Friday, June 1st 2007
MSI Radeon HD X2600 XT benckmarks
MSI Radeon HD X2600 XT benchmarks
Seems like first RV630 samples are out in the wild. What's interesting besides the framerates is the 65nm architecture which seems to work out fine. Forum member NV6800 on the Coolaler.com forum who tested the card claims his system only drew 197W at full load. That's just 51W more compared to when the system was idle.
The system used for the benches consisted of a Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 Dual-Core with an FSB of 1066 @ 2,933 MHz, two Gigabyte PC2-6400 memory modules and a MSI Radeon HD X2600 XT with 256MB GDDR4 RAM. The GPU was clocked at 800 MHz, while the memory's clock was 1100 MHz.
Source:
PCGH
Seems like first RV630 samples are out in the wild. What's interesting besides the framerates is the 65nm architecture which seems to work out fine. Forum member NV6800 on the Coolaler.com forum who tested the card claims his system only drew 197W at full load. That's just 51W more compared to when the system was idle.
The system used for the benches consisted of a Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 Dual-Core with an FSB of 1066 @ 2,933 MHz, two Gigabyte PC2-6400 memory modules and a MSI Radeon HD X2600 XT with 256MB GDDR4 RAM. The GPU was clocked at 800 MHz, while the memory's clock was 1100 MHz.
35 Comments on MSI Radeon HD X2600 XT benckmarks
10k in 3d05?! I can over 9k with my own system. if these benches are correct. it proves nothing but a rather expensive upgrade (going on fact that most people who come to this forum have pretty upto date or recent systems) SM.3 or not 10k seems a little low
his system is way uber above mine.
It gets basically the same score as my comp (i get around 11k) when my CPU is at 3Ghz (same as the x6800 used). Its only a 200 point difference, so im not complaining :)
Having said that, we know the R600 architecture is very DX10 biased and uses a completely new method of AA/AF rendering which is why it does not perform as well at these synthetic benchmarks, just like tihe 2900XT and that this new architecture really struggles with the older style AA/AF rendering methods that exist within DX9 Benches/games so I dont think all is lost just yet, personally I will take this with a "pinch of salt" until the card is released with some decent drivers.
The 8600GTS eats this card in 3Dmark05 AND FEAR, and that was with an extreme system. I have to admit, the green camp is looking awful good this time around, maybe I should stop waiting for ATI to suddenly get fantastic drivers and just get a G80.
9800XT (cant really talk about the FX series :p) > X600/6600
X800XT PE/6800 Ultra > 7600/X1600 <-- (not x1650, remember we are talking about the midrange that they first release....for all we know, there is a HD 2650 coming out ;))
I reckon AMD should have made the HD 2600 256-bit tho, unless they are saving that for a future model.
If the performance is really sub par, I just hope they have price cuts to justify it. I know I can't afford high-end, but if when winter comes around an HD2900XT is below $250 because it can't compete, I may just have to buy one.
One think is for sure, we really do need ATi to be at least competetive in DX10 otherwise these card prices are never going to come down enough to appeal to the majority of mainstream buyers, and thats bad for us.