ATI HD 2600 XT OpenGL Speed - slow ?

[mitch_de]

Hi,

the OpenGLExtensionVIewer Bench is the best OpenGL Bench for us OS X users.

Xbench is an oldi (over 2 years old) and measures only up to OpenGL 1.1 in an much to small window - more an CPU than GPU Test. GPU Benches need high resolution fullscreen modes to get real benchmark values.

 

10.5.3 / Intel E2160 (1.9 GHZ/1 MB) / MSI p965

 

 

My new ATI HD 2600 XT 800/800 MHz runs well (CI/QE) but compared to my NV 6600 GT is is only very less better in OpenGL.

 

Has anyone also ATI HD 2600 XT (or PRO) and can test his card witn OpenGLViewerExtension in high 4:3 Resolutions (1600x1200, 1200x900, i dont have 16:9 Monitor to compare) ?

 

Link to OpenGL Tool:

http://www.realtech-vr.com/glview/

Bench is in TAB Test, select BENCH and FULLSCREEN >= 1024x768 with 32 Bit and an Hz which your monitor can handle.

 

Results screen shoot 1600x1200 32 Bit / Bench / Fullscreen

(1280x960: 1.1 -1.2 values : around 650 / 1.3-2.0 : around 550, 2.1: same as 1600x1200 the higher the res, more work for GPU - the lower the Values)

[mitch_de]

Anyone OpenGLViewerExtension Bench Test Values of 2600 PRO / XT ?

[The Baron]

Here's mine, Gigabyte 2600XT 256mb, PCIe, silent.

 

[mitch_de]

Thanks!

Then my values seem to be normal for 2600XT - your CPU is faster than my E2180 (2*1.8 / 1 MB Cache), gives little better OpenGL Driver part speed, 1600x1200 is a bit higher than your resolution 

= valuas are near eqal.

 

I asked because the much older NV 6600 GT was at Tests 1.1 - 1.4 faster (5%) that the ATI 2600 XT (805 GPU /810 RAM DDR3 Clocked). Only at newer OpenGL feature Tests 1.5-2.0 was XT faster (mich better shadersspeed i think, more streamprocessors for shading (CI) on the GPU).

 

PS: 7600 GT , i had also performed not much faster / near same than 6600 GT (its same GPU familiy). But both where good and now ebay cheap cards.

 

My ATI runs not hot and its also very quite (actice fan but its an Zalman CU700, 5 V low speed selected).

[netkas]

2160 + 2600xt, scores r twice fast. in 1680x1050

[mitch_de]

2160 + 2600xt, scores r twice fast. in 1680x1050

Interesting !

 

My 2600 XT runs at highes GPU/RAM Clock and i use E2160 CPU little overclocked from 1.8 GHZ to 1.9 GHZ by FSB 200 to 210.

MHZ.

 

What can be the diffenernce ?

 

1600x1200 = 1,92 MPIX / 1680x1050 = 1,76 MPIX, so your card has 9 % less to render, but if you perform twice fast, it would be overall 1,9 * faster to my card.

At what GHZ your E2160 CPU runs ?

 

I use natit for ATI HD and this ATI HD2600 pgk for 10.5.3.

 

Can there be some not "fitting" framework be the reason ( i checked it with orig. Apple 10.5.3 Combo - my ATI drivers have same creation date , also OpenGL framework).

[netkas]

ahm, sorry, i missed u run it with benchmark option.

 

for benchmark i ghas same scores.

 

it runs on 218 FSB

 

card is saphire, runs at 800/1400

 

 

for 2600 xt u need only my latest natit, nothing more

[mitch_de]

Thanks.

Are you sure to run the latest version ? I have 3.0.4(12).

Your result window looks a bit different to mine.

 

My 2600 Xt runs at 810 GPU / 1610 MHz RAM (checked running Win XP native).

 

Cinebench10 : OpenGL 4022 CB-GFX, MultiCPU Render: 3731

[Bobert01]

any news of mobility radeon hd 2600 9581 1002 ?