We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.

[nextpage title=”Introduction”]

Nowadays GeForce 6600 chip is located on the top of all entry-level NVIDIA GPUs (or at the bottom of all mid-range graphics chips, depending on how you look the market). We reviewed an overclocked model from XFX, called PV-T43P-UDS7, which comes with 256 MB GDDR2. Let’s see how it performs against “normal” GeForce 6600 models and also against other video cards available at the market.

Figure 1: XFX Overclocked GeForce 6600 256 MB (PV-T43P-UDS7) box.

The main problem with GeForce 6600 is that NVIDIA doesn’t set a default memory clock for it, so you can find GeForce 6600 video cards with several different specs (and prices) on the market. So you may buy a GeForce 6600 because your cousin has one to learn later that it is slower than your cousin’s because it uses a different clock configuration.

GeForce 6600’s core clock is set by NVIDIA at 300 MHz but the memory clock and the number of bits (64 bits or 128 bits) isn’t set by the chip maker. So, we’ve seen on the market models accessing their video memory at 400 MHz, 500 MHz, 550 MHz and 600 MHz at 64- or 128-bit rate.

XFX, for example, has 14 different models for GeForce 6600, with different specs:

• PV-T43P-UDS7 (a.k.a. “256MB DDR2 DUAL DVI XXX Edition”): 450 MHz clock, 800 MHz memory clock, 256 MB 128-bit GDDR2.
• PV-T43P-YDL3 (a.k.a. “512MB DDR Dual DVI”): 450 MHz clock, 560 MHz memory clock, 512 MB 128-bit GDDR2.
• PV-T43P-UD (a.k.a. “256MB DDR DUAL DVI”): 256 MB 128-bit.
• PV-T43P-NA (a.k.a. “128MB DDR”): 128 MB 128-bit.
• PV-T43P-NDP7 (a.k.a. “128MB DDR3 Extreme Gamer Edition”): 1 GHz memory clock, 128 MB 128-bit GDDR3.
• PV-T43K-ND (a.k.a. “128MB DDR Dual DVI AGP”): 128 MB, 128-bit, AGP.
• PV-T43P-UDL6 (a.k.a. “256MB DDR2 DUAL DVI Extreme Edition”): 350 MHz clock, 700 MHz memory clock, 256 MB 128-bit GDDR2.
• PV-T43P-ND (a.k.a. “128MB DDR DUAL DVI”): 128 MB, 128-bit.
• PV-T43P-WFH (a.k.a. “256MB DDR VGA / TV Out”): 256 MB 64-bit DDR2, low profile.
• PV-T43P-UA (a.k.a. “256MB DDR”): 256 MB, 128-bit.
• PV-T43P-NDD7 (a.k.a. “128MB DDR DUAL DVI Extreme Gamer”): 300 MHz clock, 650 MHz memory clock, 128 MB, 128-bit.
• PV-T43K-UD (a.k.a. “256MB DDR AGP”): 256 MB, 128-bit, AGP.
• PV-T43P-RFH6 (a.k.a. “128MB DDR TV DVI LP”): 128 MB, 64-bit, low profile.
• PV-T43P-WANG (a.k.a. “256MB DDR2 TV DVI LP”): 256 MB, 64-bit, low profile.

As we mentioned, we are reviewing PV-T43P-UDS7, a.k.a. “256MB DDR2 DUAL DVI XXX Edition”, which can be seen in Figure 2, running at 450 MHz and memory at 800 MHz.

Figure 2: XFX Overclocked GeForce 6600 256 MB (PV-T43P-UDS7).

You can see in our tutorial “NVIDIA Chips Comparison Table” the difference between GeForce 6600 and the other chips from NVIDIA, while on our tutorial “ATI Chips Comparison Table” you can compare it to its competitors from ATI.

Let’s now take a closer look at the PV-T43P-UDS7 model from XFX.

[nextpage title=”Overclocked GeForce 6600 256 MB (PV-T43P-UDS7) from XFX”]

On Figures 3 and 4 you can see overclocked GeForce 6600 256 MB (PV-T43P-UDS7) from XFX.

Figure 3: XFX Overclocked GeForce 6600 256 MB (PV-T43P-UDS7).

Figure 4: XFX Overclocked GeForce 6600 256 MB (PV-T43P-UDS7), back view.

This video card uses eight GDDR2 256-Mbit 2.5 ns chips from Infineon (HYB18T256161AFL-25)to give it 256 MB of video memory (256 Mbits x 8 = 256 MB). These chips can run up to 800 MHz. Since this video card comes already overclocked at 800 MHz, there is no headroom for overclocking the memory even more inside its specs. Of course you can try overclock it over its specs.

Figure 5: 2.5 ns GDDR2 memory chips used by XFX Overclocked GeForce 6600 256 MB (PV-T43P-UDS7).

[nextpage title=”Main Specifications”]

• Graphics chip: GeForce 6600 running at 450 MHz
• Memory: 2.5 ns 256-bit 256 MB GDDR2 memory from Infineon (HYB18T256161AFL-25), running at 800 MHz.
• Bus type: PCI Express 16x.
• Connectors: One VGA, one DVI and one mini-DIN for S-Video output.
• Number of CDs/DVDs that come with this board: Two.
• Games that come with this board: Far Cry (DVD, complete version).
• Programs that come with this board: N/A.
• More information: https://www.xfxforce.com
• Average price in the US*: USD 113

* Researched on Shopping.com on the day we published this review.

[nextpage title=”How We Tested”]

During our benchmarking sessions, we used the configuration listed below. Between our benchmarking sessions the only variable was the video card being tested.

Hardware Configuration

• Motherboard: DFI LAN Party 925X-T2 (Intel 925X, Sep. 20th, 2004 BIOS)
• CPU: Pentium 4 3.4 GHz LGA 775
• Memory: Two 512 MB DDR2-533 CM2X512-4200 CL4 from Corsair memory modules
• Hard Drive: Maxtor DiamondMax 9 Plus (40 GB, ATA-133)
• Screen resolution: [email protected] Hz

Software Configuration

• Windows XP Professional installed using NTFS
• Service Pack 2
• Direct X 9.0c
• Intel inf driver version: 6.0.1.1002
• ATI video driver version: 4.10 (6.14.10.6483)
• ATI video driver version: 4.12 (Radeon X850 Platinum Edition)
• ATI video driver version: 5.3 (Radeon X800 GT)
• ATI video driver version: 5.9 (Radeon X800 GTO)
• ATI video driver version: 6.1 (Radeon X1600 XT from HIS)
• ATI video driver version: 8.173 beta (Radeon X1000 series)
• ATI video driver version: 8.203.3.0 (Radeon X1900 XTX)
• NVIDIA video driver version: 66.93
• NVIDIA video driver version: 77.72 (GeForce 7800 GTX)
• NVIDIA video driver version: 78.02 (GeForce 7800 GT)
• NVIDIA video driver version: 81.98 (GeForce 6800 GS)

Used Software

• 3DMark2001 SE
• 3DMark03 Business 3.50
• 3DMark05 Business 1.10
• Doom III
• Far Cry 1.3

We adopted a 3% error margin; thus, differences below 3% cannot be considered relevant. In other words, products with a performance difference below 3% should be considered as having similar performance.

[nextpage title=”3DMark2001 SE”]

3DMark2001 SE measures video card performance simulating DirectX 8.1 games. It is very effective software for evaluating the performance from previous-generation games, programmed using DirectX 8. In this software we run six tests. We run the software in three resolutions, 1024x768x32, 1280x1024x32 and 1600x1200x32, first without antialising and with no frame buffer, then we put the antialising at 4 samples and the frame buffer at triple-buffering. This improves the video quality but lowers the performance. We were willing to see how much performance we lost by putting the VGA to run at the maximum possible image quality. It is important to note that ATI chips can run at 6x antialising. Since NVIDIA chips cannot run at this configuration, we had to use 4x antialising to use a configuration that is valid to all video cards included in our bechmarks, allowing direct comparison between them.

You may be asking yourself why we added an old program in a review of a latest generation video card. To us, it is as important to know the performance of a video card with the latest games as it is to know its performance in an older game. That’s why we kept this software in our methodology.

At a resolution of 1024×768 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 13.01% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT, 15.58% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600 and 30.20% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory) , while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E, which was 40.84% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 39.16% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 33.82% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 31.55% faster , NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GT, which was 28.83% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 24.27% faster, NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GS, which was 22.96% faster, NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT, which was 22.88% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 21.62% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 21.20% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 20.72% faster, Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 14.06% faster, XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 9.47% faster and ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 6.60% faster.

At a resolution of 1280×1024 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 22.75% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 24.15% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 47.77% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 50.30% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E, which was 49.09% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 43.57% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 41.23% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 39.07% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 31.71% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 30.79% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 29.20% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 26.16% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 21.49% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 20.77% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 19.67% faster, Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 12.32% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 10.48% faster.

At a resolution of 1600×1200 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 31.77% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 46.84% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 77.40% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 67.43% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 62.37% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 59.07% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 54.06% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 51.96% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 40.60% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 38.98% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 38.08% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 30.05% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 29.83% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 21.31% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 19.33% faster, XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 14.72% faster and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 6.74% faster.

At a resolution of 1024×768 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 21.64% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT, 32.40% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600 and 43.98% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 75.81% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 72.60% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 66.41% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 62.49% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 55.11% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 45.39% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 43.63% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 42.59% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 42.41% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 39.83% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 38.80% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 37.72% faster, Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 33.20% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 15.35% faster.

At a resolution of 1280×1024 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 24.30% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT, 42.09% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600 and 49.35% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 125.18% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 114.62% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 109.76% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 99.19% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 89.67% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 86.81% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 75.88% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 75.45% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 60.94% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 58.87% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT,O, which was 58.84% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 55.93% faster, Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 43.85% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 22.01% faster.

At a resolution of 1600×1200 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 46.63% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 62.78% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 100.19% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

 XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 246.75% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 212.42% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 210.77% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 201.59% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 194.46% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 176.37% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 126.74% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 123.56% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 113.28% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 104.31% faster, Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 81.23% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 61.57% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 55.88% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 26.89% faster.

[nextpage title=”3DMark03″]

3DMark03 measures performance by simulating games written to DirectX 9, which are contemporary games. We run this program in three resolutions, 1024x768x32, 1280x1024x32 and 1600x1200x32, first without antialising and anisotropic filtering, and then configuring antialising at 4x and anisotropic filtering also at 4x. This improves the video quality but lowers the performance. We were willing to see how much performance we lost by putting the VGA to run at the maximum possible image quality. It is important to note that ATI chips can run at 6x antialising. Since NVIDIA chips cannot run at this configuration, we had to use 4x antialising to use a configuration that is valid to all video cards included in our bechmarks, allowing direct comparison between them.

At a resolution of 1024×768 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 35.69% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 59.33% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 89.65% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 151.54% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 137.66% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 128.13% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 109.21% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 99.85% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 94.34% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 71.58% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 70.64% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 45.40% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 42.19% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 38.94% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 38.88% faster, XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 22.49% faster, and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 10.92% faster.

At a resolution of 1280×1024 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 38.10% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 63.41% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 94.89% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 184.24% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 166.99% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 150.49% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 125.07% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 118.40% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 111.09% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 80.84% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 79.78% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 52.93% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 44.06% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 42.10% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 38.54% faster, XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 23.64% faster and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 9.52% faster.

At a resolution of 1600×1200 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 39.40% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 75.18% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 107.74% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 212.89% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 188.00% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 171.28% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 163.11% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 134.21% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 125.31% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 91.37% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 88.45% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 59.12% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 41.84% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 39.83% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 38.44% faster, XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 24.30% faster and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 5.49% faster.

At a resolution of 1024×768 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 45.79% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 76.35% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 107.11% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) achieved a performance similar to Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 233.89% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 216.96% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 186.39% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 168.96% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 159.56% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 133.86% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 99.57% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 97.32% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 56.82% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 43.58% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 38.30% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 35.36% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 20.48% faster.

At a resolution of 1280×1024 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 63.73% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 81.42% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 102.23% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) achieved a performance similar to Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 286.25% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 269.24% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 215.50% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 195.76% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 179.11% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 156.14% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 111.02% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 105.02% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 61.65% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 52.88% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 47.65% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 41.78% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 3.92% faster.

At a resolution of 1600×1200 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 6.58% faster than XFX GeForce 6600 GT, 78.19% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 150.00% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 167.54% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) achieved a performance similar to Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 329.07% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 302.40% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 235.96% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 220.93% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 217.32% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 174.54% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 119.56% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 110.98% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 68.91% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 45.14% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 40.05% faster, and HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 39.84% faster.

[nextpage title=”3DMark05″]

3DMark05 measures performance by simulating DirectX 9.0c games, i.e., using the new Shader 3.0 model. This programming model is used by Far Cry game and other games to be launched in the future. This new programming model is used by GeForce 6 and 7 series from NVIDIA and Radeon X1000 series from ATI.

We run this program in three resolutions, 1024x768x32, 1280x1024x32 and 1600x1200x32, first without antialising and anisotropic filtering, and then configuring antialising at 4x and anisotropic filtering also at 4x. This improves the video quality but lowers the performance. We were willing to see how much performance we lost by putting the VGA to run at the maximum possible image quality. It is important to note that ATI chips can run at 6x antialising. Since NVIDIA chips cannot run at this configuration, we had to use 4x antialising to use a configuration that is valid to all video cards included in our benchmark, allowing direct comparison between them.

At a resolution of 1024×768 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 54.61% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 83.53% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 92.67% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 174.60% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 165.48% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 158.14% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 146.05% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 141.18% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 117.95% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 89.77% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 87.87% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 86.58% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 72.51% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 63.54% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 51.83% faster, Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 9.73% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 9.20% faster.

At a resolution of 1280×1024 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 7.36% faster than XFX GeForce 6600 GT, 66.88% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 102.02% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro and 111.79% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory) , while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 218.85% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 210.99% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 188.77% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 164.35% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 161.97% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 125.61% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 96.57% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 94.43% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 91.43% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 78.25% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 65.59% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 51.93% faster and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 7.23% faster.

At a resolution of 1600×1200 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 38.13% faster than XFX GeForce 6600 GT, 84.96% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 114.50% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro and 146.61% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) achieved a performance similar to Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 273.02% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 235.74% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 207.62% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 174.11% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 174.05% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 125.14% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 97.88% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 93.36% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 90.21% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 77.03% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 63.57% faster and HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 39.18% faster.

At a resolution of 1024×768 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 59.60% faster than XFX GeForce 6600 GT, 97.88% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro, 119.68% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600 and 127.46% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 230.48% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 227.02% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 194.64% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 185.98% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 170.64% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 142.02% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 100.00% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 98.25% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 93.28% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 80.14% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 77.95% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 71.52% faster and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 8.67% faster.

To run at 1280×1024 enabling image quality enhancements on 3DMark05 the video card must have at least 256 MB of memory, because of that some video cards couldn’t run this test. Here XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 100.37% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro and 276.94% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 308.39% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 275.39% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 222.31% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 205.47% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 189.87% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 150.34% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 104.79% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 104.23% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 99.81% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 84.52% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 79.68% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 56.00% faster and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 7.02% faster.

To run at 1600×1200 enabling image quality enhancements on 3DMark05 the video card must have at least 256 MB of memory, because of that some video cards couldn’t run this test. Here XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 113.75% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro and 269.21% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT,

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 396.66% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 320.02% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 234.00% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 231.06% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 197.54% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 164.10% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 110.01% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 105.48% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 87.85% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 77.52% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 77.36% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 54.73% faster and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 9.13% faster.

[nextpage title=”Doom 3″]Doom 3 is one of the heaviest games available today. As we’ve done on other programs, we ran this game at three resolutions: 1024x768x32, 1280x1024x32 and 1600x1200x32. This game allows several image quality levels and we’ve done our benchmarking on two levels, low and high. We ran demo1 four times and wrote the obtained number of frames per second. The first result we discarded at once, since it is far inferior than the other results. This happens because at the first time we run the demo the game must load all textures to video memory, fact that doesn’t happen from the second time we run the demo on. From the three results left, we consider as our official result the middle result, i.e., we discard the highest and the lowest values. Curiously almost all times the values obtained at the second round on were the same.

A very important detail that we must mention is that Doom 3 has an internal FPS lock: it is only capable of generating 60 frames per second, even if your board is able to produce more frames per second than that. This is done in order to make the game to have the same “playability” sensation independently from the video card installed on the PC. This lock, however, is disabled in the game benchmarking mode.

For further details on how to measure 3D performance with Doom 3, read our tutorial on this subject.

At a resolution of 1024×768 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 3.78% faster than HIS Radeon X1600 XT, 23.38% faster than Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, 26.80% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 122.01% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 172.22% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) achieved a performance similar to HIS Radeon X800 GT and ATI Radeon X1600 XT.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 40.96% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 39.80% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 37.76% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 37.17% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 37.17% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 33.24% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 23.18% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 20.55% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 12.39% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 10.64% faster.

At a resolution of 1280×1024 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) which was 7.48% faster than HIS Radeon X800 GT, 12.53% faster than ATI Radeon X1600 XT, 13.54% faster than HIS Radeon X1600 XT, 34.85% faster than Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, 37.43% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 156.63% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 214.38% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro,

 XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 86.68% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 81.71% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 79.72% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 73.96% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 60.64% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 54.08% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 52.29% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 50.70% faster, XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 19.09% faster, and HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 9.54% faster than the board being reviewed.

At a resolution of 1600×1200 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 16.09% faster than ATI Radeon X1600 XT, 16.83% faster than HIS Radeon X800 GT, 17.57% faster than HIS Radeon X1600 XT, 38.87% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 44.31% faster than Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, 180.92% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 247.17% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 135.33% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 119.57% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 110.60% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 107.07% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 75.00% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 72.28% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 71.47% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 69.57% faster, XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 24.73% faster and HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 5.71% faster.

At a resolution of 1024×768 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 7.21% faster than ATI Radeon X1600 XT, 8.28% faster than HIS Radeon X1600 XT, 29.76% faster than Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, 34.29% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 135.25% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 185.59% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) achieved a performance similar to HIS Radeon X800 GT.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 45.72% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 44.34% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 43.12% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 40.98% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 40.37% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 35.78% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 27.83% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 24.92% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 12.84% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 8.26% faster.

At a resolution of 1280×1024 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 7.21% faster than HIS Radeon X800 GT, 14.15% faster than ATI Radeon X1600 XT, 15.53% faster than HIS Radeon X1600 XT, 38.37% faster than Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, 42.51% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 158.70% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 217.33% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro,

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 99.16% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 89.50% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 86.34% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 82.14% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 64.29% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 56.30% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 55.25% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 52.10% faster, XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 16.60% faster and HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 10.50% faster.

At a resolution of 1600×1200 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 15.74% faster than HIS Radeon X800 GT, 16.12% faster than ATI Radeon X1600 XT, 17.67% faster than HIS Radeon X1600 XT, 41.20% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 46.47% faster than Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, 204.31% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 242.72% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 150.42% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 126.35% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 114.73% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 113.03% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 73.94% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 73.09% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 71.67% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 70.82% faster, XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 22.95% faster and HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 6.80% faster.

[nextpage title=”Far Cry”]

Far Cry is a game based on the new Shader 3.0 (DirectX 9.0c) programming model available on series 6 and 7 from NVIDIA and series X1000 from ATI graphics chips. We’ve updated the game to version 1.3.
 
As we’ve done on other programs, we ran this game at three resolutions, 1024x768x32, 1280x1024x32 and 1600x1200x32. This game allows several image quality levels and we’ve done our benchmarking on two levels, low and very high. To measure the performance we used the demo created by German magazine PC Games Hardware (PCGH), available at https://www.3dcenter.org/downloads/farcry-pcgh-vga.php. We run this demo four times and made an arithmetical average with the results. This average is the result presented in our graphs.

This game has a very important detail in its image quality configuration. Antialising, instead of being configured by numbers (1x, 2x, 4x or 6x) is configured as low, medium or high. The problem is that on NVIDIA chips both medium and high mean 4x, while on ATI chips medium means 2x and high means 6x, making the comparison between ATI and NVIDIA chips completely unfair. Because of that we configured antialising at 4x and anisotropic filtering at 8x manually at the video driver control panel.

For further details on how to measure 3D performance with Far Cry, read our tutorial on this subject.

At a resolution of 1024×768 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 6.46% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 9.14% faster than NVidia GeForce 6800 GT and 16.94% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) achieved a performance similar to NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, ATI Radeon X600 XT and XFX GeForce 6600 GT.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 10.62% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 10.59% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 10.52% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 10.32% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 10.26% faster, Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 10.15% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 9.85% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 9.77% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 9.45% faster and MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 3.88% faster.

At a resolution of 1280×1024 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 32.13% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT, 34.13% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600 and 61.47% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Raden X850 XT P.E., which was 21.54% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 21.36% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 20.88% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 20.30% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 19.44% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 19.25% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 18.96% faster, Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 17.50% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 13.12% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 12.49% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 11.86% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 11.22% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 8.40% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 8.00% faster.

ATI Radeon X1900 XTX was beaten by ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 9.28% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 9.12% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 8.69% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 8.17% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 7.39% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 7.22% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 6.96% faster and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 5.65% faster.

At a resolution of 1600×1200 without any image quality enhancement, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 40.46% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 48.80% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT and 82.21% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 61.32% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 59.87% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 59.33% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 56.49% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 50.47% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 49.62% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 48.63% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 47.01% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 44.16% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 43.40% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 35.95% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 33.00% faster, XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 22.80% faster and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 18.21% faster.

At a resolution of 1024×768 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 57.03% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 82.12% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro and 98.35% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) achieved a performance similar to XFX GeForce 6600 GT.

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 106.11% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 105.95% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 104.95% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 103.98% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 102.80% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 90.26% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 86.71% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 82.75% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 69.63% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 47.48% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 28.89% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 26.58% faster and Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 9.55% faster.

At a resolution of 1280×1024 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 64.03% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 74.70% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro and 81.50% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 204.53% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 187.74% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 183.17% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 177.47% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 174.80% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 171.40% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 117.68% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 108.45% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 85.28% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 55.46% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 43.97% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 37.18% faster, Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 14.08% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 4.45% faster..

At a resolution of 1600×1200 enabling image quality enhancements, XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was 52.84% faster than Albatron GeForce 6600, 114.43% faster than Sapphire Radeon X600 Pro and 145.93% faster than ATI Radeon X600 XT. Keep in mind that XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB was running at 400 MHz (core) and 800 MHz (memory), while its rival, Albatron GeForce 6600, was running at 300 MHz (core) and 500 MHz (memory).

XFX GeForce 6600 256 MB (which is factory-overclocked) was beaten by ATI Radeon X1800 XT, which was 316.94% faster, ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, which was 298.03% faster, ATI Radeon X1800 XL, which was 244.32% faster, MSI GeForce 7800 GTX, which was 237.01% faster, ATI Radeon X850 XT P.E., which was 214.56% faster, NVidia GeForce 7800 GT, which was 203.65% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GS, which was 131.61% faster, NVidia GeForce 6800 GT, which was 98.90% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GTO, which was 97.56% faster, HIS Radeon X800 GT, which was 60.90% faster, ATI Radeon X1600 XT, which was 42.17% faster, HIS Radeon X1600 XT, which was 39.33% faster, Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro, which was 16.07% faster and XFX GeForce 6600 GT, which was 13.28% faster.

[nextpage title=”Conclusions”]

Overclocked models are always an option for users that don’t want to play with overclocking by themselves. If you are one of these users, this model from XFX is great, because it comes already overclocked and with 256 MB GDDR2, double the amount of regular GeForce 6600 and GeForce 6600 GT.

Speaking of GeForce 6600 GT, it of course was faster than this boosted GeForce 6600 model from XFX, however in some situations it was amazingly faster: on 3DMark03 at 1600×1200 with high quality image settings enabled and at 3DMark05 at 1280×1024, 1600×1200 (almost 40% faster) and at 1024×768 with image quality settings enable (60% faster, really impressive). We couldn’t run GeForce 6600 GT at 1280×1024 and 1600×1200 with image quality settings enable because it only had 128 MB.

This is quite remarkable, since GeForce 6600 GT runs at 500 MHz for core and 1 GHz for memory, while the reviewed model runs at 450 MHz for core and 800 MHz for memory. The 256 MB really made some difference here.

Of course this video card is a little bit more expensive than plain GeForce 6600 models, but keep in mind that plain models come with only 128 MB and the reviewed model had 256 MB. Let’s compare apples to apples. On Shopping.com we could find an ASUS Extreme N6600 with 256 MB costing exactly the same thing, but it isn’t overclocked. And this model from XFX also comes with Far Cry on DVD.

Comparing it to GeForce 6600 GT is a little bit more complicated. GeForce 6600 GT with 128 MB also from XFX can be found by USD 120 on the market. But it only comes with 128 MB.

So it’s your pick, depending on the kind of games you will play. If you like to play recent games maxing out image quality settings, this model from XFX is an excellent option because of its 256 MB. But if you don’t run games like this, GeForce 6600 GT is a better choice. Of course if you have more than USD 120 to spend on a video card and want an even better performance, you should look for other mid-range options.