ATI's Late Response to G70 - Radeon X1800, X1600 and X1300
by Derek Wilson on October 5, 2005 11:05 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Test Setup and Power Performance
Our testing methodology was to try and cover a lot of ground with top to bottom hardware. Including the X1300 through the X1800 line required quite a few different cards and tests to be run. In order to make it easier to look at the data, rather than put everything for each game in one place as we normally do, we have broken up our data into three separate groups: Budget, Midrange, and High End.
We used the latest drivers we had available which are both beta drivers. From NVIDIA, the 81.82 drivers were tested rather than the current release as we expect the rel 80 drivers to be in the end users hands before the X1000 series is easy to purchase.
All of our tests were done on this system:
ATI Radeon Express 200 based system
AMD Athlon 64 FX-55
1GB DDR400 2:2:2:8
120 GB Seagate 7200.7 HD
600 W OCZ PowerStreams PSU
The resolutions we tested range from 800x600 on the low end to 2048x1536 on the high end. The games we tested include:
Before we take a look at the performance numbers, here's a look at the power draw of various hardware.
As we can see, this generation draws about as much power as previous generatation products under load at the high end and midrange. The X1300 Pro seems to draw a little more power than we would like to see in a budget part. The card also sports a fan that is just as loud as the X1600 XT. Considering that some of the cards we tested against the X1300 Pro were passively cooled, this is something to note.
Our testing methodology was to try and cover a lot of ground with top to bottom hardware. Including the X1300 through the X1800 line required quite a few different cards and tests to be run. In order to make it easier to look at the data, rather than put everything for each game in one place as we normally do, we have broken up our data into three separate groups: Budget, Midrange, and High End.
We used the latest drivers we had available which are both beta drivers. From NVIDIA, the 81.82 drivers were tested rather than the current release as we expect the rel 80 drivers to be in the end users hands before the X1000 series is easy to purchase.
All of our tests were done on this system:
ATI Radeon Express 200 based system
AMD Athlon 64 FX-55
1GB DDR400 2:2:2:8
120 GB Seagate 7200.7 HD
600 W OCZ PowerStreams PSU
The resolutions we tested range from 800x600 on the low end to 2048x1536 on the high end. The games we tested include:
- Day of Defeat: Source
- Doom 3
- EverQuest 2
- Far Cry
- Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory
- The Chronicles of Riddick
Before we take a look at the performance numbers, here's a look at the power draw of various hardware.
As we can see, this generation draws about as much power as previous generatation products under load at the high end and midrange. The X1300 Pro seems to draw a little more power than we would like to see in a budget part. The card also sports a fan that is just as loud as the X1600 XT. Considering that some of the cards we tested against the X1300 Pro were passively cooled, this is something to note.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
103 Comments
View All Comments
ChanningM - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
Where is the AA info and AF info on each test?You list 4x AA for the High End cards at 1600x1200. What about other levels of AA, and various levels of AF?
What about other resolutions? and varying levels of AA and AF at different resolutions and how they compare image quality wise? Okay, so the X1600XT loses at 1280x960 with no aa or af. What about at 1028x764 with AA and AF on? And how does that compare image wise?
Where is the discussion of the results? You just throw out graphs at me, and don't do a real disucssion of them.
In otherwords, where is the rest of the review?
Peldor - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
At this point, a fairly weak review from Anandtech, especially compared to the 7800GTX review when it appeared. Hot Hardware and Tech Report have a bit better coverage IMO.Looking at other reviews around the web, my conclusion is the X1800 cards are viable competitors in performance to the 7800 cards, but the street prices will have to come down near the 7800 cards to be a good value.
The X1600 cards look dead in the water when the 6600GT is under $150 and available in AGP and PCIe, while the 6800GT is far beyond it in the ~$250 segment.
The X1300 cards will only survive in the ~$100 and under market.
ATI is going to need that R580 sooner rather than later.
ChanningM - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
The format of the hardocp articles has grown on me, especially after reading there review + the anandtech + another.There are all kinds of AA and AF options for a reason. They look different. How do the affect peformance though? What works best?
That obviously varies by game, card and resolution. But anandtech and others just don't do the comparisons and I think that makes it difficult to compare. Especially when image quality differences between nvidia and ATI come into play with there various settings.
DerekWilson - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
We will have tables of all the data with all the numbers we ran across all the resolutions with 4xAA and 8xAF up shortly.Quite a bit of data was collected and it has taken some time to organize. You are absolutely right to want more, and we are working on getting it out the door as soon as possible.
Thanks,
Derek Wilson
jeffrey - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
Derek,You really need to evaluate your situation at this website. You are listed as "author" of the "NVIDIA's GeForce 7800 GTX Hits The Ground Running" and "ATI's Late Response to G70 - Radeon X1800, X1600 and X1300" articles. Both of these articles are not up to Anandtech standards and have prompted numerous posts for readers to visit other websites.
I am a long-time reader of the site and am only posting this because I don't want to go anywhere else. I just don't believe that your articles have been up to snuff. The posts for proofreading, wrong labels, incomplete data, etc keep appearing and back up my opinion.
If Anand did not finish your mentoring, please let him know. I know that you put a lot of time and effort into this site, but the two biggest articles of the year for GPU's have left me shaking my head in dissapointment. Please work more with Anand, or do your own homework and read some of his old reviews. If you need another person, or co-author to help you ...please swallow your pride and ask for it.
Respectfully,
Jeffrey
drifter106 - Thursday, October 6, 2005 - link
What credentials do you have to make such an accusation? What indicators do you use to support such a statement? On the contrary, considering the time frame and the rush to provide us with information it is obvious for the coherent, that he has done a good job. Glad to see information provided that will futher support my next video card selection.erinlegault - Thursday, October 6, 2005 - link
That is exactly the point! He shouldn't be rushing. The Techreport and Xbit Labs and many others offer much more informative reviews.Do you want my credentials? It shouldn't matter a report is a report is a report. You don't have to have a PhD or be a CEO to have an opinion. Any person with a University or College degree knows how to write a report that is complete and accurate.
The fact of the matter is Anand's graphics reviews have been not up to par. Period.
Tamale - Saturday, October 8, 2005 - link
lol.. the 'fact' is that this 'opinion' isn't up to 'my standards'sounds like a real fact, folks.. this guy is serios business
Madellga - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/X1800_Serie...">http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/X1800_Serie...AdamK47 3DS - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link
I absolutly hate obvious marketing fluff!"16 ultra efficient extreme pipelines"
Those pipelines are about as extreme as a peanut butter and jelly sandwich is extreme. Try harder next time Ati!