HIS, Palit, MSI, Sapphire
RADEON 2600/2900 PRO/XT Roundup

VSync is disabled.

Test results: performance comparison

We used the following test applications:

• Splinter Cell Chaos Theory v.1.04 (Ubisoft) - DirectX 9.0, shaders 3.0 (with/without HDR), maximum settings.
  
  
• Call Of Juarez (Techland/Ubisoft) - DirectX 9.0, shaders 3.0 (HDR), demo (demo Tests were run with maximum quality. The batch file is included.
  
  
• World In Conflict (beta) (Sierra/Massive Ent.), DirectX 10.0, shaders 4.0, (the benchmark is started inside the game), all settings were set to maximum.
  
  
• PREY 1.01 (3D Realms Entertainment / Human Head Studios / 2K Games) - OpenGL, shaders 2.x, demo003 (40MB!). Tests were run with maximum quality. The batch file is included.
  
  
• 3DMark05 1.20 (FutureMark) - DirectX 9.0, multitexturing, trilinear filtering.
  
  
• Serious Sam II 1.068 (Croteam/2K Games) - DirectX 9.0, shaders 3.0 (with/without HDR), batch file to start the test. It's the standard demo0002 that comes with the game. Tests settings - maximum.
  
  We express our thanks to our reader, Vozniuk Valery AKA Px, for his batch file to run this game.
  
  
• S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 1.003 (GSC Game World/THQ) - DirectX 9.0, demo. You should unpack the files into the game folder with savegames (Documents and settings). When the game starts up, load ixbt3, open the console and start the demo: demo_play ixbt3. Test settings - maximum (DYNAMIC LIGHTS are ENABLED).
  
  
• Company Of Heroes (Relic Entertainment/THQ) - DirectX 9.0, shaders 2.0, startup batch file. When you start the game, you should go to options, choose the graphics section, and press the test button. Tests were run with maximum quality.
  
  
• 3DMark06 1.02 (FutureMark) - DirectX 9.0c, multitexturing, trilinear test settings.
  
  

Graphics cards' performance

If you have a decent understanding of 3D graphics, you may draw your own conclusions for the diagrams below. However, if you are interested in our comments on test results, you may read them after each test. Anything that is important to beginners and those who are new to the world of video cards will be explained in detail in the comments.

First of all, you should look through our reference materials on modern graphics cards and their GPUs. Be sure to note the operating frequencies, support for modern technologies (shaders), as well as the pipeline architecture.

ATI RADEON X1300-1600-1800-1900 Reference

NVIDIA GeForce 7300-7600-7800-7900 Reference

If you have just begun realizing how large the selection to choose a video card is, don't worry, our 3D Graphics section offers articles about 3D basics (you will still have to understand them - when you run a game and open its options, you'll see such notions as textures, lighting, etc) as well as reviews of new products. There are just two companies that manufacture graphics processors: ATI (the graphics department of AMD) and NVIDIA. So most of the information is divided into these two sections. We also publish monthly 3Digests that sum up all comparisons of graphics cards for various price segments. The February 2007 issue analyzed dependence of modern graphics cards on processors without antialiasing and anisotropic filtering. The March 2007 issue did the same with AA and AF.

Thirdly, have a look at the test results of our today's cards. We are not going to analyze each test in this article, primarily because for us it makes sense to draw a bottom line in the end of the article. We will, however, make sure that we make our readers aware of any special circumstances or extraordinary results.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

World In Conflict (beta), DX10, Vista

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory (No HDR)

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory (HDR)

Call Of Juarez

Company Of Heroes

Serious Sam II (No HDR)

Serious Sam II (HDR)

Prey

3DMark05: MARKS

3DMark06: SHADER 2.0 MARKS

3DMark06: SHADER 3.0 MARKS

Conclusions

On the whole, our tests brilliantly prove my theses in the beginning of the article. Namely that DX10 games configured for maximum graphics quality just crush these weak graphics cards. It's impossible to play games without SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING 3D graphics quality. Besides, you'll most likely have to switch to DX9 mode, which will be available in many new games. The question is why we need the GeForce 8600 or RADEON 2600, if we can get the excellent GeForce 7900GS and RADEON X1950 PRO, which offer higher speed in DX9 applications for the same price?

It's a rhetorical question. OK, they offer HDTV, HDMI... But these features are not spread in Russia. You may also buy these card for forums, which users like discussing HD features, complain about no HDCP support, even though they use 2-year-old Middle-End cards and are not planning to upgrade.

I have never been so disappointed in a new Middle-End family. Such cards had always been faster in old games and offered new features. And now? Indeed, the 8600-series cards are faster than the 7600-series models. But look at the prices! The 7900 cards come at the same prices, and they are still available in stores. Something is not right. They are either cut down too much to reduce the costs, or they made a mistake while doing it. Now they are trying to solve the problem using marketing means. Now marketing will dictate users to buy only these new cards.

It will happen, because the previous generation of graphics cards will disappear from the shelves. It will be done very soon for the above mentioned reasons.

Now it's time to mention the strange quality (to put it mildly) of AMD/ATI drivers. They seem to get worse from version to version. One feature or another is broken. AA in CoH has been broken in Catalyst 7.8. As a result, performance in the AA+AF mode has become even higher than without this load. We've checked it up several times. It's true. Why? - Ask AMD.

HIS RADEON 2600 XT (Zalman Edition) 256MB DDR3 PCI-E is a high-quality product with a good cooler. What concerns its performance, the situation varies. We can see how leaders change from game to game. The 2600 is often victorious in shader-intensive games. Its tiny texturing unit, as if inherited from the RADEON 9000, is certainly too weak for texturing-intensive games.

HIS RADEON 2600 XT IceQ Turbo 256MB DDR3 PCI-E - our conclusions are actually the same. The cards do not differ much from each other, although increased GPU frequencies of this card play an important role from time to time. It's a very good card. We had no gripes with its operation. It's equipped with an excellent time-proven cooler that takes the heat out of a system unit.

MSI RADEON 2600 XT Diamond 256MB DDR4 (RX2600XT-Diamond-256) PCI-E - the same applies here. It looks better, because its frequencies are even higher. But its popularity will depend on prices. The card is notable for its efficient and quiet cooler that takes the heat out of a PC case. It's very good!

Palit RADEON 2600 XT Sonic 256MB DDR3 PCI-E - this card is not present in the diagrams, but its results are very close to the HIS RADEON 2600 XT (Zalman Edition) 256MB DDR3 PCI-E. So there is no need to include its results. Our conclusions are the same. This sample worked fine. We had no gripes with it. It uses a very efficient cooler. I hope it won't get noisy after six months of usage.

Sapphire RADEON 2600 PRO 256MB DDR2 PCI-E is weaker than the 2600P¥P¢, but it competes with the 8500GT in price. In this case the 2600 PRO fares well. If its prices are adequate, the 2600 PRO will be preferable. It's a good card, we had no gripes with its operation, it's equipped with a good cooler.

Palit RADEON 2600 PRO Sonic 256MB DDR3 PCI-E differs from the previous card only in memory frequencies. Its performance is higher by 6-7% at best, so our conclusions are similar. This sample worked fine. We had no gripes with it. However, it uses a unique design. It may also use cheaper components. You should take it into account. What concerns the cooler, I can say the same here as in case with the 2600 XT from this company.

Sapphire RADEON 2900 XT 512MB DDR3 PCI-E is just a copy of the reference card. We showed it to you to make sure that all 2900 XT cards are manufactured by AMD's orders. Partners just buy ready cards and pack them into their boxes.

As always, the final choice is up to the reader. We can only inform you about products and their performance, but can't make a buying decision. In our opinion, that should solely be in the hands of the reader, and possibly their budget. ;)

And here is one more thing, we'll repeat it in each review. Having decided to choose a graphics card on your own, you should be aware that you change one of the key components of your system unit, which may require additional configuration for better performance or you may have to enable some functions to achieve higher quality. This is not an end product, it's just a component. So you should understand that you'll have to learn 3D graphics basics in order to get maximum performance from a new graphics card. And some graphics in general. If you don't want to deal with it, you shouldn't upgrade your computer on your own: you'd better buy ready PCs with preconfigured software and technical support from your system integrator, or game boxes, where no configuration is required, everything necessary is already configured in a game.

To find more information regarding the current graphics card market and the performance of various cards, feel free to read our monthly special 3Digest.

The following cards get the Original Design award (August):

1. MSI RADEON 2600 XT Diamond 256MB DDR4 (RX2600XT-Diamond-256)
2. HIS RADEON 2600 XT (Zalman Edition) 256MB DDR3
3. HIS RADEON 2600 XT IceQ Turbo 256MB DDR3

PSU was kindly provided by TAGAN

The Dell 3007WFP monitor was kindly provided by NVIDIA