Test System Setup
Processor(s): Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3150MHz (350MHz FSB 1:1)
Motherboard(s): ASUS P5B Deluxe (Supplied by ASUS)
Memory: 2 X 1GB G.Skill HZ PC8000 @ 350MHz 4-4-4-12 (Supplied by Bronet)
Hard Disk(s): Hitachi 80GB 7200RPM SATA 2
Operating System: Windows XP Professional SP2
Drivers: ATI Catalyst 7.1, nVidia ForceWare 93.71 and DX9c
Since we don't know exactly where the new comer Radeon X1950GT 512MB graphics card (costing roughly $245 AUD or $193 USD in Australia) sits in terms of performance against the other boys, it seemed fair to include both the Radeon X1950PRO 256MB (costing roughly $275 AUD or $216 USD in Australia) from ATI and a factory overclocked version of the GeForce 7900GS 256MB (costing roughly $300 AUD or $236 USD in Australia) from Gigabyte and nVidia.
Keep in mind that a regular and non-overclocked GeForce 7900GS 256MB will cost you roughly the same price as the 512MB version of the Radeon X1950GT. Although we were using the more expensive Turbo Force overclocked 7900GS from Gigabyte in this review, the 7900GS is very easy to overclock.
With all of the pricing details considered, we will move on and run our normal array of benchmarks. Even though the Radeon X1950GT has slower clock speeds than the more expensive Radeon X1950PRO, will its extra memory come through and save it?
Let's check out the performance!
Version and / or Patch Used: Build 130
Developer Homepage: http://www.futuremark.com
Product Homepage: http://www.futuremark.com/products/3dmark05/
3DMark05 is now the second latest version in the popular 3DMark "Gamers Benchmark" series. It includes a complete set of DX9 benchmarks which tests Shader Model 2.0 and above.
For more information on the 3DMark05 benchmark, we recommend you read our preview here.
Straight of the mark we can see that the new Radeon X1950GT sits in between both the 7900GS and X1950PRO which isn't bad considering it is the cheapest of them all.