ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT and 2600 Pro Review

[Deathawk]

I will not post any benchmark for you because you can look at the link I posted, by yourself

8600GT won in nearly all benchmarks against HD2600XT except in oblivion and Rainbow six vegas

7600GT was overall better than HD2600Pro

It seems that you are calling me a fanboy because you don't have any thing important to say. I'm here talking about facts.

And please before posting silly argument like this, read by post. I said that 7600GT beats HD2600pro in many cases. Thats why I post a benchmark showing that 7600GT performed better than HD2600pro

According to website that I posted, HD2600pro performed better than 7600GT only in oblivion. In all other games it lost against 7600GT. What is so sad is that 7600GT was able to beat HD2600XT in some cases. Haha

So, by conclusion 7600GT is overall much better than HD2600pro and this is a fact. But fanboys like you won't accept this fact.

And you are telling me that I should go home. Haha. But I think members like you who make useless posts, and people like who don't have any review that can back up their arguments need to go home. I have looked at all the benchmarks before I made my conclusion.

I can tell English isn't your first language, right Maroon? ^^

HD 2600 XT beats 8600GT in Prey @ 1600x1200. I don't even know why they're testing at this resolution for these cards, but I digress. 1600x1200 x4 AA holds no worth, really, and seems like it was just a test to try and give bad light to the HD 2600 XT. Who the **** is going to play Prey @ these settings with any of these cards. Okay.

HD 2600 XT owns the 8600GT and GTS in Rainbow Six @ 1280x1024.


HD 2600XT beats the 8600GT in Supreme Commander performance.

So they went 3 and 3, so how are you going to tell me that the HD 2600XT is a worse card than the 8600GT? OH, I forgot, you're a fanboy, that's how.

And the HD 2600 Pro and HD 2400 suck at gaming performance. I admit that. It's just cool to know that they're really not made for gaming performance in the first place. 7600GT beats them in gaming performance. Since when wouldn't I accept that?

 

[maroon1]

HD 2600 XT beats 8600GT in Prey @ 1600x1200. I don't even know why they're testing at this resolution for these cards, but I digress. 1600x1200 x4 AA holds no worth, really, and seems like it was just a test to try and give bad light to the HD 2600 XT. Who the **** is going to play Prey @ these settings with any of these cards. Okay.

I have looked at the reviews from other websites, and I can tell you that HD2600XT don't perform well when AA is enables. What if there are people who want to play at 1280x1024 with 4x AA, instead of 1600x1200 with no AA

HD 2600 XT owns the 8600GT and GTS in Rainbow Six @ 1280x1024.

It won by 1 fps against 8600GTS, you can say it owned GT but not GTS in that game

However, I can use the same argument against you who will play rainbow six vegas at settings they tested. HD2600XT only go 23 fps on this game. The game is not playable with any of those cards

HD 2600XT beats the 8600GT in Supreme Commander performance.

Only by 1 fps (Actually less than 1 fps)

However, HD2600XT is supposed to compete with 8600GTS, not 8600GT

how are you going to tell me that the HD 2600XT is a worse card than the 8600GT? OH, I forgot, you're a fanboy, that's how.

I said that HD2600XT is worse than 8600GTS (not GT)

read my first post again
http://www.techist.com/forums/1125904-post6.html

I would give you $1000, if you can find for me where did I say that HD2600XT is worse than 8600GT from that post ^^, if you can't then please don't open your mouth.

And the HD 2600 Pro and HD 2400 suck at gaming performance. I admit that. It's just cool to know that they're really not made for gaming performance in the first place. 7600GT beats them in gaming performance. Since when wouldn't I accept that?

So, what is your problem ?

From the first post I made, I was talking about HD2600pro, I never said that HD2600XT performs worser than 8600GT. Actually, they are comparable. But 8600GTS beats it.

Can you tell how my first post made you get angry ?

 

[maroon1]

Deathawk, this proves that 8600GT performs better when AA is enabled

Just look at 1280x1024 4xAA (the red one)

So they went 3 and 3, so how are you going to tell me that the HD 2600XT is a worse card than the 8600GT? OH, I forgot, you're a fanboy, that's how.

But you are here assuming that HD2600XT performs better in Prey, which is not true.

And you counting Supreme commander. HD2600XT won by less that 1fps in that game.

And I never said that HD2600XT is worser than 8600GT. I was talking about 8600GTS, not GT !!

So, before you call me a fanboy, read by posts carefully. If you are blind then this your problem.

I can tell English isn't your first language, right Maroon? ^^

Yes, it is not my first language, but do you have problem with that ?

 

[Deathawk]

I would give you $1000, if you can find for me where did I say that HD2600XT is worse than 8600GT from that post ^^, if you can't then please don't open your mouth.

8600GT won in nearly all benchmarks against HD2600XT except in oblivion and Rainbow six vegas

Why bring that up unless you are implying that the HD2600XT is worse than the 8600GT.

What is the price of the HD 2600XT supposed to be? It's not in 8600GTS range. It's 120 to 150, which is the price range of the 8600GT.

And just so you know, 1 benchmark doesn't really prove anything, which is sort of the whole point. These cards went even on the benchmarks(8600gt and HD 2600XT.) One benchmark of AA from Prey and the HD 2600 XT sucks at AA? I don't know how valid that is.

Even moreso, is a mid range/budget card supposed to be playing newer games at 1280x1024 in the first place? What's it matter if card X sucks at AA if it's not going to have AA enabled in the first place. :\

Maybe more later, maybe not. It's 3:40 here at my time, and I want to spend the few minutes I have before I sleep doing something besides arguing about video cards.

And nah, I don't have a problem with you not speaking English as a first language. It's just obvious.