag not FPS related. After a lot of checking and re-installing it seemed to be a driver related problem.
F.E.A.R.
F.E.A.R. is a game based on an engine that uses many features of DirectX 9.0c. It has volumetric lighting, soft shadows, parallax mapping and particle effects, with a slow-motion mode that really taxes today's top of the line GPU's. I played a fully updated game with the latest patches installed. I played three two-minute runs on a taxing part of the game with plenty of action, using slow-motion for the full time whilst firing at enemy soldiers and using grenades that produce a cool "blast" contortion effect when blown up.
The cards were played at 1280 x 1024 with 4 x AA, 4 x FSAA and soft shadows disabled. All other settings were on maximum.
However upon playing through F.E.A.R. the 2600's both fall well behind. It has to be said that the gaming experience whilst playing F.E.A.R. was pretty poor even at 1280 x 1024, due to inconsistant frame rates.
Oblivion
Oblivion is an awesome RPG with a simply huge immersive environment, great graphics and incredibly realistic scenery. This game is currently one of the most testing games that you can buy and it is certainly a test of the high-end cards here. I chose to do a run-through of the Arena part of the game. I spoke to a character, did some magic whilst in a fight and fought in the arena that is pretty huge. Also as well as doing this test I took a wander around to make sure that the benchmark resembled the general gameplay with each card. In-game settings used:
Oblivion was played at 1280 x 1024 with HDR enabled and no AA.
F.E.A.R. is a game based on an engine that uses many features of DirectX 9.0c. It has volumetric lighting, soft shadows, parallax mapping and particle effects, with a slow-motion mode that really taxes today's top of the line GPU's. I played a fully updated game with the latest patches installed. I played three two-minute runs on a taxing part of the game with plenty of action, using slow-motion for the full time whilst firing at enemy soldiers and using grenades that produce a cool "blast" contortion effect when blown up.
The cards were played at 1280 x 1024 with 4 x AA, 4 x FSAA and soft shadows disabled. All other settings were on maximum.
However upon playing through F.E.A.R. the 2600's both fall well behind. It has to be said that the gaming experience whilst playing F.E.A.R. was pretty poor even at 1280 x 1024, due to inconsistant frame rates.
Oblivion
Oblivion is an awesome RPG with a simply huge immersive environment, great graphics and incredibly realistic scenery. This game is currently one of the most testing games that you can buy and it is certainly a test of the high-end cards here. I chose to do a run-through of the Arena part of the game. I spoke to a character, did some magic whilst in a fight and fought in the arena that is pretty huge. Also as well as doing this test I took a wander around to make sure that the benchmark resembled the general gameplay with each card. In-game settings used:
Oblivion was played at 1280 x 1024 with HDR enabled and no AA.
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







Tell us what you think. ATI not done enough on this gen or are we overstating the case?