iXBT Labs :: Computer Hardware In Detail

Platform

Video

Multimedia

Mobile

Other

3Digest, August 2007


 Forum


 Comment

Monthly drivers report and popular 3D
accelerators comparison

Monthy 3Digest is the project of iXBT.com and Digit-Life.com dedicated to informing you about the performance of a large number of graphics cards under Windows XP in the past month.

This issue is dedicated to drivers released from the 15th of July 2007 to the 15th of August 2007. Traditionally our 3Digest informs you about the best price/performance ratios available in the market. Another very important part of any issue is cards' 3D graphics quality shown on the example of a wide selection of games.

It's our 87th issue of 3Digest.

August 2007

For this issue and on we have replaced the F.E.A.R. benchmark with the World In Conflict beta DX10 tests under MS Windows Vista.

Attention! This digest contains benchmarking results for PCI-E cards only. The final AGP benchmarking was conducted in March 2006.

CONTENTS

  1. Testbed configurations and test software
  2. Tested videocards list
  3. What's new in 3Digest
  4. Test summary diagrams and digest bottom line
  5. 3D accelerator rating calculations for the end of the month
  6. Screenshot gallery
  7. Game Quality Section
  8. Game Quality Control Section



1. Testbed configuration



  • Intel Core2 Duo (775 Socket) based machine
    • Intel Core2 Duo Extreme X6800 (2930 MHz) (L2=4096K) CPU;
    • EVGA nForce 680i SLI motherboard on NVIDIA nForce 680i;
    • 2GB DDR2 SDRAM Corsair 1142MHz (CAS (tCL)=5; RAS to CAS delay (tRCD)=5; Row Precharge (tRP)=5; tRAS=15);
    • WD Caviar SE WD1600JD 160GB SATA HDD.

The testbed has the following OS installed:

  • Windows XP Professional Service Pack 2, DirectX 9.0c,
  • Windows Vista Ultimate 32bit, DirectX 10;

We used theDell 3007WFP monitor. (30").

The list of benchmarks is here



2. Graphics card list

Below is a list of graphics cards that we tested linked to the respective 3Digest feature description pages.

You can see the quality of 3D produced by tested cards in our monthly updated Screenshot gallery.

Cards list:

  1. PCI-E-ATI RADEON X1300 XT 256MB DDR2 2.0ns (500/900 MHz)
  2. PCI-E-ATI RADEON X1650 PRO 256MB DDR 1.4ns (590/1380 MHz)
  3. PCI-E-ATI RADEON X1950 PRO 256MB GDDR3 1.4ns (580/1400 MHz)
  4. PCI-E-ATI RADEON X1950 PRO 512MB GDDR3 1.4ns (573/1360 MHz)
  5. PCI-E-ATI RADEON X1950 XTX 512MB GDDR4 0.9ns (650/2000 MHz)
  6. PCI-E-ATI RADEON HD 2400 XT 256MB GDDR3 1.2ns (700/1600 MHz)
  7. PCI-E-ATI RADEON HD 2600 PRO 256MB GDDR2 2.0ns (600/1000 MHz)
  8. PCI-E-ATI RADEON HD 2600 PRO 256MB GDDR3 1.2ns (700/1400 MHz)
  9. PCI-E-ATI RADEON HD 2600 XT 256MB GDDR4 0.9ns (800/2200 MHz)
  10. PCI-E-ATI RADEON HD 2900 XT 512MB GDDR3 1.0ns (743/1660 MHz)
  11. PCI-E-NVIDIA GeForce 7600GT 256MB GDDR3 1.4ns (560/1400 MHz)
  12. PCI-E-NVIDIA GeForce 8500 GT 256MB GDDR2 2.5ns (450/800 MHz)
  13. PCI-E-NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT 256MB GDDR3 1.2ns (560/1560 MHz)
  14. PCI-E-NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS 256MB GDDR3 1.0ns (720/2200 MHz)
  15. PCI-E-NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GS 256MB GDDR3 1.4ns (450/1320 MHz)
  16. PCI-E-NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB GDDR3 1.2ns (512/1600 MHz)
  17. PCI-E-NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB GDDR3 1.2ns (512/1600 MHz)
  18. PCI-E-NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB GDDR3 1.1ns (575/1800 MHz)
  19. PCI-E-NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra 768MB GDDR3 0.8ns (612/2160 MHz)
  20. PCI-E-NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra SLI 2x768MB GDDR3 0.8ns (2x612/2160 MHz)

Archive (graphics cards, information on which is no longer updated)

3. August 2007 news and the current matters

Added a number of new graphics cards (marked "NEW").

  • 3.1. The following drivers were released from July 15, 2007 to August 15, 2007:



  • 3.2. This month we used 163.44 drivers for NVIDIA-based card summaries, 7.8 drivers for ATI-based card summaries.

4. Summary diagrams of graphics cards performance with the latest drivers for August 2007.

All willing to see the complete results in Excel 2003 format can download this RAR 3.0 or ZIP archive.

If you are familiar with 3D graphics, you will be able to draw all the conclusions yourself after looking at the charts provided. Those interested in our judgement of test results should see reviews dedicated to specific GPUs (see our 3D graphics section). And for newbies and those who has just started choosing a graphics card we'll provide some more detailed explanations.

First of all, you should take a look at our brief references of modern graphics card series and their respective GPUs. Note clock rates, shader support and pipeline architecture.



Reference for ATI RADEON X1300-1600-1800-1900-x, HD 2900 series

Reference for NVIDIA GeForce 7300-7600-7800-7900-8800 series

Secondly, in our 3D graphics section all newbies can read about the basics of 3D (this knowledge will be required anyway, because you'll surely try to adjust some game settings: textures, lighting, etc.) Besides, newbies should read separate reviews dedicated to new products. There are just two GPU vendors: ATI (recently merged with AMD under its brand) and NVIDIA. Thus, all information is generally separated in two parts.

Thirdly, let's see the charts and make conclusions.

5. 3D accelerator ratings calculations for the end of the month

Calculations were based on gaming benchmark results as well as the results from 3DMark06 new tests (ATI CATALYST 7.8, NVIDIA ForceWare 163.44).


All willing to conduct their own rating calculations with own values are invited to download this Excel XP table in RAR 3.0 or ZIP format.

The method of rating calculation is described here.

Calculations were conducted considering the following assumptions:

  1. Percentage of performance and quality demand ratio:
    • performance priority - 60%
    • quality priority - 40%

  2. Only the HIGHEST resolution available in games was used to calculate prospect ratings.
  3. The usability rating indicates performance and features of a card (numerator) related to its price (denominator).

According to your wishes, we separated ratings into two groups: the first gathers all benchmarks, and the second contains only the gaming tests without m3DMark05/06. Disbelieving the synthetic tests, many think the second group is of higher importance.

Core2 Duo X6800 based testbed:

Usability Rating:

  • GAMING ONLY usability rating

    # Card Usability rating Prospect rating Approx. price
    01. 8600 GT 256MB, 560/1560
    285
    391
    129
    02. 8800 GTS 320MB, 512/1600
    275
    655
    345
    03. HD 2600 PRO 256MB, 700/1400
    273
    363
    110
    04. X1950 PRO 256MB, 580/1400
    270
    424
    149
    05. X1300 XT 256MB 500/800
    259
    252
    57
    06. 8800 GTS 640MB, 512/1600
    256
    736
    440
    07. 8600 GTS 256MB, 720/2200
    251
    459
    201
    08. X1650 PRO 256MB 590/1380
    246
    309
    80
    09. 8800 GTX 768MB, 575/1800
    245
    867
    610
    10. HD 2900 XT 512MB, 750/1660
    244
    702
    419
    11. HD 2600 XT 256MB, 800/2200
    242
    403
    155
    12. HD 2600 PRO 256MB, 600/1000
    237
    327
    100
    13. X1950 PRO 512MB, 575/1370
    224
    449
    195
    14. 8800 Ultra 768MB, 612/2160
    224
    892
    700
    15. 8500 GT 256MB, 450/800
    222
    273
    82
    16. HD 2400 XT 256MB, 700/1600
    208
    255
    73
    17. 7900 GS 256MB, 450/1320
    172
    313
    129
    18. X1950 XTX 512MB, 650/2000
    159
    534
    368
    19. 7600 GT 256MB, 560/1400
    145
    274
    118
    20. 8800 Ultra SLI 2x768MB, 612/2160
    117
    960
    1400


  • GENERAL usability rating

    # Card Usability rating Prospect rating Approx. price
    01. HD 2600 PRO 256MB, 700/1400
    864
    649
    110
    02. 8600 GT 256MB, 560/1560
    860
    687
    129
    03. 8800 GTS 320MB, 512/1600
    817
    1147
    345
    04. X1950 PRO 256MB, 580/1400
    815
    746
    149
    05. X1300 XT 256MB 500/800
    779
    439
    57
    06. 8600 GTS 256MB, 720/2200
    766
    813
    201
    07. HD 2600 XT 256MB, 800/2200
    756
    721
    155
    08. HD 2600 PRO 256MB, 600/1000
    753
    587
    100
    09. HD 2900 XT 512MB, 750/1660
    749
    1242
    419
    10. X1650 PRO 256MB 590/1380
    741
    532
    80
    11. 8800 GTS 640MB, 512/1600
    738
    1261
    440
    12. 8800 GTX 768MB, 575/1800
    692
    1472
    610
    13. X1950 PRO 512MB, 575/1370
    683
    791
    195
    14. 8500 GT 256MB, 450/800
    663
    478
    82
    15. HD 2400 XT 256MB, 700/1600
    650
    454
    73
    16. 8800 Ultra 768MB, 612/2160
    641
    1525
    700
    17. X1950 XTX 512MB, 650/2000
    483
    939
    368
    18. 7900 GS 256MB, 450/1320
    453
    510
    129
    19. 7600 GT 256MB, 560/1400
    383
    445
    118
    20. 8800 Ultra SLI 2x768MB, 612/2160
    357
    1688
    1400

    Prospect Rating:

  • GAMING ONLY prospect rating

    # Card Usability rating Prospect rating Approx. price
    01. 8800 Ultra SLI 2x768MB, 612/2160
    117
    960
    1400
    02. 8800 Ultra 768MB, 612/2160
    224
    892
    700
    03. 8800 GTX 768MB, 575/1800
    245
    867
    610
    04. 8800 GTS 640MB, 512/1600
    256
    736
    440
    05. HD 2900 XT 512MB, 750/1660
    244
    702
    419
    06. 8800 GTS 320MB, 512/1600
    275
    655
    345
    07. X1950 XTX 512MB, 650/2000
    159
    534
    368
    08. 8600 GTS 256MB, 720/2200
    251
    459
    201
    09. X1950 PRO 512MB, 575/1370
    224
    449
    195
    10. X1950 PRO 256MB, 580/1400
    270
    424
    149
    11. HD 2600 XT 256MB, 800/2200
    242
    403
    155
    12. 8600 GT 256MB, 560/1560
    285
    391
    129
    13. HD 2600 PRO 256MB, 700/1400
    273
    363
    110
    14. HD 2600 PRO 256MB, 600/1000
    237
    327
    100
    15. 7900 GS 256MB, 450/1320
    172
    313
    129
    16. X1650 PRO 256MB 590/1380
    246
    309
    80
    17. 7600 GT 256MB, 560/1400
    145
    274
    118
    18. 8500 GT 256MB, 450/800
    222
    273
    82
    19. HD 2400 XT 256MB, 700/1600
    208
    255
    73
    20. X1300 XT 256MB 500/800
    259
    252
    57


  • GENERAL prospect rating

    # Card Usability rating Prospect rating Approx. price
    01. 8800 Ultra SLI 2x768MB, 612/2160
    357
    1688
    1400
    02. 8800 Ultra 768MB, 612/2160
    641
    1525
    700
    03. 8800 GTX 768MB, 575/1800
    692
    1472
    610
    04. 8800 GTS 640MB, 512/1600
    738
    1261
    440
    05. HD 2900 XT 512MB, 750/1660
    749
    1242
    419
    06. 8800 GTS 320MB, 512/1600
    817
    1147
    345
    07. X1950 XTX 512MB, 650/2000
    483
    939
    368
    08. 8600 GTS 256MB, 720/2200
    766
    813
    201
    09. X1950 PRO 512MB, 575/1370
    683
    791
    195
    10. X1950 PRO 256MB, 580/1400
    815
    746
    149
    11. HD 2600 XT 256MB, 800/2200
    756
    721
    155
    12. 8600 GT 256MB, 560/1560
    860
    687
    129
    13. HD 2600 PRO 256MB, 700/1400
    864
    649
    110
    14. HD 2600 PRO 256MB, 600/1000
    753
    587
    100
    15. X1650 PRO 256MB 590/1380
    741
    532
    80
    16. 7900 GS 256MB, 450/1320
    453
    510
    129
    17. 8500 GT 256MB, 450/800
    663
    478
    82
    18. HD 2400 XT 256MB, 700/1600
    650
    454
    73
    19. 7600 GT 256MB, 560/1400
    383
    445
    118
    20. X1300 XT 256MB 500/800
    779
    439
    57



    Ingame quality



    6. Games screenshot gallery

    All test screenshots are compiled into a gallery where you can qualify the work of a chosen videocard. All shots were taken at the same 1024x768 resolution at the maximum quality. Screenshot gallery

    7. Game Artefacts Gallery

    Game Quality Section

    7.1. Game bugs archive

    Game quality archive

    8. Game Quality Control

    Game Quality Control



    We thank all the companies that provided us with graphics cards and other equipment for our 3Digest, including:
    Chaintech Russia and personally Alexander Petrushin,
    Zotac,
    BFG Russia and personally Mikhail Proshletsov,
    EVGA Russia and personally Victoria Nikolaeva,
    Foxconn Russia,
    MSI Russia,
    Gainward,

    HIS (and personally Peter Yueng)
    "NVIDIA Russia",
    AMD Russia,
    "Sapphire Technology Russia",
    "ASUStek Russia",



    The PSU for the testbed was kindly provided by HIPER




                                   The Dell 3007WFP monitor was kindly provided by NVIDIA




    Andrey Vorobiev (anvakams@ixbt.com)
    Danil Gridasov (degust@ixbt.com)








    10.08.2007




  •   Most Popular Reviews More   RSS  
      Latest Reviews More   RSS  
      Latest News More   RSS  
      Sponsored Links Get listed  
     

    Platform  ·  Video  ·  Multimedia  ·  Mobile  ·  Other  ·  Compare Prices  ||  Feedback  ·  Advertise at iXBT Labs  ·  About us  ·  Affiliates  ·  Forum


    29

    Copyright © Byrds Research & Publishing, Ltd., 1997—2008. All rights reserved.