MSI's 2600XT benched and pixelized

Printable View

06-01-2007, 03:34 PM
G3XC

MSI's 2600XT benched and pixelized

65nm is doing just fine

Quote:

Coolaler.com, the same site that showed us the QX6850 Kentsfield, had a interesting surprise on its forum. A user with nicknamed "NV6800" posted pictures and benchmarks of MSI's 2600XT with 256MB GDDR4.

http://www.fudzilla.com/images/stori.../msi2600xt.jpg

The clocks for this card are now confirmed, and they are the same ones that we wrote about, 800MHz for the core and 2200MHz for GDDR4 memory. As for the results, 3DMark05 gave 10,802 at 1024x768 and 8,866 at 1280x1024, and 3DMark06 gave on the same resolutions, 6,118 and 5,027 points. His claim that his system used only 197W at full load, 51W more compared to idle was rather interesting.

http://www.fudzilla.com/images/stori...i2600xt-30.jpg

he system that was used in the benchmark is an Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 Dual-Core with FSB of 1066 working at 2,933 MHz, Gigabyte's GA-P965-DQ6(P965), four modules of "DDR2-800HK 512MB" and of course a MSI Radeon HD X2600 XT with 256MB GDDR4 of memory.

Leakage has started, and Computex is just around the corner.

You can check out the full forum post with Fear and Company of Heroes game benchmarks at Coolaler.com.
06-01-2007, 04:34 PM
FghtinIrshNvrDi

hmm, a little slower than my x1950xt with an opteron at 2.85. I was sortof hoping the mid range would meet the high end from last generation.

Ryan
06-01-2007, 04:36 PM
CedricFP

Why the huge disparity between Sm2 and Sm3?
06-01-2007, 04:37 PM
lowfat

Not to bad at all. Better than the 8600s :)
06-01-2007, 05:04 PM
eXceeded

gets completely raped by any form of AA/AF or even higher than 1024x768... what a poor card :S
06-01-2007, 05:24 PM
zerazax

Well it still looks better than the 8600 series. And we all know the mid range is where money is to be made, so there is still hope for ATI/AMD
06-01-2007, 05:30 PM
v_rr

Look at the picture of the cooler. The white part in the fan.
Fake....

Anyway they have plently of time to optimize drivers.... and only in the final launch we can say something about it.
06-01-2007, 05:46 PM
Okda

Quote:

Originally Posted by eXceededgoku

gets completely raped by any form of AA/AF or even higher than 1024x768... what a poor card :S

not true on low resolution

and what were you expecting from a midrange card
06-01-2007, 05:47 PM
Starscream

Quote:

Originally Posted by v_rr

Look at the picture of the cooler. The white part in the fan.
Fake....

Anyway they have plently of time to optimize drivers.... and only in the final launch we can say something about it.

doesnt have to be fake.
could be the white is white plastic wich is encasing the fan.
but most likely that pic is a promo pic from MSI and those pics are usualy photoshopped.
06-01-2007, 07:49 PM
Cybercat

Quote:

Originally Posted by lowfat

Not to bad at all. Better than the 8600s :)

By like 5%. The 2900XT scores 20% better than the 8800GTS, but in games it's the same or worse.

I'm not sure this is a good thing at all.
06-01-2007, 08:11 PM
DataNusse

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerazax

so there is still hope for ATI/AMD

Not if its 128bit. Of course the price can play a roll in that also.

But i dont see myself buying a card with 128bit memory today. Its a bottleneck. It kills totally the performance when you have AA/AF and high resolution.
Oh.. and 3DMark scores dont show the true performance IRL scenarios. Games that is.
06-01-2007, 08:16 PM
nn_step

Quote:

Originally Posted by CedricFP

Why the huge disparity between Sm2 and Sm3?

Because it is more designed for SM3 and DX10 than it is designed for SM2 and DX8
06-01-2007, 08:22 PM
fhpchris

seems like similar power consumption as a 7900gtx, but mabye a tad lower.
06-01-2007, 08:45 PM
[XC] Lead Head

Quote:

Originally Posted by fhpchris

seems like similar power consumption as a 7900gtx, but mabye a tad lower.

No PCI-E 6pin connector. Has to draw less then 75watts:)
06-01-2007, 09:38 PM
Gam3Ra

Remove this 3dmark06 picture!
6k points in 1024x768 res.!
On default (1280x1024) is 5k points!
But who need 3dmark points? I need some game benching
06-01-2007, 10:21 PM
RAMMAN

Quote:

Originally Posted by DataNusse

Not if its 128bit. Of course the price can play a roll in that also.

But i dont see myself buying a card with 128bit memory today. Its a bottleneck. It kills totally the performance when you have AA/AF and high resolution.
Oh.. and 3DMark scores dont show the true performance IRL scenarios. Games that is.

amd and nvidia have to realise that 128bit is the new 64bit.
06-01-2007, 10:32 PM
Spawne32

lol ill be waiting for nvidias new cards at the end of the year beginning of 08 thank you very much.
06-01-2007, 11:41 PM
Shintai

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAMMAN

amd and nvidia have to realise that 128bit is the new 64bit.

Sure, after they sold you the 128bit version so you can upgrade to the 256bit version on the product refresh after 6months. More money!
06-02-2007, 12:04 AM
DeathReborn

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAMMAN

amd and nvidia have to realise that 128bit is the new 64bit.

There are 64bit DX10 cards in the 8400GS & HD 2400 Pro... you'd think that they'd have dropped 64bit at least a generation ago.

There will probably be a 9100GS & HD 3300 LE on 64bit too knowing them.
06-02-2007, 12:07 AM
Proesterchen

Can't wait for the 256bit mid-range offerings. Quite frankly, they should've been here with this gen already. This latest round of 32, 64 and 128bit GPUs has been a shame vs. their 320/384/512bit high-end brethren.
06-02-2007, 02:59 AM
ahmad

I don't think I can believe this. Result looks fake until proven otherwise.

How the heck can a 3GHz x6800 give a CPU score of 2500. That is not even possible.

edit: well maybe it is possible, but we need some confirmation.
06-02-2007, 03:29 AM
krille

Bah, another disappointment. At least it's got UVD, so it'll probably be the card for the HTPC.
06-02-2007, 04:02 AM
eXceeded

next gen mid range shud own current gen high end which is not the case...
06-02-2007, 04:51 AM
XS2K

The score is legit,anyway I don't think anyone was expecting X2600XT GDDR4 to be much faster than 8600GTS,and if it behaves similary to 8600GTS in games than this year mainstream until the refresh is very bad,you can buy this beauty for less than the price of 8600GTS.....yeah it doesen't have DX10 but that's not an issue since most DX10 games have problems when running on 8800GTS/X on 8600GTS you would get a very nice slideshow.....
06-02-2007, 05:09 AM
perkam

Hmmm....not too bad...not that great...looking forward to release.

Perkam
06-02-2007, 05:25 AM
Cybercat

This gen's mainstream cards SUCK. If you're going to double performance in the highend, why not the mainstream cards too? That's what they did the last two generations.
06-02-2007, 08:08 AM
ahmad

Well how does it compare to the 8600?
06-02-2007, 10:53 AM
xsbb

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahmad

I don't think I can believe this. Result looks fake until proven otherwise.

How the heck can a 3GHz x6800 give a CPU score of 2500. That is not even possible.

edit: well maybe it is possible, but we need some confirmation.

:shrug:
06-02-2007, 11:36 AM
DeathReborn

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahmad

Well how does it compare to the 8600?

8600GTS's get around 5500-6500 depending on the version you get (OC, XXX etc).
06-02-2007, 12:00 PM
OutSider

Its better to wait until we see performance in game and the price afcourse of that midrange baby :)
06-02-2007, 04:25 PM
ahmad

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathReborn

8600GTS's get around 5500-6500 depending on the version you get (OC, XXX etc).

So basically, its in the same range.
06-02-2007, 04:39 PM
DeathReborn

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahmad

So basically, its in the same range.

Yea but I do expect the HD 2600XT GDDR4 (2200MHz) to hit closer to 7k when the drivers are more mature.
06-02-2007, 04:41 PM
Miwo

If you look at the link on the first post, the person does post FEAR and CoH benchmarks. They are pretty crappy if true
06-02-2007, 05:20 PM
Daveb2012

nice deal
06-02-2007, 05:27 PM
DoubleZero

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cybercat

By like 5%. The 2900XT scores 20% better than the 8800GTS, but in games it's the same or worse.

Not hard to find reviews where 2900xt is 20% faster than 8800gts in games.
06-02-2007, 06:38 PM
Dainas

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cybercat

This gen's mainstream cards SUCK. If you're going to double performance in the highend, why not the mainstream cards too? That's what they did the last two generations.

Yep, Why the hell do Nvidia and ATI insist on using much more expensive GDDR rather than a 256-bit bus. Its been so long since the obsoletion of 128-bit memory that I think any video-card maker should be required to put "Castrated Memory Bus" instead of "Super Fast 2GHZ GDDR" if they price it above $120.

Ohwell :p: