backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 24 comment(s) - last by Mitch101.. on Jul 2 at 10:22 AM

Sapphire Radeon HD 2600 XT
AMD occupies the $50-to-$149 price points with new value and mainstream offerings

AMD today announced the ATI Radeon HD 2400 and HD 2600 series graphics cards, over a month after the introduction of the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT. AMD has also lifted the performance NDA on ATI Radeon HD 2400 and HD 2600-series graphics cards and reviews should be popping up. The value and mainstream ATI Radeon HD 2400 and HD 2600-series introduce ATI DirectX 10 compatible graphics processing to $50-to-$149 price points.

The ATI Radeon HD 2600-series arrives in three variants, one HD 2600 Pro and two HD 2600 XT models. AMD positions the ATI Radeon HD 2600-series at $89-to-$149 price points. The ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro features 600 MHz core clock and 500 MHz GDDR2 memory on a 128-bit memory interface. The Stepping up to the ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT raises the core clock to 800 MHz with two memory choices.

AMD offers the ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT with 800 MHz GDDR3 memory or 1.1 GHz GDDR4 memory on a 128-bit memory interface. All ATI Radeon HD 2600-series graphics cards have 120 stream processors and available with memory capacities between 128-to-512MB.

ATI Radeon HD 2000-Series
Model
Stream processors Core clock
Memory clock
Memory interface
HD 2900 XT
320 740 MHz
825 MHz
512-bit
HD 2600 XT
120 800 MHz 1100 MHz 128-bit
HD 2600 XT
120 800 MHz 800 MHz 128-bit
HD 2600 Pro
120
600 MHz
500 MHz
128-bit
HD 2400 XT
40
700 MHz
800 MHz
64-bit
HD 2400 Pro
40
525 MHz
400 MHz
64-bit

Taking over the low end is the ATI Radeon HD 2400-series, available in Pro and XT flavors. The ATI Radeon HD 2400-series occupies $50-to-$85 price points. AMD equips the ATI Radeon HD 2400-series with 40 stream processors and 64-bit memory interfaces. The ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT clocks in at 700 MHz core with 800 MHz GDDR3 memory. The ATI Radeon HD 2400 Pro has lower specifications with a 525 MHz core clock and 400 MHz GDDR2. AMD ATI Radeon HD 2400-series graphics cards are available with memory capacities ranging from 128MB-to-256MB.

Expect ATI Radeon HD 2600 and HD 2400-series graphics cards to pop up at retailers in early July. The usual board manufacturers should have cards, including ASUS, Diamond, Gigabyte, PowerColor, Sapphire and other partners.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
cool
By omnicronx on 6/28/2007 12:59:42 PM , Rating: 3
looks like ati is tackling where they think the real market is. any video card these days does anything the normal end user wants except graphics intensive games.
hope the drivers are good though..




RE: cool
By nayy on 6/28/2007 1:30:32 PM , Rating: 2
I agree there is a big market of no-gamers out there, people look for something under $100 just for HD video playbak, these have hardware acceleration right?


RE: cool
By DeepBlue1975 on 6/28/2007 1:31:16 PM , Rating: 2
I think AMD/ATi is just doing what they can, and that, for now, is going towards mainstream and low end markets, as they have given up on the highest end by now.
Hope they can compete with nvidia on the high end soon enough, AMD is very slow lately and has not been getting any of those latest products on schedule for the last year.


RE: cool
By omnicronx on 6/28/2007 1:38:58 PM , Rating: 3
heh i really doubt they have 'given up', i think this is just backlash from the AMD takeover, and they are almost skipping the high end this time around, but putting out competitive cards in the market where the real money is made.. probably to give them more time/resources to get their hybrid gpu/cpu (fusion or whatever) ready.
also .. i wouldnt be surprised if ati is being put on the bench a bit as AMD isnt having great success right now with c2d and all.


RE: cool
By DeepBlue1975 on 6/28/2007 7:33:20 PM , Rating: 2
That's why I said "by now". They seem to be quite busy to afford competing on the high end market right now.
Weather they'll be able to be back fighting for the top again in some months or not is a whole different story, they'll surely try but I doubt it will be an easy feat for them.

I guess financial tightness, internal activity towards integrating ex ATi crew with AMD's own and the usual projects of both companies are more than enough to keep them quite busy and not able to perform on schedules as tight as they could before.


RE: cool
By KnightProdigy on 6/28/2007 8:18:18 PM , Rating: 2
ATI and AMD have been ahead of intel for a long time, its about time they let nvidia and intel catch up a little.

Stream processing is where the future is and intel and nvidia are way behind on the technology.

When AMD gets back to making high end products, intel will be trying to catch up again.

Simple as that.

For now, its a very smart move for AMD to keep their HD DX10 cards on par with nvidias mid range cards that do not offer the features. To the people who purchase these cards, gaming and high performance isnt an issue. Features are what sell at this point and the HD versions have NV beat.

I have been an NV fan since the days of the STB cards, but this is a good move for the ATI division.


By maroon1 on 6/28/2007 2:30:04 PM , Rating: 2
Here is a review
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2151674...

8600GTS performed better than HD2600XT in most cases, even 8600GT beats it in some cases
8600GT completely destroy HD2600pro

Currently 8600GTS can be found at $149.9 after rebate (same as HD2600XT)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

8600GT cost $99 after rebate (same as HD2600pro)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

And since 7600GT performs very close to 8600GT, then I'm pretty sure that 7600GT outperforms HD2600pro. 7600GT only cost about $85 after rebate in newegg

In other words, HD2600 is a horrible video card in terms of performance and price. Period




By omnicronx on 6/28/2007 3:00:25 PM , Rating: 2
yawn.. those reviews are for different cards.. especially the 2600xt version with 1100mhz memory.. which id like to see a review for..

did you have that info saved in clipboard ready to post?


By ultimaone on 6/28/2007 3:50:27 PM , Rating: 2
well considering it has half the texture units and half the number of render back-ends....so in older games it does get beat, because they handle the graphics differently

yet it can still beat the 8600 GT and 8600 GTS in some games
(company of heros) and by alot, be interesting to see what its like in dx10 games

besides its a relatively cheap option for a dx10 card
for vista


By maroon1 on 6/28/2007 4:52:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:

yet it can still beat the 8600 GT and 8600 GTS in some games
(company of heros) and by alot


No, not by a lot

Just look at it again
http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image...

Without running AA, HD2600 won (not by alot), but when AA was enabled in company of heroes, 8600 series won. Just look at 1280x1024 with 4xAA

In the other games specially in FEAR, 8600 completely destroyed HD2600

However, in DX10 games both cards got less than 10 fps. In other words, DX20 games are not playable with those mid ranged video cards.

quote:
be interesting to see what its like in dx10 games


As I said, in DX10 games, both video cards are horrible. Even the high-end video cards like HD2900 and 88000 don't perform that well in DX10.


By maroon1 on 6/28/2007 5:01:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
so in older games it does get beat, because they handle the graphics differently


Really ??

What about FEAR, and Supreme commander ? Are those old ?

What about STALKER, oblivion and Rainbow six ? Don't tell me that those games are old.

You can see benchmarks for those game from this website
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3023...

So, what you are saying is not true at all. 8600 series can beat HD2600 in many of the new games

It is very sad to say that even the outdated 7600GT and X1650XT can beat HD2600Pro in many cases


By ultimaone on 6/29/2007 12:51:20 PM , Rating: 2
and a 6600 gt
can beat a 7300 gt
yet its older...

the 7900 gs beats the 8600 gts and 8600 gt
yet its older too, and even a 6800 ultra can beat them too

you are ranting

yes the 8600 gt is better, but you are comparing just the 2"600" to 8"600" part

video cards have always been buyer beware and find out
what the card can really do

these aren't high end parts either
i've already said they have half the texture units
hence why the 8600 series wins in most games

but for ppl getting windows vista and still want a value system, they can with either the 2600 or 8600 series, since it'll run the AERO interface

it is funny that you mention Supreme commander
the 2600 xt beats the 8600 gt

hence the newer style of doing textures...and why a card
with half the texture pipelines can win....because nvidias cards are still working with the old style, and use brute force to get the job done, which is fine cause it works well for older games too

i am not disagreeing with you that the 8600 gt and gts outperforms the 2600, it does in a lot of areas

i was just pointing out that the 2600 has some interesting quirks, cause for something with half the texture units it shouldn't be able to keep up, but it does, i think it has to do with a faster core clock speed, if ati ramped up the speed of the shader clock speed, they would have a great card in the 2600 and the 2900, but for now its a underperformer


By maroon1 on 6/30/2007 9:25:52 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
the 7900 gs beats the 8600 gts and 8600 gt
yet its older too, and even a 6800 ultra can beat them too


7900GS beats 8600GT, but not 8600GTS.

And no 6800Ultra doesn't beat 8600GT.

quote:
it is funny that you mention Supreme commander
the 2600 xt beats the 8600 gt


I was comparing HD2600XT to 8600GTS (not GT)


Gapped!
By Mitch101 on 6/28/2007 4:58:20 PM , Rating: 4
Anyone else feel like there is a gap between the mid to high end?

I could use a $200 video card with performance between the 8600 and 8800 nvidia lineup. On ATI that would be between the 2600 and 2900 lineup.

And can anyone please do benchmarks at 1680x1050 which is the typical 20-22" widescreen panel size. Im not saying abandon CRT resolutions I just asking for 1680x1050 resolutions to be included in testing.




RE: Gapped!
By dubldwn on 6/28/2007 5:59:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I could use a $200 video card with performance between the 8600 and 8800 nvidia lineup.

If you want to play games at 1680x1050, I think you could use an 8800GTS 320. And I'm sure they don't do that rez because it's so close to 16x12. Just add 5-10% to the frames.


RE: Gapped!
By Hare on 6/28/2007 11:49:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Anyone else feel like there is a gap between the mid to high end?
Yep...
quote:
I could use a $200 video card with performance between the 8600 and 8800 nvidia lineup. On ATI that would be between the 2600 and 2900 lineup.

X1950pro & X1950xt ;)


RE: Gapped!
By EndPCNoise on 6/29/2007 12:46:21 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with you. The X1950Pro and X1950XT are decent choices in this price range.

The only reason I didn't purchase an X1950XT is because it runs a little too hot. Otherwise, the X1950XT was my first choice.

I finally decided to go with the BFG 7900GS OC at $150, $100 after $50 rebate at frys.com.

I will upgrade to a DX10 card when ATI/NVidia release a good card in the $150-$200 range. The G84 series and RV630 series are a disappointment.

The 7900GS is highly overclockable. Some reviews have overclocked this card to near the 7900GTX!

Since I am already somewhat concerned with heat, noise, and power, I will not do this extreme overclocking on my card.

Those of you who talk of DX10 should check out some DX10 reviews. You will find that DX10 most often requires the power of cards in the $400 and up range just to get playable framerates.


RE: Gapped!
By EndPCNoise on 6/29/2007 1:54:11 PM , Rating: 2
UPDATE: NVidia to release G92 cards this November with 65nm chips, a 256 bit bus, and PCI Express 2.0.

Intended to fill the gap between the 8600GTS and the 8800GTS 320.

http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/12770


RE: Gapped!
By Mitch101 on 7/2/2007 10:22:01 AM , Rating: 2
Nice lets hope performance is a winner and maybe a decent overclock I have a 22" monitor and would like to play at 1680x1050 but can live without FSAA if needed.

I would certainly do X1950's but eventually we will be forced into DX10 even if current gen DX10 cards are nice but feel like they are lacking a little.


What happened to mid and lower range video cards?
By dandres87 on 6/28/07, Rating: 0
By jak3676 on 6/28/2007 1:28:26 PM , Rating: 2
I keep hoping for someing in the upper-mainstream segment that looks nice. Maybe we'll see some 256-bit interface cards in time for Christmas. Say something in the $200 range. Hopefully AMD/Nvidia are listining. I'm not goin gto bother to pay nearly $300 (OK, maybe $270 after mail in rebate) for a new card. The current round of "mid-range" cards don't get me anything better than last years cards with DX10 support (which I don't need yet anyway). I'll be waiting with my current setup until then - maybe R700 and Nvidia 9000 will have something for me.


By lumbergeek on 6/28/2007 1:49:28 PM , Rating: 2
Now that depends entirely on what you plan to use it for. I plan on putting a 2600XT into my HTPC for HD. I've been waiting fer it for quite some time now.


By Goty on 6/28/2007 2:02:18 PM , Rating: 2
ATI has had a weak mid- and lower-range for the past three generations or so. It hasn't been until they get the refreshes out the door that they actually become competitive. The last decent mid-range card ATI had was the 9500.


You know ...
By just4U on 6/28/2007 3:02:00 PM , Rating: 2
On the performance side by both Nvidia/Ati with these lower end cards. It's quite possible that they are (cough) trying to lower the bar a little.

We've been used to the latest gen midrange cards outperforming or coming close to the top end cards of a previous generation for awhile now. So maybe that's what both companies are up to.

It does look like if your a casual gamer,or wanting to get a decent htpc up and running cards from either gpu maker will do nicely.

I picked up a 8500GT for just such a reason (and would have considered the Ati offering if it was available at the time) and you know .. it's not half bad.

This coming from someone using a 640Meg GTS everyday!




We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki