The PowerColor X800 GTO 16 behaves differently in the second test where it gets the first place in the “pure speed” mode and is as fast as the GeForce 6800 GS at the “eye candy” settings. This is probably the result of the overall compactness of the test which doesn’t include too many open scenes with complex textures. The Radeon X1600 XT isn’t far behind the leader, thus indicating that scenes like these don’t require too many TMUs.

The third test offers both math1ematical and textural load to the graphics card. Not limited by its four TMUs, the Radeon X1600 would probably be far ahead of the PowerColor X800 GTO and the Radeon X800 XL. As it is, the X1600 delivers the same performance as the mentioned cards. The GeForce 6800 GS has everything aplenty – texture-mapping units, efficient pixel shader processors and high clock rates – and it looks well across all the resolutions.

So, the results of the separate tests agree with the overall scores. But unlike in 3DMark03, the PowerColor X800 GTO 16 would have a smaller overall score than the GeForce 6800 GS if the “eye candy” results were counted in because it is slower at executing shaders with complex-texture lookups.