Categories:

ATI's Radeon 2600 XT Remixed : Introduction

03:28 - Monday 17 September 2007 by Don Woligroski
Source: Tom's Hardware UK – Keywords: the, radeon, 2600xt, remixed
Categories: Hardware

Introduction

Ad

When the Radeon 2600 XT was released, it was met with a lukewarm response from the PC community. Available in the $150 neighborhood when it was new, the 2600 XT GDDR3 was in Radeon X1950 PRO and GeForce 7900 GS territory - both of which are notably more powerful when it comes to gaming. The 2600 XT’s gaming performance is comparable to that of the 7600 GT and X1650 XT, both of which could be found for under $125 at the time. And the higher-speed GDDR4 version of the 2600 XT was even more expensive, with little to show for the price increase in the way of extra performance.

On the positive side, the 2600 XT GDDR3 was going head-to-head with the GeForce 8600 GT. While both cards were priced a bit high considering their gaming performance, they are among the first mainstream video cards with DirectX 10 support and full HD video acceleration. These features appeal to people who are looking forward to HD video and DirectX 10 gaming.

As we approach the end of 2007, we can see the 2600 XT’s pricing position has changed dramatically. Models can be found on Newegg for as low as $100 - which is even cheaper than the old-budget trench fighter, the 7600 GT.

But when you look closely at the low-priced 2600 XTs, you’ll notice something a tad troubling: the memory speed on these cards is usually 700-MHz GDDR3. This is 100 MHz slower than the reference GDDR3 2600 XTs that were tested at the 2600 XT’s launch. It also represents a more than 10% decrease in memory speed.

(To add to the confusion, Nvidia’s partners have released DDR2 versions of the GeForce 8600 GT to the market. These cards have a huge 30% memory speed penalty compared to the reference 8600 GT. This has a significant impact on performance. Happily, true 8600 GTs with 800 MHz GDDR3 can still be had for as little as $115.)

So with all of this in mind, how does the new, cheaper and slower Radeon 2600 XT compare to the reference 8600 GT with fast GDDR3 memory? Is the new 2600 XT a great buy at $100, or is it a crippled part that smart buyers should avoid?

Let’s have a look at two examples of the 2600 XT, examine their features and assess their gaming performance compared to their arch enemy, the 8600 GT GDDR3.

Join our discussion on this topic


Talkback
mactronix 19/09/2007 10:02
Hide
-0+
mactronix
How much more performance inprovement would it be sensable to expect from the drivers and partner overclocking?
Would it say get to the point where it would be viable for those with 7600gt and x1650xt cards to change over to these new "midrange cards" ?
Mactronix
dev1se 11/10/2007 08:51
Hide
-0+
dev1se
Ive just upgraded from HD2600XT's (DDR4) in Crossfire mode and their performance as a single card solution were poor to say the least but very good in Crossfire (equal to that of HD2900XT/PRO on 3DMark06 - around 9,000-10,000 with 5000+ AMD)... but if you're upgrading from a 7600GT or X1650XT then I very much doubt there'll be much difference apart from the HD benefits. These cards are hugely limiting themselves with the 128-bit bus and it shows at high res's... maybe wait for the next wave of midrange cards to be released that could have 256-bit memory bus.

Note You are going to post a comment as anonymous.



Google Ads