NVIDIA's GeForce 6600GT AGP: The Little Bridge that Could
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 16, 2004 12:15 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Far Cry 1.3 Performance
Once again we see the 6600GT fall between the x800 Pro and the 9800 Pro. The Far Cry benchmark has been touted by NVIDIA as one of the first PS 3.0 games, but it wasn't until the release of this patch that PS 3.0 features became available to the public. And oddly enough, things like geometry instancing are available on ATI hardware as well. CryTek and Ubisoft have done a good job of supporting both NVIDIA and ATI hardware and it comes across in the balanced benchmarks.
Our 6600GT scales fairly evenly between the 9800 Pro and x800 Pro under Far Cry. The resolution scaling is very spread out across the board here, but it's clear that current generation cards have an advantage.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
66 Comments
View All Comments
Pete - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - link
Great article, Anand. Are you sure about your 9700P numbers for Far Cry, though? They seem awfully low, especially in relation to a 5900XT.SlinkyDink - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - link
/*The AGP version of the 6600GT obviously lacks SLI support given that you can only have a single AGP slot on a motherboard.*/Actually I believe that AGP 3.0 specs allow up two AGP slots (and both could be used used at once), but nobody ever decided to implement it :P
Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - link
I am not treating NVIDIA's Video Processor as a feature of any NV4x GPU until NVIDIA provides a working driver and commits to a public release date. The 6600GT AGP supposedly has the same video processor that the PCI Express version has (since they are the same GPU), but to this date NVIDIA has failed to deliver a working driver set to take advantage of it.Take care,
Anand
slurmsmackenzie - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - link
#28....remember, the point is that ati didn't have a bridge in the works at the release of the x700, so now that it has become apparent that agp is still the front running solution, they're behind it it's agp equivelant releases. so, as far as agp interface is concerned, the closest ati comparison is the 9800.
vailr - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - link
Any comments on: comparing the hardware video decoding, of the 6600 vs. the (reportedly faulty)6800; and overall video quality, in comparison with ATI's offerings?For those people interested in the best cost-to-performance video solution, for Home Theater PC use.
Thanks.
Cybercat - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - link
They couldn't have been using the NF4 reference motherboard, these are all AGP cards. Also, why is it that the 9800 Pro does 63% better than the 9700 Pro in FarCry? At most that card is around 30% better. Did you guys really rerun the tests with the 9700 Pro using the latest drivers, or did you merely recycle some of the numbers?marcnakm - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - link
The card I was waiting for.Good review, just missing the comparison with the regular 6800 which is very important.
Regs - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - link
This review shows a lot of things. One of them was how the FX series was a horrible failure.draazeejs - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - link
Did nVidia pay for this article? Is it really fair to put up this card against a 2-years old card, like R9800Pro? As far as I understood, the X700 should be the real competitor for 6600GT, because the X700 is supposed to be in the same price cathegory, no? There have been numerous reviews of the X700 on the net, why not include it here???Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - link
The impact of the bridge, as I mentioned in the review, is negligible. The bridge + slower memory results in a 0 - 5% performance difference between the PCI Express and AGP versions of the 6600GT (the 5% figure being because of the additional memory bandwidth courtesy of the 500/1000 clock vs. 500/900).Just so you guys know, I went out and picked up a vanilla 6800 for inclusion in my upcoming Half Life 2 GPU comparison. Know that your voice has been heard :)
Take care,
Anand