Articles: Graphics
 

Bookmark and Share

(38) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 ]

Performance in Theoretical Benchmarks: RADEON X1300 PRO

We selected the following rivals for our RADEON X1300 PRO:

  • RADEON X700 (RV410, 400/700MHz, 8pp, 6vp, 128-bit, 256MB)
  • RADEON X300 (RV380, 325/400MHz, 4pp, 2vp, 128-bit, 128MB)
  • GeForce 6600 (NV43, 300/500MHz, 8pp, 3vp, 128-bit, 128MB)
  • GeForce 6200 TC128 (NV44, 300/700MHz, 4pp, 3vp, 64-bit, 32MB onboard)

Since we did not have these graphics cards in our lab at that moment, we emulated them by reducing to the appropriate level the clock frequencies of RADEON X700 PRO, RADEON X600 XT and GeForce 6600 GT, respectively.

Fillrate

RADEON X700 demonstrates the highest theoretical fillrate: its GPU working at 420MHz frequency is equipped with 8 pixel pipelines, while RADEON X1300 PRO working at 600MHz can boast only 4 pixel processors and 4 texturing units.

The new architecture allows it to get ahead of the rivals during single texture processing. With two textures, RADEON X1300 PRO also performs well enough. However, the third and fourth textures do not let it retain the leading position any more: the laurels go to GeForce 6600. At the same time, during four textures processing RADEON X700 lacked cache capacity and hence fell down to the level of the budget GeForce 6200.

 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 38
Discussion started: 10/06/05 12:54:52 AM
Latest comment: 12/16/06 07:48:37 AM

View comments

Add your Comment