More Mainstream DX10: AMD's 2400 and 2600 Series
by Derek Wilson on June 28, 2007 8:35 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
The Test and Power
We will only be looking at DX9 performance under Windows XP today. This is still the platform of choice for gamers, and thus very important to examine. This doesn't mean we are ignoring DX10. We have a follow-up article on DX10 performance coming down the pipe next week. Here we'll take a look at how these cards stack up against the currently available DX10 games and demos.
We are also planning to look at UVD vs. PureVideo in a follow up article. Video decode is an important feature of these cards and we are interested in seeing how NVIDIA and AMD hardware stacks up against each other. Please stay tuned for this article as well.
For this series of tests, we used the following setup:
Performance Test Configuration:
As for power, the 65nm AMD hardware shows rather unimpressive results. At idle, both the 8600 GTS and 8600 GT draw less power than the 2600 XT and 2600 Pro respectively. Under load we see the AMD parts become more competitive in terms of low power. Not even 65nm can help push the 2600 XT past the 8600 GTS in terms of power draw though.
As for our game tests, first we'll take a look at how only the new AMD HD series parts stack up against NVIDIA's 8 series competitors. Following that we'll break down test by game and show performance verses previous and current generation hardware.
We will only be looking at DX9 performance under Windows XP today. This is still the platform of choice for gamers, and thus very important to examine. This doesn't mean we are ignoring DX10. We have a follow-up article on DX10 performance coming down the pipe next week. Here we'll take a look at how these cards stack up against the currently available DX10 games and demos.
We are also planning to look at UVD vs. PureVideo in a follow up article. Video decode is an important feature of these cards and we are interested in seeing how NVIDIA and AMD hardware stacks up against each other. Please stay tuned for this article as well.
For this series of tests, we used the following setup:
Performance Test Configuration:
| CPU: | Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 (2.93GHz/4MB) |
| Motherboard: | ASUS P5W-DH |
| Chipset: | Intel 975X |
| Chipset Drivers: | Intel 8.2.0.1014 |
| Hard Disk: | Seagate 7200.7 160GB SATA |
| Memory: | Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 4-4-4-12 (1GB x 2) |
| Video Card: | Various |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 8.38.9.1-rc2 NVIDIA ForceWare 158.22 |
| Desktop Resolution: | 1280 x 800 - 32-bit @ 60Hz |
| OS: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
As for power, the 65nm AMD hardware shows rather unimpressive results. At idle, both the 8600 GTS and 8600 GT draw less power than the 2600 XT and 2600 Pro respectively. Under load we see the AMD parts become more competitive in terms of low power. Not even 65nm can help push the 2600 XT past the 8600 GTS in terms of power draw though.
As for our game tests, first we'll take a look at how only the new AMD HD series parts stack up against NVIDIA's 8 series competitors. Following that we'll break down test by game and show performance verses previous and current generation hardware.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
96 Comments
View All Comments
Le Québécois - Thursday, June 28, 2007 - link
I was replying to that. There is no REAL review or even preview from DX10 (game that have been developed from the start for it) now. I know very well that you will need a very good Video card to play Crysis in its full glory.
gigahertz20 - Thursday, June 28, 2007 - link
If these cards suck that bad in DX9 they are bound to suck even harder in DX10. Don't give me this...OH they will do better in DX10....pffff. I'm going to hold off and buy a DX10 card once the games come out, that way I will know what performs the best and buy then the Geforce 8900 series will be out this Q3 making the prices drop even further the the 8800 line.TA152H - Thursday, June 28, 2007 - link
You're obviously not very bright, I never said they'd perform better or worse. I said it makes more sense to wait until the results are in before passing judgment. Don't put words in my mouth.PrinceGaz - Thursday, June 28, 2007 - link
First post! :)nameisfake - Sunday, July 1, 2007 - link
I have to agree but disagree about these cards.I agree that they will suck for gaming.
But, I think they can be fantastic in the right application.
I would love a 2600pro in a family pc.
1. Gets rid of onboard ram sucking video
2. 128mbit path to its own onboard ram
3. Hardware built in to offload multimedia from the cpu
4. Low power requirements
5. Cheap
6. Drop to low res and an occasional game will function
A person may want a very fast modern pc but not be a gamer.
These cards are great for that small market and oems.
My 2cents
DigitalFreak - Thursday, June 28, 2007 - link
Dude, that shit died years ago...