RSS Feed

HCW Tech Blog

For the latest info on computer hardware, tech, news, video games, software tips, and Linux, check out our new improved front page: HCW Tech Blog

Reviewed by: Carl Nelson [05.24.05]
Manufactured by: Gigabyte
Discuss this article in the forum!


3dMark 05 Individual Tests

Ah, the benchmark everyone loves to hate. I will always maintain that 3dMark IS useful, if used properly. Running a benchmark and looking at the final score is not what I mean. We need to check out the individual scores to get an idea of what is going on. First let's have a look at Fill Rate:

From these charts, we can verify that the X800 really does have much higher fillrate than its competitor, the 6600 GT. You can also clearly see the improvement that is made from Gigabyte upping the memory clock speed by almost 300 MHz. The X700 Pro really didn't stand a chance against the 6600 GT, so it's easy to see why ATI had to abandon it for the X800.

The X800XL is a bit more evenly matched to the 6800 GT however, when it comes to fill rate. Keep in mind though that the 6800 GT will sell for rougly $30-50 more than the X800XL we're looking at here.

The GeForce cards definitely benefit from Pixel Shader model 3.0 here.

However when it comes to vertex shader performance, the ATI cards excel.

For those who just can't live without 3dMark's final scores, here are the results from both 3dMark 05 and 03:

The 6600 GT simply doesn't stand a chance against the X800. The higher priced 6800 GT fares better against the X800 XL, despite the fact that it has lower specs on paper.

Next Page: (AquaMark 3)