Visiontek 512mb HD2600 Pro AGP 3DMark05/06 scores

[Dazed and Confused]

Okay, I finally got the hotfix DL'd and got my 512mb Visiontek HD2600 Pro benchmarked I figure these numbers should come in handy for some of you thinking about getting one of these cards if you don't already have one.

I ran the benchmarks at default settings on 3DMark but my HD was Oc'd from 600/810 to 675/1098 .

Here are the complete results :

3DMark05

Hardware details

General information
Operating system Microsoft Windows XP
System type Unknown
Motherboard manufacturer ASUSTeK Computer INC.
Motherboard model Yale
Hard drive model SAMSUNG SP2504C
Memory 2048 MB ( All 4 sticks are PQI Value mem running 3-3-3-8 timings in dual channel mode )
Slot 1 512 MB
Slot 2 512 MB
Slot 3 512 MB
Slot 4 512 MB
Processor information
Processor Intel Pentium 4
Processor clock 3000 MHz
Physical / logical processors Unknown / Unknown
Multicore N/A
FSB 200 MHz

Display information

Graphics card ATI Radeon HD 2600
Graphics card vendor ATI Technologies
Graphics memory 512.0
Core clock 607.0 ( Dunno why it says this as the core was at 675mhz )
Memory clock 409.0 ( And no idea either why this says this as the mem was running 549mhz for 1098 effective )
Driver name ATI Radeon HD 2600 Series AGP
Driver version 6.14.10.6783
Driver status Non WHQL - Not FM Approved
Linked display adapters No

Result details

Benchmark settings
Program Version 3DMark05 Revision 3 Build 0
Resolution 1024x768@32
Full Screen Anti-Aliasing None
Texture Filtering Optimal
Vertex Shader Profile 3_0
Pixel Shader Profile 3_0
Force Full Precision Off
Disable DST Off
Disable Post-processing Off
Force Software Vertex Shaders Off
Colour Mipmaps Off
Repeat Count Off
Main test results

3DMark Score 6001 3DMarks

CPU Score 3472 CPUMarks

3DMark Score
Game Tests
GT1 - Return To Proxycon 23.95 FPS
GT2 - Firefly Forest 16.73 FPS
GT3 - Canyon Flight 34.52 FPS
CPU Score
CPU Tests
CPU Test 1 1.7 FPS
CPU Test 2 3.15 FPS
Other Tests
Feature Tests
Fill Rate - Single-Texturing N/A
Fill Rate - Multi-Texturing N/A
Pixel Shader N/A
Vertex Shader - Simple N/A
Vertex Shader - Complex N/A
Batch Tests
8 Triangles N/A
32 Triangles N/A
128 Triangles N/A
512 Triangles N/A
2048 Triangles N/A
32768 Triangles N/A

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3DMark06

Hardware details

General information
Operating system Microsoft Windows XP
System type 32-bit
Motherboard manufacturer ASUSTeK Computer INC.
Motherboard model Yale
Hard drive model SAMSUNG SP2504C
Memory 2048 MB ( All 4 sticks are PQI Value mem running 3-3-3-8 timings in dual channel mode )
Slot 1 512 MB
Slot 2 512 MB
Slot 3 512 MB
Slot 4 512 MB
Processor information
Processor Intel Pentium 4
Processor clock 3000 MHz
Physical / logical processors 1 / 2
Multicore 1 Processor Core
FSB 200 MHz

Display information

Graphics card ATI Radeon HD 2600
Graphics card vendor ATI Technologies
Graphics memory 512.0
Core clock 607.0 ( Dunno why it says this as the core was at 675mhz )
Memory clock 409.0 ( And no idea either why this says this as the mem was running 549mhz for 1098 effective )
Driver name ATI Radeon HD 2600 Series AGP
Driver version 6.14.10.6783
Driver status Non WHQL - Not FM Approved
Linked display adapters No

Result details

Benchmark settings
Program Version 3DMark06 Revision 1 Build 0
Resolution 1280x1024
Full Screen Anti-Aliasing None
Texture Filtering Optimal
Vertex Shader Profile 3_0
Pixel Shader Profile 3_0
Force Full Precision No
Disable Post-processing No
Force Software Vertex Shaders No
Force Software FP Filtering No
Disable Harware Shadow Mapping No
Colour Mipmaps No
Repeat Count Off
Fixed Framerate Off
Main test results

3DMark Score 3100 3DMarks

SM 2.0 Score 1306

SM 3.0 Score 1639

CPU Score 655

Test Results
Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 9.81 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 11.97 FPS
CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 0.2 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 0.34 FPS
HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 14.61 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 18.16 FPS
Feature Tests
Fill Rate - Single Texturing N/A
Fill Rate - Multi Texturing N/A
Pixel Shader N/A
Vertex Shader - Simple N/A
Vertex Shader - Complex N/A
Shader Particles (SM 3.0) N/A
Perlin Noise (SM 3.0) N/A
Batch Tests
8 Triangles N/A
32 Triangles N/A
128 Triangles N/A
512 Triangles N/A
2048 Triangles N/A
32768 Triangles N/A

 

[cannondale06]

wow that P4 is killing you in 3dmark 06. anyway whats the point of your thread? surely youre not suggesting somebody actually go out and buy a 512mb 2600pro card. that is a horrible card and there are much better alternatives.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

For the $25 they cost at BestBuy ?

Not to mention I play S.T.A.L.K.E.R. @ 1024x768 mid detail ( view distance and lighting at max with AF at max as well ) and it's 100% playable, even when jumping arround like a monkey in the middle of a pack of mutant dogs whilst capping them with my Fort 15 If I turn the lighting to static I can play on 1280x1024

Also I play Crysis @ 1280x1024 with low detail and 8x AF with no slowdowns.

I play CoD2 @ 1280x1024 with everything except corpses and smoke on max with no AA and 8x AF.

I can ( though I hate the game ) play Doom 3 on 1280x1024 on Ultra Detail and get 25 - 60+ FPS.

Even for the $50 these cards are now being sold for on the forums they are a danged decent card for the money when u consider the overclockability. With the stock cooler I get a 75mhz boost on the core and almost 150mhz ( 300mhz DDR ) on the memory

 

[cannondale06]

For the $25 they cost at BestBuy ?

Not to mention I play S.T.A.L.K.E.R. @ 1024x768 mid detail ( view distance and lighting at max with AF at max as well ) and it's 100% playable, even when jumping arround like a monkey in the middle of a pack of mutant dogs whilst capping them with my Fort 15 If I turn the lighting to static I can play on 1280x1024

Also I play Crysis @ 1280x1024 with low detail and 8x AF with no slowdowns.

I play CoD2 @ 1280x1024 with everything except corpses and smoke on max with no AA and 8x AF.

I can ( though I hate the game ) play Doom 3 on 1280x1024 on Ultra Detail and get 25 - 60+ FPS.

Even for the $50 these cards are now being sold for on the forums they are a danged decent card for the money when u consider the overclockability. With the stock cooler I get a 75mhz boost on the core and almost 150mhz ( 300mhz DDR ) on the memory

well for $25 its ok then but other than that it is a lousy card for gaming. just so you know having 512mb on the 2600pro does absolutely nothing more for it than the 256mb model can do. also you arent playing all of Crysis at 1280x1024 without some slowdowns even on low settings.

 

[JackAshley]

well for $25 its ok then but other than that it is a lousy card for gaming. just so you know having 512mb on the 2600pro does absolutely nothing more for it than the 256mb model can do. also you arent playing all of Crysis at 1280x1024 without some slowdowns even on low settings.

QFT. Wait till it starts snowing...

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Snow ?

 

[Syntax Error]

I should bench my old FX 5200 PCI and make a whole new thread about it! Those are still sold at Best Buy, too!

 

[Dazed and Confused]

I should bench my old FX 5200 PCI and make a whole new thread about it! Those are still sold at Best Buy, too!

Well, when you get that card to play anything considered slightly modern, you just let us all know cause it'd be worth it Meanwhile, I'm satisfied with my $25 video card that plays S.T.A.L.K.E.R. on medium detail

 

[horrorshow]

Well, when you get that card to play anything considered slightly modern, you just let us all know cause it'd be worth it Meanwhile, I'm satisfied with my $25 video card that plays S.T.A.L.K.E.R. on medium detail

Seriously, I made a fuss the last time I saw the 5200 still at Best Buy.

It was horrible tech in '03 and it's REALLY horrible tech now.

 

[4745454b]

Well, at least I feel better about my x1800XT's scores...

OP, have you had any issues with the card? I've been hearing of issues with the HD cards when they are on the AGP bus. I was wondering how its been working, by the sounds of it, you like it a lot.

 

[WhDemon]

For the $25 they cost at BestBuy ?

he got a point

 

[Red Falcon]

well for $25 its ok then but other than that it is a lousy card for gaming. just so you know having 512mb on the 2600pro does absolutely nothing more for it than the 256mb model can do. also you arent playing all of Crysis at 1280x1024 without some slowdowns even on low settings.

I was waiting for ol' cannondale06 to show up in a thread like this to say how worthless the 512MB on your card is. However, this is not ENTIRELY true.

If you do video editing of any kind with Adobe After Effects, you can put that 512MB of memory to use as some video processing is done by the GPU. Also, decoding using AVIVO HD will help out a lot. Using my 8600GT's 512MB and Purevideo HD definitely helps in the video rendering/decoding/encoding department. ^_^

 

[cannondale06]

I was waiting for ol' cannondale06 to show up in a thread like this to say how worthless the 512MB on your card is. However, this is not ENTIRELY true.

If you do video editing of any kind with Adobe After Effects, you can put that 512MB of memory to use as some video processing is done by the GPU. Also, decoding using AVIVO HD will help out a lot. Using my 8600GT's 512MB and Purevideo HD definitely helps in the video rendering/decoding/encoding department. ^_^

I was talking about gaming only as I have no idea what extra vram can do for video processing. Do you have any links that actually back this up though?

 

[Red Falcon]

I was talking about gaming only as I have no idea what extra vram can do for video processing. Do you have any links that actually back this up though?

LOL, the two guys with 8600GT's to the rescue!

When running Adobe After Effects, there are settings to adjust the amount of VRAM used when rendering a file. This is also used in Photoshop CS3 and Premiere CS3, as both of these have optional 3D graphic functions (in the Extended versions). The minimum VRAM for any of these programs' 3D capabilities is 64MB, so a killer graphics card is not really necessary.

However, back when I had my Quadro FX540 w/ 128MB, rendering a video using only that amount took waaay longer than using my 8600GT (or even my old 8500GT) with 512MB, and me choosing to allocate more than 100MB of VRAM to processing dedication. This was on the exact same system at the time (not the one in my sig). There was no significant difference between the 8600GT and the 8500GT with After Effects CS3's rendering time, so I don't believe the power/GPU/memory bandwidth of the video card is as important as the amount of actual VRAM that is able to be allocated with the rendering processes. At least not with these programs.

As for Photoshop, the VRAM is only used during the rendering/developement of a 3D graphic, such as a 3D can (like a pop can) and putting an image wrap around it. When the image is rendered itself though, it's all CPU power. Premiere CS3 is basically the same as After Effects. When 3D effects are used, a small amount of VRAM is used, but not much. For Photoshop and Premiere CS3, only 64MB is required. But for After Effects, the more the merrier. I guess one of Palit's 8500GT's w/ 1GB of memory could come in handy for this.

BTW, these comments were all from my personal experience w/ using these programs when rendering SD and HD H.264 videos.

Link #1

Link #2

Quote from here

To set the Texture Memory preference in After Effects:

Multiply the total installed VRAM by 80% to calculate the optimal Texture Memory setting.
In After Effects, choose After Effects > Preferences >Previews (Mac OS) or Edit > Preferences > Previews (Windows).
Click OpenGL Info.
Enter the value you calculated in Step 1, then click OK.
The ideal value for texture memory is 80% of the VRAM on your video card. (If you use multiple video cards, calculate 80% of the VRAM on the video card that is identified in the OpenGL Information dialog box.) If the Texture Memory preference in After Effects is set to more than 80% of the VRAM, not enough VRAM may be left over for the video card to handle the user interface or other tasks (for example, the entire screen may turn white). If the value is set to less than 80%, OpenGL previews in After Effects may take longer to process frames.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Well, at least I feel better about my x1800XT's scores...

OP, have you had any issues with the card? I've been hearing of issues with the HD cards when they are on the AGP bus. I was wondering how its been working, by the sounds of it, you like it a lot.

It's been working perfectly and since I jammed the fan to 100% with ATITool I can now run the GPU @ 695mhz. I'ma rebench at this speed then again with the stock 600/810 later today. I'm also going to try to figure out how to run the Crysis benchmark and find a way to benchmark S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

well for $25 its ok then but other than that it is a lousy card for gaming. just so you know having 512mb on the 2600pro does absolutely nothing more for it than the 256mb model can do. also you arent playing all of Crysis at 1280x1024 without some slowdowns even on low settings.

So DOOM3 and QUAKE4 won't make use of that extra 256mb by storing the extra textures in it when set to ULTRA detail ? Why is it then that in the old 256mb X800XL vs 512mb X800XL benchmarks all show the same thing which is the 512mb card performs better in games like DooM 3 and Call of Duty 2 ? And although it isn't on the old Benchmarks, Quake 4 would follow the same trend.

So you are wrong, the extra 256mb will help in some games vs a 256mb HD2600 pro running the same speeds.

 

[Red Falcon]

It's been working perfectly and since I jammed the fan to 100% with ATITool I can now run the GPU @ 695mhz. I'ma rebench at this speed then again with the stock 600/810 later today. I'm also going to try to figure out how to run the Crysis benchmark and find a way to benchmark S.T.A.L.K.E.R.



So DOOM3 and QUAKE4 won't make use of that extra 256mb by storing the extra textures in it when set to ULTRA detail ? Why is it then that in the old 256mb X800XL vs 512mb X800XL benchmarks all show the same thing which is the 512mb card performs better in games like DooM 3 and Call of Duty 2 ? And although it isn't on the old Benchmarks, Quake 4 would follow the same trend.

So you are wrong, the extra 256mb will help in some games vs a 256mb HD2600 pro running the same speeds.

Oh, I forgot about Doom 3 @ ultra settings... yeah, even on a low-end modern card can make use of 512MB. My 8500GT w/ 512MB ran Doom 3 on ultra settings with relative ease. Doom 3 is by no means a modern game and should not really be considered a reason to buy a low-end card /512MB or 1GB of memory. Really, the only reason to do so is for video editing as I stated above.

Doom 3 is old by today's benchmarking standards. It was great back in late '04, early '05, but a lot has changed since then. Try running Crysis or some other game that can take full advantage of the 512MB of memory on your card... the GPU would buckle long before the full 512MB would be utilized.

 

[cannondale06]

It's been working perfectly and since I jammed the fan to 100% with ATITool I can now run the GPU @ 695mhz. I'ma rebench at this speed then again with the stock 600/810 later today. I'm also going to try to figure out how to run the Crysis benchmark and find a way to benchmark S.T.A.L.K.E.R.



So DOOM3 and QUAKE4 won't make use of that extra 256mb by storing the extra textures in it when set to ULTRA detail ? Why is it then that in the old 256mb X800XL vs 512mb X800XL benchmarks all show the same thing which is the 512mb card performs better in games like DooM 3 and Call of Duty 2 ? And although it isn't on the old Benchmarks, Quake 4 would follow the same trend.

So you are wrong, the extra 256mb will help in some games vs a 256mb HD2600 pro running the same speeds.

Yes games can use more than 256mb but the 2600pro is too weak to run games at high enough settings to take advantage of more than 256mb. As for Doom3 my 8600gt 256mb and plenty of other decent 256mb cards can play on Ultra with NO hiccups whatsoever.

 

[Red Falcon]

Yes games can use more than 256mb but the 2600pro is too weak to run games at high enough settings to take advantage of more than 256mb. As for Doom3 my 8600gt 256mb and plenty of other decent 256mb cards can play on Ultra with NO hiccups whatsoever.

This is true with more modern machines. Even a good machine with 1+GB memory and a decent processor can run Doom 3 with Ultra settings on a 6600GT with 128MB VRAM (I've done it) without any frame drops.

 

[JackAshley]

Snow ?

Reference to the last third of crysis, when there's snow and ice everywhere...brought my 8800 to a crawl