NVIDIA GeForce 6600GT and 6600 (NV43): Part 1 - Performance.
|
Contents
- Official specifications
- Architecture
- Video cards' features
- Testbed configurations, benchmarks,
2D quality
- Synthetic tests in D3D RightMark
- Synthetic tests in 3DMark03:
FillRate Multitexturing
- Synthetic tests in 3DMark03:
Vertex Shaders
- Synthetic tests in 3DMark03:
Pixel Shaders
- Test results: Quake3 ARENA
- Test results: Serious Sam:
The Second Encounter
- Test results: Return to Castle
Wolfenstein
- Test results: Code Creatures
DEMO
- Test results: Unreal Tournament
2003
- Test results: Unreal II: The
Awakening
- Test results: RightMark 3D
- Test results: TRAOD
- Test results: FarCry
- Test results: Call Of Duty
- Test results: HALO: Combat
Evolved
- Test results: Half-Life2(beta)
- Test results: Splinter Cell
- Test results: DOOM III
- Test results: 3DMark03 Game1
- Test results: 3DMark03 Game2
- Test results: 3DMark03 Game3
- Test results: 3DMark03 Game4
- Test results: 3DMark03 MARKS
- Conclusions
Serious Sam: The Second Encounter
GeForce 6600GT vs. OTHER CARDS |
GeForce 6600GT vs. GeForce 6800/6800GT |
GeForce 6600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The easiest modes without AA and anisotropy: 6600GT demonstrates excellent results in the battle against X600XT (if would have been strange otherwise) and PCX5900. The battle against the "emulators" is still a failure. The reason may still be the same, I have already written about it above. But 6600 is doing fine! This video card demonstrated parity with PCX5900, which is higher in price. To say nothing of PCX5750, which is simply destroyed. A little advantage over X600XT certifies that with slower memory installed in 6600 they will be approximately equal (which is again an advantage of 6600 as a cheaper product).
With enabled AA: it's interesting to note the defeat due to insufficient memory bandwidth, but not so global as in the previous test. It even outscored R9800PRO and PCX5900 with their 256-bit bus! This is another proof that the drivers must be optimized! This is very important. The defeat from 6800LE can be explained by the difference in memory bandwidth (we haven't reduced the frequencies in this card). And of course an excellent victory over X600XT! But what concerns the strife with the "emulators", the picture is the same as in the previous test. GeForce 6600 outscored its more expensive competitor X600XT (the bus is the same as well as the memory bandwidth), but it couldn't overcome PCX5900 (which is pardonable for a cheaper device).
With enabled anisotropy: Excellent victory of 6600GT over R9800PRO! X600XT and PCX5900 also got a licking. The battle with the "emulators" is closing to a draw (the more critical is the core, the less should the difference be). 6600 is also all right!
The final heaviest mode with AA and anisotropy: 6600GT outscored R9800PRO, but it lost to 6800LE. Though X600XT and PCX5900 are knocked out. GeForce 6600 won the battle in all respects!
Thus, on the whole:
- GeForce 6600GT versus RADEON 9800 PRO (ATHLON64 3400+) – victory!
- GeForce 6600GT versus GeForce PCX5900 – victory!
- GeForce 6600GT versus RADEON X600XT – victory!
- GeForce 6600GT – GeForce 6800LE (ATHLON64 3400+) – defeat (quite normal, it's up to the 256-bit bus...)
- GeForce 6600GT 325/700 MHz versus GeForce 6800 (8/3) 325/350 MHz (ATHLON64 3400+) – defeat (still not clear)
- GeForce 6600GT 350/1000 MHz versus GeForce 6800GT PCX (8/3) 350/500 MHz – the same picture
- GeForce 6600 300/600 MHz versus GeForce PCX5900 – victory! (over a more expensive competitor!)
- GeForce 6600 300/600 MHz versus GeForce PCX5750 – I think there is no point to comment, even PCX5900 is defeated
- GeForce 6600 300/600 MHz versus RADEON X600XT – victory!
What concerns overclocking 6600GT, the performance gain is almost proportional to frequency increase (18%) or even a little higher.
Write a comment below. No registration needed!
|
|
|
|
|