| HIS Radeon X1600 Pro AGP Review |
|
|
Real-time pricing for Logitech 963290-0403 |
| Logitech Extreme 3D Pro Joystick Silver/Black 963290-0403 DH963290 Game Accessory Electronics Usually ships in 2 to 4 weeks |
|
|
|
|
|
| 3DMark2001 SE |
3DMark2001 SE measures video card performance simulating DirectX 8.1 games. It is very effective software for evaluating the performance from previous-generation games, programmed using DirectX 8. In this software we run six tests. We run the software in three resolutions, 1024x768x32, 1280x1024x32 and 1600x1200x32, first without antialiasing and with no frame buffer, then we put the antialiasing at 4 samples and the frame buffer at triple-buffering. This improves the video quality but lowers the performance. We were willing to see how much performance we lost by putting the VGA to run at the maximum possible image quality. It is important to note that ATI chips can run at 6x antialiasing. Since NVIDIA chips cannot run at this configuration, we had to use 4x antialiasing to use a configuration that is valid to all video cards included in our bechmarks, allowing direct comparison between them.
You may be asking yourself why we added an old program in a review of a latest generation video card. To us, it is as important to know the performance of a video card with the latest games as it is to know its performance in an older game. That’s why we kept this software in our methodology.

| 3DMark2001 SE - 1024x768 |
Score |
Difference |
| Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
24,579 |
40.43% |
| Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
24,293 |
38.79% |
| Radeon X800 Pro (Sapphire) |
23,086 |
31.90% |
| GeForce 6800 Ultra (XFX) |
22,642 |
29.36% |
| Radeon 9800 XT (ATI) |
20,770 |
18.67% |
| GeForce FX 5950 Ultra (Gigabyte) |
18,199 |
3.98% |
| GeForce 6600 GT AGP (Leadtek) |
18,192 |
3.94% |
| Radeon X1600 Pro (HIS) |
17,503 |
|
| Radeon X700 (HIS) |
16,264 |
7.62% |
At a resolution of 1024x768 without any image quality enhancement, HIS Radeon X1600 Pro was 7.62% faster than HIS Radeon X700 and it was beaten by ATI Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition, which was 40.43% faster, ATI Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition, which was 38.79% faster, Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro, which was 31.90% faster, XFX GeForce 6800 Ultra, which was 29.36% faster, ATI Radeon 9800 XT, which was 18.67% faster, Gigabyte GeForce FX 5950 Ultra, which was 3.98% faster and Leadtek GeForce 6600 GT AGP, which was 3.94% faster.

| 3DMark2001 SE - 1280x1024 |
Score |
Difference |
| Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
22,158 |
56.57% |
| Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
22,048 |
55.79% |
| GeForce 6800 Ultra (XFX) |
20,821 |
47.12% |
| Radeon X800 Pro (Sapphire) |
20,503 |
44.88% |
| Radeon 9800 XT (ATI) |
17,522 |
23.81% |
| GeForce 6600 GT AGP (Leadtek) |
15,599 |
10.22% |
| GeForce FX 5950 Ultra (Gigabyte) |
15,538 |
9.79% |
| Radeon X1600 Pro (HIS) |
14,152 |
|
| Radeon X700 (HIS) |
13,319 |
6.25% |
At a resolution of 1280x1024 without any image quality enhancement, HIS Radeon X1600 Pro was 6.25% faster than HIS Radeon X700 and it was beaten by ATI Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition, which was 56.57% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition, which was 55.79% faster, XFX GeForce 6800 Ultra, which was 47.12% faster, Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro, which was 44.88% faster, ATI Radeon 9800 XT, which was 23.81% faster, Leadtek GeForce 6600 GT AGP, which was 10.22% faster and Gigabyte GeForce FX 5950 Ultra, which was 9.79% faster.

| 3DMark2001 SE - 1600x1200 |
Score |
Difference |
| Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
20,246 |
80.83% |
| Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
20,002 |
78.65% |
| GeForce 6800 Ultra (XFX) |
19,338 |
72.72% |
| Radeon X800 Pro (Sapphire) |
18,177 |
62.35% |
| Radeon 9800 XT (ATI) |
14,537 |
29.84% |
| GeForce 6600 GT AGP (Leadtek) |
13,511 |
20.68% |
| GeForce FX 5950 Ultra (Gigabyte) |
13,374 |
19.45% |
| Radeon X1600 Pro (HIS) |
11,196 |
|
| Radeon X700 (HIS) |
10,418 |
7.47% |
At a resolution of 1600x1200 without any image quality enhancement, HIS Radeon X1600 Pro was 7.47% faster than HIS Radeon X700 and it was beaten by ATI Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition, which was 80.83% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition, which was 78.65% faster, XFX GeForce 6800 Ultra, which was 72.72% faster, Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro, which was 62.35% faster, ATI Radeon 9800 XT, which was 29.84% faster, Leadtek GeForce 6600 GT AGP, which was 20.68% faster and Gigabyte GeForce FX 5950 Ultra, which was 19.45% faster.

| 3DMark2001 SE – 1024x768 AA x4, FB x3 |
Score |
Difference |
| Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
21,625 |
63.15% |
| Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
20,847 |
57.28% |
| GeForce 6800 Ultra (XFX) |
19,731 |
48.86% |
| Radeon X800 Pro (Sapphire) |
19,525 |
47.30% |
| Radeon 9800 XT (ATI) |
15,993 |
20.66% |
| GeForce FX 5950 Ultra (Gigabyte) |
15,517 |
17.07% |
| GeForce 6600 GT AGP (Leadtek) |
13,482 |
1.71% |
| Radeon X1600 Pro (HIS) |
13,255 |
|
| Radeon X700 (HIS) |
12,474 |
6.26% |
At a resolution of 1024x768 enabling image quality enhancements, HIS Radeon X1600 Pro achieved a similar performance to Leadtek GeForce 6600 GT AGP and it was 6.26% faster than HIS Radeon X700.
HIS Radeon X1600 Pro was beaten by ATI Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition, which was 63.15% faster, ATI Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition, which was 57.28% faster, XFX GeForce 6800 Ultra, which was 48.86% faster, Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro, which was 47.30% faster, ATI Radeon 9800 XT, which was 20.66% faster and Gigabyte GeForce FX 5950 Ultra, which was 17.07% faster.

| 3DMark2001 SE – 1280x1024 AA x4, FB x3 |
Score |
Difference |
| Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
19,015 |
92.89% |
| Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
17,926 |
81.84% |
| GeForce 6800 Ultra (XFX) |
17,253 |
75.02% |
| Radeon X800 Pro (Sapphire) |
16,421 |
66.58% |
| Radeon 9800 XT (ATI) |
12,530 |
27.10% |
| GeForce FX 5950 Ultra (Gigabyte) |
12,289 |
24.66% |
| GeForce 6600 GT AGP (Leadtek) |
10,102 |
2.48% |
| Radeon X1600 Pro (HIS) |
9,858 |
|
| Radeon X700 (HIS) |
9,257 |
6.49% |
At a resolution of 1280x1024 enabling image quality enhancements, HIS Radeon X1600 Pro achieved a similar performance to Leadtek GeForce 6600 GT AGP and it was 6.49% faster than HIS Radeon X700.
HIS Radeon X1600 Pro was beaten by ATI Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition, which was 92.89% faster, ATI Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition, which was 81.84% faster, XFX GeForce 6800 Ultra, which was 75.02% faster, Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro, which was 66.58% faster, ATI Radeon 9800 XT, which was 27.10% faster and Gigabyte GeForce FX 5950 Ultra, which was 24.66% faster.

| 3DMark2001 SE – 1600x1200 AA x4, FB x3 |
Score |
Difference |
| Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
16,632 |
203.01% |
| Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition (ATI) |
15,001 |
173.29% |
| Radeon X800 Pro (Sapphire) |
13,632 |
148.35% |
| GeForce 6800 Ultra (XFX) |
13,331 |
142.87% |
| Radeon 9800 XT (ATI) |
9,497 |
73.02% |
| GeForce FX 5950 Ultra (Gigabyte) |
9,022 |
64.37% |
| Radeon X700 (HIS) |
6,873 |
25.21% |
| GeForce 6600 GT AGP (Leadtek) |
6,206 |
13.06% |
| Radeon X1600 Pro (HIS) |
5,489 |
|
At a resolution of 1600x1200 enabling image quality enhancements, HIS Radeon X1600 Pro was beaten by ATI Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition, which was 203.01% faster, ATI Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition, which was 173.29% faster, Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro, which was 148.35% faster, XFX GeForce 6800 Ultra, which was 142.87% faster, ATI Radeon 9800 XT, which was 73.02% faster, Gigabyte GeForce FX 5950 Ultra, which was 64.37% faster, HIS Radeon X700, which was 25.21% faster and Leadtek GeForce 6600 GT AGP, which was 13.06% faster.
|
| « Previous | Page 5 of 10 | Next » |
| Print Version | Send to Friend |
Bookmark Article
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
Recommended Deal |
 | Diamond 5830PE51G
Diamond ATI Radeon HD5830 PCI Express 1024 MB GDDR5 Video Card 5830PE51G DH5830PE51G Electronics Usually ships in 24 hours
|
|
 Latest News
February 10, 2012 - 8:20 AM PST
February 9, 2012 - 8:06 AM PST
February 8, 2012 - 7:50 AM PST
February 7, 2012 - 8:31 AM PST
February 6, 2012 - 7:40 AM PST
February 3, 2012 - 8:19 AM PST
February 2, 2012 - 8:42 AM PST
February 2, 2012 - 8:41 AM PST
February 1, 2012 - 4:50 PM PST
February 1, 2012 - 7:55 AM PST
 Latest Content
Our Most Popular Articles
1,612,330 views
1,413,193 views
1,157,318 views
1,116,680 views
1,043,055 views
943,370 views
741,177 views
668,991 views
652,194 views
622,540 views
Latest Threads in Our Forums
by Athlonite
by RayBay
by RayBay
by WreakingHavoc
by dlb
by loonicy
by Hardware Secrets Team
by Gabriel Torres
by Hardware Secrets Team
by Gabriel Torres
|