New 2600/2400 Review

Wreckage

Banned
Jul 1, 2005
5,529
0
0
http://www.techreport.com/revi...2400-2600/index.x?pg=1

Here's the shame of it: the Radeon HD 2600 XT GPU packs about 100 million more transistors than the GeForce 8600 GTS, is a larger chip even though made on a smaller fab process, is built on a longer card with a larger cooler, and has more theoretical memory bandwidth and shader power. Yet it can't keep pace with the 8600 GT all of the time, let alone the GTS, in current games.
 

ShadowOfMyself

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2006
4,227
2
0
See, now here I agree with you... Reputable site, and the card is a POS, unless you want a cheap card for video instead of gaming
 

BFG10K

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
22,709
3,000
126
ATi really dropped the ball with these things. You could make a case for the 2900 XT given its price point and interesting AA but most would have trouble justifying the 2400/2600 series, especially since nVidia's mid-raneg competition is lackluster to begin with.
 

Extelleron

Diamond Member
Dec 26, 2005
3,127
0
71
The HD 2600XT does what it is supposed to do - competes with the 8600GT, and AMD definately has a winner with the HD 2600 Pro/2400XT, which compete very well against the 8500GT. The HD 2400/2600 have extremely low power consumption, are quiet, and run cool.

The 8600GT does win in a few games over the HD 2600XT, but if you look most of those end up being the older games - such as BF2142, based on the old Battlefield 2 engine. When you get to the newer games like Oblivion and Rainbow Six: Vegas, the HD 2600XT is able to compete neck to neck with the 8600GT and in RB6:V, surpass even the GTS.

Overall, all of these cards are a disappointment. I can't see anyone buying one of these cards for gaming... just wait until better things come.
 

coldpower27

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2004
1,676
0
76
Yeah, I read that I was disappointed that ATI's design no only needs more transistors then Nvidia's but it requires a higher clock frequency to compete, what an 800MHZ SKU, vs Nvidia's 540MHZ SKU and it's only "on par"?

The beauty of this though that despite having a core clock of 800MHZ and 390 Million Transistors under it's hull it's power consumption is very competitive and on that front I am fairly impressive, gives us a glimpse of how well the 65nm process is working.