XFX Geforce 7600GT Fatal1ty - Cooler and Faster than others

Videocards/VGA Reviews by geoffrey @ 2007-01-12

With the official release of the NVIDIA G80 based high end video cards in November last year, it is only a matter of months before we see new mid-range mayhem released for every budget minded gamer out there. At the very last moment XFX decided to satisfy gamers with one of the last G70 based video cards, their 7600GT Fatal1ty edition features passive cooling and faster clock speeds at a competitive price. How much faster? We find out.

  • prev
  • next

Quake 4

Quake 4
Official website

Quake 4 was released in 2006, based on the popular Doom 3 engine from ID Software. Unlike Quake 3 this game also has a fully fledged single player story which continues the events from Quake 2.

In Quake 4 you, Matthew Kane, find yourself in a war with some kind of aliens called "Strogg". As a member of the Elite Rhino Squad u get dropped at the heart of the Strogg war machine. The scene we went true is at the beginning of Quake 4, when you walk outside for the first time, the “you are but a soldier in a war” approach also seen in the first Call of Duty, although the outdoor scenes are smaller in size.

The Air Defense Trenches level sure was a good place to benchmark Quake 4 as you get to see some indoor and outdoor action.

Madshrimps (c)

Madshrimps (c)


Both NVIDIA and XFX 7600GT offer very fluent gameplay. Most of the time the cards will be able to stay close to the engine's in-game maximum framerate, which is a comfortable 60fps. 4xAA pushes these cards a bit more, though XFX shows us that its higher clocks put them 5 whole frames per second in front of NVIDIA's reference design.

This advantage in FPS is most noticeable when there is heavy action on screen, while the min. fps with the reference 7600GT is still an acceptable ~35, the 5 fps extra on the XFX edition made a difference.

Madshrimps (c)

Madshrimps (c)


Increasing the resolution had the same impact as going from 2xAA -> 4xAA on the lower resolution, at 2xAA performance is now identical to 4xAA at 1024x768, with the same drawbacks and advantages.

Further increasing AA made the game unplayable as the min FPS was below 30 FPS resulting into a stuttering/choppy gameplay experience.
  • prev
  • next
Comment from SuAside @ 2007/01/12
i kinda miss a X1950Pro thrown into the mix... (and a real case )
Comment from jmke @ 2007/01/12
X1950Pro is out the 7600GT league, the 7900GS is the X1950Pro match which Geoffrey compared earlier here: http://www.madshrimps.be/gotoartik.php?articID=523
Comment from Massman @ 2007/01/12
I really like the card's specs, 80nm should be one good overclocker
Comment from jmke @ 2007/01/12
SusAside, you might have a point, the X1950Pro performs quite on par with the 7600GT in this review: http://www.trustedreviews.com/graphi...1ty-7600-GT/p4
Comment from HitenMitsurugi @ 2007/01/13
Depends on what graph and game you're looking at, and what the bottleneck in the system is

upping res/AA gives you this:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/images...924-graph9.gif

Which is another extreme case, i know, but just as valid. The problem is that they don't mention the system test configuration
If you look at how cs:source scales, you see a big cpu bottleneck at 1280x1024, with all the cards performing the same, and only some spacing apart as the resolution increases. If you'd only look at that one resolution, you'd draw the wrong conclusions.

and the price difference isn't that big, in germany u can find x1950pro's for €165 for the bog standard cards, but a more general pricerange is €180-200

edit: ah yes they do: "To test I used our standard selection of benchmarks in our reference Intel 975XBX “Bad Axe” motherboard, with an Intel X6800 Core 2 Duo, coupled with 2GB of Corsair CMX1024-6400C4 running at 800MHz with latency settings of 4-4-4-12." Strange that even that processor bottlenecks these mid range cards.
Comment from SuAside @ 2007/01/13
well, it might be 35 euros more expensive, but it's still ATI's best mainstream card (price/performance). a comparison with that is always educational i'd say (and a good reference).
Comment from jmke @ 2007/01/13
the 7600GT is competitor to X1650XT in fact, as seen in this review: http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/s...ad.php?t=29022

unfortunately Geoffrey changed test configs, so he couldn't reuse the numbers of his X1950Pro tests, the cards have been since send back to companies.
Comment from flokel @ 2007/01/28
Can somebody tell me how high the 7600gt fatality is ?

I'm worried if the card fits in my silverstone lc-16m

regards,
Flo
Comment from geoffrey @ 2007/01/30
Height
Zalman HD135 ---> 135mm
Silverstone LC-16M ---> 170mm

XFX 7600GT Infin1ty ----> +-150mm

Should fit in there.
Comment from jmke @ 2007/07/10
* Cheapest "stock" 7600 GT is now only €79
http://www.alternate.de/html/product...wTechData=true
* The Fatality version is only €119
http://www.alternate.de/html/product...wTechData=true

* Cheapest "stock" 8600 GT €99
http://www.alternate.de/html/product...wTechData=true
* OC'd XFX 8600 GT €119
http://www.alternate.de/html/product...l?artno=JAXXHB
* XFX Fatality 8600 GT €149
http://www.alternate.de/html/product...wTechData=true

will be interesting to compare these cards, don't ya think will be testing them the coming week; shown down of NVIDIA low/mid end

 

reply