by Alexey Stepin
07/26/2005 | 04:14 PM
Products from Leadtek frequently visit our test labs and always show good if not best overclockability, largely because of their inventive cooling systems. The Leadtek WinFast A400 Ultra TDH was even originally overclocked to 425/1100MHz (instead of 400/1100MHz), but the frequencies were brought down to the default in the next versions of the device’s BIOS (for details, please, see our article called Leadtek WinFast A400 Ultra TDH Graphics Card Review ).
<%BANNER[article]%>The PCI Express version of the GeForce 6800 Ultra is still rather scarce in shops. The ATI RADEON X850 XT is much easier to find, but now that the GeForce 7800 GTX has been released, these graphics cards have lost much of their appeal.
The GeForce 6800 GT, on the contrary, is a widespread device, and some samples of this card can work at the frequencies of the GeForce 6800 Ultra, thus making a good graphics card for a PC enthusiast who’s into NVIDIA’s solutions. Heat dissipation of the NV4x core quite naturally grows up at overclocking, so the overclocked card must be equipped with an efficient cooling system, capable of handling the increased thermal load. The standard single-slot cooler many GeForce 6800 GT come with isn’t the best choice in this case.
Of course, you can purchase a good cooler separately, but it means spending more money. So, if you do buy a GeForce 6800 GT with overclocking in mind, consider models originally equipped with high-performance coolers. One such card is going to be reviewed in this article.
It is Leadtek’s WinFast PX6800 GT TDH.
The design of the package hasn’t changed much since the WinFast A400 Ultra – we have the same mixture of red, yellow and brown tones here, and yet another fantasy character is looking at you from the front side of the box.
The package is rather small (if compared with packages from MSI or ASUS). You can easily thrust it into your bag, so there’s no carry handle. Besides the graphics card, the package includes:
Not gorgeous, but acceptable, the accessories include everything necessary for you to use the WinFast PX6800 GT, plus two quite good games. The multilingual guide comprehensively describes the installation procedure. The user’s manual is also informative, but is in English only.
The cables for connecting the card to a TV-set are average quality: the S-Video cable is screened sufficiently well, but the RCA one is too thin and is hardly protected against interference. But well, the composite connection lacks quality anyway, unlike S-Video. As for connecting to HDTV devices via an YPbPr connector, they are supported optionally. That is, there is no such adapter among the accessories.
The disc with the drivers also contains the following software:
We already described the WinFox suite in our Leadtek WinFast A350 TDH review (for details see our article called Dependence of Contemporary High-End Graphics Accelerators Performance on FSAA Mode: VisionTek Xtasy 9800 PRO and Leadtek WinFast A350 TDH Graphics Cards Review ). The video recording and editing utilities are not quite appropriate here – the WinFast PX6800GT TDH lacks the VIVO functionality.
The Leadtek WinFast PX6800 GT TDH outwardly resembles another graphics card from the same manufacturer. We mean the WinFast A400 Ultra TDH that has a similar cooling system (for details see our article called Leadtek WinFast A400 Ultra TDH Graphics Card Review ).
There is the same massive copper heatsink under a casing of black translucent plastic. The new cooler is slightly different, though. For example, the fan used to be surrounded with a pressed-out rather than mesh grid. The fan itself is different and there’s now an additional aluminum heatsink under it.
These changes were intended to improve the cooling efficiency: the heat from the GPU die is now transferred not only via the heat pipe connected to the side ribbing, but also through the aluminum heatsink installed right under the fan. The geometry of the fan’s blades was changed and its main air stream now goes downward rather than sideways as it was with the WinFast A400 Ultra. So, the air stream first cools the aluminum sections and then splits up to cool the right and left copper sections of the heatsink the U-shaped heat pipe is attached to. Part of the air stream, like in the earlier version of the cooler, is driven through the casing to the reverse side of the card where a massive copper heatsink is located. This reverse heatsink doesn’t get much air, of course, but the small amount it receives is anyway quite enough.
Very thick gray-colored paste acts as a thermal interface between the GPU die and the cooler’s sole. The memory chips are interfaced through ordinary silicone paste. The rear heatsink contacts the PCB via soft pads of heat-conducting material. The whole cooling system is fastened on four threaded poles with spring-loaded nuts, and with two ordinary plastic clips. This ensures a robust fastening. The cooling system occupies two slots, so the card’s bracket is dual-slot, too.
The heatsink on the power circuit elements is made of copper and has elongated ribs. Otherwise, this graphics card doesn’t differ from the reference GeForce 6800 GT/Ultra.
Our sample of the WinFast PX6800 GT doesn’t support the video-in/video-out functionality, so the appropriate chip is missing on board. The 2.0ns chips of GDDR3 memory are manufactured by Samsung. Such chips are installed on an overwhelming majority of modern high-performance graphics cards, and this model isn’t an exception.
The frequencies of the GPU and memory are the GeForce 6800 GT’s standard 350MHz GPU and 500 (1000DDR) MHz memory.
Leadtek claims the noise from the cooling system deployed on the WinFast PX6800 GT doesn’t exceed 28dB. The card is really very quiet, although not absolutely noiseless, after the OS with the ForceWare driver has booted up. The noise mostly consists of the quiet hissing of the air which is being sucked in through the protecting grid. It is not irritating at all. So, even though the noise may be louder than 28dB, it is quite comfortable to work at a PC with a WinFast PX6800 GT inside.
Our overclocking experiments suggest that this device can really be called the enthusiast’s choice. We reached 450/600 (1200) MHz without extra cooling, and the card was stable at these frequencies. Of course, there’s no guarantee that each sample of the PX6800 GT is going to be as overclocker-friendly as ours, but we think you have a high chance of success here, not least because of the advanced cooling system developed at Leadtek. The concept first implemented back in the WinFast A380 TDH Ultra has proved its efficiency (for details see our article called ASUS RADEON 9800 XT and LeadTek WinFast A380 TDH Ultra: The Battle for AquaMark3 ), so we have a third generation of such coolers now.
The quality of the 2D image as produced by the card was acceptable. Both outputs yielded a sharp picture in all resolutions up to 1600x1200@85Hz, but a hardly discernable blur occurred in 1800x1440@75Hz, so we can’t call the 2D quality of this card ideal.
We performed our tests on the following testbed:
Software:
Besides the Leadtek WinFast PX6800 GT TDH we also tested the following graphics cards:
Following our traditional methodology, we enabled the ForceWare optimizations, except the Anisotropic mip filter optimization. The Image settings slider was set to the Quality position. In ATI’s Catalyst we enabled Catalyst A.I. using the Standard mode. The Mipmap Detail Level option was set to Quality. We disabled the VSync option in both drivers.
If possible, we control FSAA and anisotropic filtering from the application. Otherwise, we force the necessary mode from the driver. We don’t edit any configuration files. The graphics quality settings in the games were set to the maximum level, the same for graphics cards from NVIDIA and ATI Technologies. The following games and applications were used:
First Person 3D Shooters:
Third Person 3D Shooters:
Simulators:
Strategies:
Semi-Synthetic Benchmarks
Synthetic Benchmarks
It’s not quite right to compare graphics cards from RADEON X8x0 and GeForce 6800 series in Doom 3 since the game obviously favors the latter. The WinFast PX6800 GT is rather too far ahead of the more advanced and expensive RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition.
It’s the same story in the “eye candy” mode with enabled full-screen anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering. Even the advanced memory controller can’t help ATI’s cards here just because the game engine is GeForce-oriented.
The numbers are different on the d3dm4 map, yet the overall picture is the same: the GeForce6 cards triumph over their rivals.
This is the only case in Doom 3 when the ATI RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition manages to overtake the WinFast PX6800 GT when the latter works at its default frequencies.
The performance of all the participating cards is limited by the speed of the system’s central processor on the Torlan map.
The speeds of the card begin to differ in 1600x1200 resolution only. Since the speed of Unreal Tournament largely depends on the fill rate and the performance of the vertex processors, it is only natural that the RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition is on top. It just works at higher frequencies. Since the NV45 core has more speed per megahertz in this test, the WinFast PX6800 GT has a similarly high result when its GPU is overclocked to 450MHz.
The scene recorded on the Metallurgy map depends less on the CPU. We can spot some differences between the cards in 1280x1024 already: the GeForce6 family are ahead of the RADEONs by 5-8%.
When full-screen anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering are enabled, the RADEON X850 XT and XT PE are on top, together with the overclocked WinFast PX6800 GT. Working at the default frequencies the latter is successfully competing with the RADEON X800 XL.
The Chronicles of Riddick is like home turf for the GeForce6 architecture: the Leadtek card easily beats the RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition even at the default frequencies, being 8-12% faster depending on the resolution.
The same is true for the “eye candy” mode, but the senior RADEON almost overtakes the WinFast PX6800 GT in 1600x1200 when the latter is clocked at its default frequencies.
The pixel shader performance of a graphics card directly depends on the frequency of the GPU. That’s why the RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition is superior on the Pier map. The shaders employed here aren’t complex enough for the GeForce6 cards to get any advantage from using Shader Model 3.0. Overclocking helps the WinFast PX6800 GT rise to the level of the RADEON X850 XT, but not to overtake the leader.
It’s even more difficult to compete with senior RADEON models in the “eye candy” mode as the performance of the graphics memory subsystem becomes important here. The overclocked PX6800 GT is only 5-7% slower than the RADEON X850 XT, though.
It’s different on the Research map with its per-pixel lighting: the GeForce 6800 series cards pass through this test successfully thanks to their support of Shader Model 3.0. The GeForce 6800 Ultra is no worse than the RADEON X850 XT. Meanwhile, the WinFast PX6800 GT is a little faster than the RADEON X800 XL at the default frequencies and as fast as the senior RADEON model at overclocking.
The “eye candy” mode brings the same results, except that the PX6800 GT equals the RADEON X800 XL rather than outperforms it.
The benchmarking mode in this game isn’t hard enough for modern top-end graphics cards.
The game prefers GPUs with a high operational frequency as you can see in resolutions above 1024x768: the RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition and the overclocked Leadtek WinFast PX6800 GT win the “eye candy” mode.
The speed of this game depends on the ability of the GPU to execute version 2.0 pixel shaders, so all RADEON X850/X800 series cards are on top here.
It starts the same way in the “eye candy” mode, but the speeds become similar in 1280x1024 and in 1600x1200 the GeForce 6800 series cards suddenly find themselves ahead of the RADEONs.
The performance of the vertex processors is the decisive factor on the d3_c17_02 map. It depends directly on the frequency of the GPU, so the RADEON X850 and X800 series cards are better here. The overclocked WinFast PX6800 GT overtakes the RADEON X800 XL.
The “eye candy” mode brings similar results.
The GeForce6 graphics cards win this test, although the WinFast 6800GT is only 2fps ahead of the RADEON X850 XT PE in 1600x1200. On the other hand, the performance in this resolution is below all playability.
Things improve for the RADEONs in high resolutions of the “eye candy” mode. But again, even the 28fps we get with the fastest card in 1024x768 is too low for comfortable play.
The GeForce 6800 series cards are all somewhat better than the RADEON X850 and X800 in this game, but the results even out in 1600x1200.
The WinFast PX6800 GT is similar to the RADEON X800 XL in this game. When overclocked, the Leadtek card easily overtakes the RADEON X850 XT.
A high fill rate and an excellent OpenGL driver help the WinFast PX6800 GT and other GeForce 6800 series cards show best results in this flight simulator. The overclocked PX6800 GT is beyond competition altogether, being 5-10% ahead of the GeForce 6800 Ultra.
The results in the low resolutions of the “eye candy” mode are like those we had in the “pure speed” mode, but the Leadtek loses the lead in higher resolutions, even though it remains on the same level of performance as the RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition (these high resolutions are actually only playable on an overclocked PX6800 GT).
The GeForce6 cards are victorious in Lock On , too. This architecture suits flight simulators that require a high scene fill rate in the first place.
It’s more difficult to name the winner after we enable full-screen anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering. Only the GeForce 6800 Ultra and the overclocked WinFast PX6800 GT stand out against the rest of the participating cards. We should remind you that the numbers in the diagrams aren’t precise due to the capricious character of the game.
Having a higher pixel shader performance, the RADEON X850/X800 series cards have higher frame rates in Colin McRae Rally 2005 . Overclocking improved the speed of the WinFast PX6800 GT greatly, but not enough to catch up with the RADEON X800 XL.
ATI’s RADEON X850/X800 cards look even more advantageous against their rivals in the “eye candy” mode – again because of their highly efficiency memory controller.
At the default frequencies the WinFast PX6800 GT equals the RADEON X800 XL. When overclocked, it leaves the GeForce 6800 Ultra as well as the RADEON X850 XT PE behind.
The PX6800 GT is only slower than the GeForce 6800 Ultra at the default frequencies. It is 5-10% ahead of the senior RADEON, depending on the resolution (the gap diminishes in higher display modes).
The WinFast PX6800 GT can stand against the RADEON X850 XT in all resolutions up to 1600x1200 where it is about 9% slower than ATI’s card because of the less efficient graphics memory subsystem. The performance of all the participating devices is however too low in this resolution, so the results are of no practical use.
The situation changes a little in the “eye candy” mode: the WinFast PX6800 GT has almost the same speed as the ATI RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition in all resolutions. The latter is even slightly slower in 1600x1200, despite the higher operational frequencies.
The PX6800 GT is slower than the other participating cards even at the overclocked frequencies. This benchmark seems to like high graphics memory speed which all modern RADEONs have.
The Leadtek is no slower than the RADEON X800 XL at the default frequencies and competes with the RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition at the overclocked ones.
Everything is quite different in the “eye candy” mode: the load on the graphics memory subsystem is multiplied when full-screen anti-aliasing is in use, and the GeForce 6 cards cannot compete with ATI’s cards anymore. Even overclocked, WinFast PX6800 GT is about 5-9% slower than the RADEON X800 XL.
The Leadtek WinFast PX6800 GT has a higher overall score than the RADEON X800 XL and stops a little short of 13,000 points at the overclocked frequencies.
The PX6800 GT is as fast as the more advanced and expensive RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition in the first test. The test only uses DirectX 7 functions and GeForce6 cards are specially optimized for such applications.
Leadtek’s card is less successful in the “eye candy” mode, but it keeps on the same level with the RADEON X800 XL at the default frequencies and becomes a leader at overclocking.
The WinFast PX6800 GT feels better in the second test than the RADEON X800 XL. The gap is no more than 5%, though.
The WinFast PX6800 GT even rivals the RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition and X850 XT in the FSAA + anisotropic filtering mode, but the latter two cards are better in 1600x1200 when the load on the graphics memory subsystem is highest.
The third test resembles the second one technologically, so it produces almost the same results. The PX6800 GT is farther ahead of the RADEON X800 XL in higher resolutions.
The Leadtek is far ahead of the RADEON X800 XL in 1024x768 only. In the remaining resolutions their speeds are similar.
The fourth test uses version 2.0 pixel shaders, so ATI’s RADEON X850 and X800 take highest places here. The overclocked WinFast PX6800 GT overtakes the RADEON X800 XL, but can do nothing more.
In the “eye candy” mode the overclocked Leadtek even rises to the level of the RADEON X850 XT, but it is the slowest card when working at the default frequencies.
The WinFast PX6800 GT scores the least number of points, even though it is close to the RADEON X850 XT at overclocking.
The first test is a typical 3D shooter scene. The WinFast PX6800 GT is the slowest card here. Overclocking helps it perform better, at the level of the RADEON X850 XT.
It’s all the same in the FSAA + anisotropic filtering mode, but the overclocked WinFast PX6800 GT is a little behind the RADEON X850 XT.
The Leadtek is closer to the RADEON X800 XL in the second test: they already have almost the same speeds in 1280x1024. The overclocked PX6800 GT keeps on the level of performance of the two senior RADEON models.
After we enable full-screen anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering, the WinFast PX6800 GT is again slightly slower than the RADEON X800 XL in the first two resolutions. In 1600x1200, however, its performance degenerates dramatically. Overclocking isn’t as profitable as in the “pure speed” mode, save for 1600x1200 where it’s important to have a high memory frequency.
Supporting Shader Model 3.0, the WinFast PX6800 GT is a mere 1-2fps behind the RADEON X800 XL. The overclocked Leadtek rivals the RADEON X850 XT. The advanced NV4x architecture shows its benefits here.
The WinFast PX6800 GT isn’t far behind the RADEON X800 XL, its main market rival, in the “eye candy” mode, either. The latter, however, has an advantage in higher resolutions due to its advanced memory controller. Overclocking is profitable in this test: the overclocked Leadtek is almost as fast as the RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition.
Thus, the results of the Leadtek card in both versions of 3DMark seem on the whole correct.
So, we were much pleased with the Leadtek WinFast PX6800 GT TDH which turned to be a practically blameless product (not an often thing in our practice, we should confess). The only small drawback of this card is it is heavy because of the use of copper in the cooling system. But well, you should just make sure the device is properly fastened in the system case, and the weight won’t be a problem at all. The card is loud only before the ForceWare driver is loaded. After that it is no louder than other components of an ordinary PC. It means you will surely have acoustic comfort with this device.
The WinFast PX6800 GT performs well enough in modern games, especially in OpenGL ones. The support of Shader Model 3.0 and floating-point color representation may give this graphics card an advantage in upcoming games, but it is still slower than the RADEON X800 XL when high graphics memory performance is important, like in full-screen anti-aliasing modes. So again, you may want to consider ATI’s RADEONs if you like to have an anti-aliased picture in games, but the Leadtek may be a better choice for the upcoming new generation of games that actively use Shader Model 3.0.
The excellent overclockability makes the Leadtek WinFast PX6800 GT TDH a good choice for an overclocker. At least, we reached 450/1200MHz frequencies very easily, without additional cooling and stability issues. This result may probably be improved upon if you use liquid or other advanced types of cooling but it’s anyway good for an NV45-based with 2ns memory. Another bonus of the PX6800 GT is its support of NVIDIA’s SLI technology. It means you can buy another such card and install them both into an nForce4-based system to get a powerful, yet rather quiet gaming machine.
So, our verdict is: if you are into overclocking, the WinFast PX6800 GT TDH undoubtedly deserves your consideration.
Highs:
Lows:
Having summed up our test results we here at X-bit labs decided to award Leadtek WinFast PX6800 GT TDH graphics card with the prestigious Editor’s Choice Title as the today’s Best Graphics Card for Overclockers and Enthusiasts :
