"X1600PRO, X800GT/GTO/GTO2 versus GeForce 6600GT" confrontation
Benchmarking
|
Motherboard:
|
ASUSTek P5ND2-SLI nForce4 SLI Intel Edition;
|
|
Processor:
|
Intel Pentium 4 630 (3.00GHz 2MB LGA775 FSB800MHz) BOX;
|
|
Memory:
|
2ġ DDR2-533 512Mb Elixir PC4300;
|
|
PSU:
|
COLORSit PSU400U GOLDEN (400W, PFC, 12cm FAN);
|
|
Operating system:
|
Microsoft Windows XP SP2;
|
|
Drivers:
|
ATI Catalyst 6.1 WHQL;
NVIDIA ForceWare 81.98 WHQL.
|
Results:
As usual, let's start with the synthetics. The OpenGL benchmark Codecreatures Benchmark Pro keeps being rather a hard nut to crack for most mid-end video cards, although the set of tests is a bit outdated. This benchmark gives an easier assessment of a video card's operability, e.g. for 3D-modeling suites than for games. It is well seen that the increase in the number of pipelines for X800 series results in higher performance and some advantage of X1600PRO of the major rival - GeForce 6600GT.
This suite models operation in various CAD/CAM-systems using scenes and modules of real suites. In the total, the winner is GeForce 6600GT of 256 MB onboard video memory. But the remaining results imply a different conclusion - performance in running applications is poorly dependent on the power of the video card.
3Dmark'03 shows an alignment of forces in games of the past years. The suite does not use over 128 MB memory, so the major factors which affect the result are the clock speed of the GPU, the number of operating pipelines, and the memory frequency. The failure of X1600PRO with 256 MB DDR2 is evident.
3DMark'05 allows estimating performance in modern games. That's where the new architecture X1600PRO allows to catch up and even somehow overtake GeForce 6600GT. On the other hand, the suite shows that 128 MB of fast memory is better than 256 MB of not very fast memory. Also of note are the superb results of overclocked X800GT - only overclocking saves the situation. It is also worth mentioning the practicality of 256 MB for GeForce 6600GT (increase in the cost of the card related to the rise of memory capacity is proportional to the performance boost).
 Futuremark 3DMark'06 is an absolutely new package which has integrated all the advancement of computer graphics of the recent years and shows an alignment of forces for future video cards. Since the future requires support for PS 3.0 and HDR, then the X800 series is no longer welcome there (the second part of gaming tests simply won't start on these cards). At that, we can congratulate ATI on the creation of a competitive chip which is able defeating GeForce 6600GT for smaller amount of money in future.
Well.. synthetics is simply synthetics, but people play games.
Far Cry is no longer fearful to video cards for quite a white, so they all provide comfortable gameplay for it, whereas for high-end video cards all depends on the CPU capability.
In "Riddick", we found an annoying issue - the game simply wouldn't start with new drivers for GeForce 6600GT, but after a few unsuccessful tries to find suitable drivers we gave up the idea so as not to waste time. So, having set the texture AA and quality settings to the maximum, we selected the shader options SM 2.0 and compared to Radeon video cards. Unless most recent graphic features are used, then X1600PRO loses at performance, but it offers a lower price as a tradeoff, which is better even if compared to X800GT.
At Half-Life 2, with the image quality set to high, GeForce 6600GT demonstrated quite a good showing. The graphs depict performance reading for this and other games taken with the Auto-detect option selected, since many users prefer this way to get an optimum image quality at optimum performance.
Serious Sam 2 at 1024x768 with the automatic quality adjustment provides a comfortable gameplay for any of the video cards, but once the best quality is selected, it seems the CPU is no longer enough. On the other hand, we were able to see the results for GeForce 6600GT with 256 MB memory - it surpassed even the overclocked X800GTO2.
Doom 3 has always been a patrimony for NVIDIA cards, so we are not surprised by the results. As to X1600PRO, the conclusion is not very optimistic - the 4 texture units are unable fully loading 12 pixel pipelines. But Doom 3 is just a special case, and let's hope there will be fewer such cases onwards for X1600. Quake 4 is a sequel to the engine of Doom 3, so the results are unchanged and thus repeat.
F.E.A.R. offers the hardest engine to date and in some ways expresses the demands of future games. At this game, X1600PRO has essentially rehabilitated, but the comfortable FPS at maximum FSAA and soft shades is attained only on X800GTO and X800GTO2.
Final Words
Well, what do we infer from our today's benchmarking? We can get answers to many questions.
First, is the "middling" X1600PRO worth of attention? We can state with confidence: "Yes!". Despite the slightly misbalanced architecture, high operating speed of the GPU and memory allow producing a performance sufficient for the mid-end systems. For thrifty users, that is an ideal option for today's price level. In choosing a video card like that, we should be aware that 128 MB of fast memory is better than 256 MB of the slower.
Secondly, are there are worthy warriors in the X800GT line? As regards the youngest X800GT, it can appeal to the buyer only for its price - unless it is cheaper than that for X1600PRO (very unlikely), you will have to master a new overclocking technique. On the other hand, X800GTO can be quite a good buy unless it is more expensive than GeForce 6600GT. Despite some architectural lag, video cards on this GPU still offer some performance margin.
Thirdly, what do the extra 128 MB video memory give? We can answer this question only based on examples of similar operating memory frequency. For such cases, we can state with confidence: "Yes, it gives much in new games." But, are you still playing old games?". Otherwise, the best video card will be the one whose memory runs faster.
We appreciate PF Servis (Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine) for the test-bench and video cards presented for tests.
 |
Top Stories: |
 |
 |
|
MoBo:
| |
|
|
VGA Card:
|
|
|
|
CPU & Memory:
|
|
