D_o_S
10-14-2005, 05:29 PM
[Page=Introduction]
Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE AGP
First of all, I would like to thank Sapphire (http://www.saphiretech.com) for providing the test sample.
Sapphire Technology has been around for over 10 years, striding to provide the best graphic card (and nowadays motherboard) solutions. It has a wide selection of ATI products, ranging all the way from the budget segment up to high end 3D accelerators. Sapphire is usually among the first to implement ATI’s new chips, and is not scared to experiment on its own, for example with its liquid-metal cooled BLIZZARD cards.
Today, we will take a look at Sapphire’s Radeon X850XT Platinum Edition for AGP. With nForce 4 for AMD and the i9XX chipsets for Intel, it seemed that the long era of AGP was over once and for all. However, about a year later, this is not quite the case, and many people still use AGP. Is there still some life left in the dying standard? Or would you be better off upgrading to PCI-Express right this minute? Read on to find out…
It has been quite a long time since ATI released its X850 series, and as the new X1K series have been introduced, I think a small overview will be quite useful:
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" class="resulttable" style="font-size:11px">
<tr>
<th align="center">Product</th>
<th align="center">Manufacturer</th>
<th align="center">Core</th>
<th align="center">Pixel<br>
Pipelines</th>
<th align="center">Process <br>
Size (µm)</th>
<th align="center">Core <br>
Clock<br>
(MHz)</th>
<th align="center">Memory<br>
Clock<br>
(MHz)</th>
<th align="center">Memory<br>
Bus Width<br>
(bits)</th>
<th align="center">Memory<br>
Size<br>(MB)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X850XT PE</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R481</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">540</td>
<td align="right">1180</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X850XT</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R481</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">520</td>
<td align="right">1080</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X850 PRO</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R481</td>
<td align="right">12</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">520</td>
<td align="right">1080</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X800XT PE</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R420</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">520</td>
<td align="right">1120</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X800XT</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R420</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">500</td>
<td align="right">1000</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X800 PRO</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R420</td>
<td align="right">12</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">475</td>
<td align="right">900</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X800XL</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R430</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.11</td>
<td align="right">400</td>
<td align="right">1000</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>GeForce 6800 Ultra</td>
<td>NVIDIA</td>
<td>NV40</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">400</td>
<td align="right">1100</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>GeForce 6800 GT</td>
<td>NVIDIA</td>
<td>NV40</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">350</td>
<td align="right">1000</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>GeForce 6800</td>
<td>NVIDIA</td>
<td>NV40</td>
<td align="right">12</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">325</td>
<td align="right">700</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
</table>
Keep in mind that this table considers the AGP version of the card, not the PCI Express version.
With the introduction of the X1K series, it looks that ATI is retracing nVidia’s steps at cancelling out AGP. Only the low-end X1K series are officially announced for AGP (X1300 series). It remains to be seen if the X1600s will make it to AGP.
Architecture
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/x850architecture.jpg
As you can see, the card has 16 pixel pipelines (equal to the 6800's pipeline count, but 8 short of the number present on the 7800GTX), 6 vertex pipes and a 256-bit GDDR3 memory interface.
[Page=Packaging & Specifications]
Packaging
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxfrontt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxfrontb.jpg)http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxbackt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxbackb.jpg)http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxholdt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxholdb.jpg)http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/bundlet.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/bundleb.jpg)
The card itself comes in a relatively small box; nonetheless the box is really packed with goodies. The thing I probably like best about the design is the see through window, through which you get to see the actual card. The bundle is something that Sapphire should be proud of, I have yet to see a company that gives away so many CDs with recent games and programs, you also receive all the cables that you need to get the card going (as well as cables for full ViVo functionality); the case badge is like a cherry on top.
In the bundle, you will find:
Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE
DVI to VGA Converter
Molex Pass-through cable
Composite cable
S-Video Cable
Input cable
Prince Of Persia Sands of Time
Splinter Cell Pandora Tomorrow
Power DVD
Power Director
Sapphire Redline tweaking utility
Specifications
According to ATI (http://www.ati.com/products/radeonx850/specs.html):
Technology Features
Over 160 million transistors
Sixteen parallel pixel pipelines
Six parallel vertex processing engines
256-bit quad-channel GDDR3 memory interface
PCI Express® x16 lane native support
SmartShader™ HD
Full hardware acceleration of Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0 programmable vertex and pixel shaders in hardware
DirectX 9.0 Vertex Shaders
Vertex programs up to 65,280 instructions with flow control
Single cycle trigonometric operations (SIN & COS)
Direct X 9.0 Extended Pixel Shaders
Up to 1,536 instructions and 16 textures per rendering pass
32 temporary and constant registers
Facing register for two-sided lighting
128-bit, 64-bit & 32-bit per pixel floating point color formats
Multiple Render Target (MRT) support
Complete feature set also supported in OpenGL® via extensions
SmoothVision™ HD
2x/4x/6x Anti-Aliasing modes
Sparse multi-sample algorithm with gamma correction, programmable sample patterns, and centroid sampling
Lossless Color Compression (up to 6:1) at all resolutions, including widescreen HDTV resolutions
Temporal Anti-Aliasing
2x/4x/8x/16x Anisotropic Filtering modes
Up to 128-tap texture filtering per AA sample
Adaptive anisotropic filtering algorithm with bilinear (performance) and trilinear (quality) options
3Dc™
High quality 4:1 Normal Map Compression
Works with any two-channel data format
HyperZ™ HD
3-level Hierarchical Z-Buffer with Early Z Test
Lossless Z-Buffer Compression (up to 48:1)
Fast Z-Buffer Clear
Z cache optimized for real-time shadow rendering
Optimized for performance at high display resolutions, including widescreen HDTV resolutions
VideoShader™ HD
Seamless integration of pixel shaders with video in real time
FullStream™ video de-blocking technology for Real, DivX, WMV9, and WMV10 formats
VideoSoap™ noise removal filtering for captured video
MPEG1/2/4 decode and encode acceleration
DXVA Support
Hardware Motion Compensation, iDCT, DCT and color space conversion
All-format DTV/HDTV decoding
Adaptive Per-Pixel De-Interlacing and Frame Rate Conversion (temporal filtering)
Display Features
Dual integrated display controllers
Dual integrated 10 bit per channel 400 MHz DACs
Integrated 165 MHz TMDS transmitter (DVI 1.0 compliant / HDMI interoperable and HDCP ready)
Integrated TV Output support up to 1024x768 resolution
YPrPb component output for HDTV display connection*
Single and dual link external TMDS transmitter support for high resolution and/or multi-monitor DVI configurations
Compatible with ATI’s THEATER™ video decode and capture devices for VIVO (Video Input / Video Output) configurations
Unfortunately, the bundle we received was not the newer version. If you purchase a card now, you should receive a Sapphire Select CD, with a series of games that you can play for a limited time each, and then choose and unlock a game of your choice. This is a nice addition, as you are more likely to find a game that will interest you, and also if you buy two PCI-Express cards for Crossfire, you’re not stuck with the same game bundled with each card. Also, Sapphire’s OC utility called Sapphire TRIXX should be available with new cards.
[Page=3Dc]
3Dc
3Dc is a technology that ATI developed under the aim of providing better image quality. How does it work? All games have to use some sort of texture compression, because the textures would simply be too big to fit into you video card’s memory. Direct X has DXTC compression, whereas 3Dc is a new form of compression, resulting in better textures. Let’s have a look at a picture so I can show you what I mean:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dct.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dcb.jpg)
The details of the picture on the right are far better that those on the left. Normal maps are used, they are special textures that add detail to 3D objects. Normal maps allow the card to determine the direction in which incoming light will reflect off a surface at any given point. To create a Normal map, a high polygon count and a low polygon count model is used. The two models are compared, and the Normal map is created. The Normal map is then used on the low polygon count model. This way, the low polygon count model looks realistic, with fine details.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/normalmapt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/normalmapb.jpg)
3Dc comes into all of this, as it is used to compress the Normal maps, so that they can be applied to the models, thereby adding detail. The difference between 3Dc normal map compression and DXTC (Direct X texture compression) can be seen below
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/comparisont.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/comparisonb.jpg)
3Dc is not perfect - it is what we call a lossy form of compression. Lossy means that some of the data that is input (in this case the normal map data) is lost during compression and decompression. This means that some detail is lost, but compared to lossless compression (where no information would be lost), the size of the map is much smaller.
3Dc compresses normal maps, therefore it allows more maps with more details to be stored in the 3d card's memory, without exceeding the onboard memory limit.
[Page=Description & Installation]
The Card
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/cardfrontt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/cardfrontb.jpg) http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/cardbackt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/cardbackb.jpg) http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/X850portst.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/X850portsb.jpg) http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/coolingt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/coolingb.jpg) http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/ragett.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/ragetb.jpg)
The first thing I noticed after opening the package (other than the perfect bundle) was the card’s red PCB, just a tad lighter than blood red, and the two-slot cooling setup. The card is shorter than my nVidia 6800 Ultra, which will definitely please all owners of a small case. The card also appears less power hungry, as it only features one power connector. The yellow connector is for VIVO. The cooling system on this card is the reference one by ATI (unlike the Arctic Cooling Silencer that Sapphire mounts onto some of its cards) and occupies two slots, compared to the one slot solution on the X800 series. I would not count this as a major disadvantage, as very little people need all the five or six PCI slots on their motherboard, and can afford to sacrifice one to aid cooling. The advantage, of course, is that hot air can be expelled directly out of the case as fresh, colder air is taken in. There is also a L-shaped piece of metal that provides passive cooling to the memory on the back of the card.
Unlike its PCI Express brother, this card only has 1 DVI output and one VGA (wheras the X850XT PE for PCI-Express boasts 2 DVI connectors). This is a bit of a shame, as nVidia's 6800 Ultras have dual DVI regardless of the bus type. The only reason why ATI might have opted for 1 VGA output would be that it was expecting people with AGP to have a CRT monitor, and thereby allow CRT users to plug in their monitor without much hassle.
Installation
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/installt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/installb.jpg)
This card’s installation was no different than the countless number of AGP cards I have installed before. Just “pop” the card into the slot, check that the AGP security tab is holding the card in place and finally secure the bracket with 2 screws. Nothing out of the ordinary. I fired up my PC, expecting a sound similar to the “whoooosh” of my GeForce FX 5800, but the sound took me by surprise. It was more like “grrrrrr”, as if the card was getting ready to rip out of my motherboard. A few seconds later, the noise vanished, and I could barely hear the sound of a fan spinning, definitely much quieter than a GeForce FX 5800 or the 6800. The screen then came on and I proceeded to install a fresh copy of Windows.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/caset.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/caseb.jpg)
Test Systems
<table border="1" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0" class="systable">
<tr><th colspan="2" style="font-size:larger;text-align:center">Test System - AGP</th></tr>
<tr>
<th width="100">CPU:</th>
<td>AMD Athlon64 3200+</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Motherboard:</th>
<td>MSI K8T Neo</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Memory:</th>
<td>2x 512 MB Micron DDR 333MHz CL 2.5 3-3-6</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Video Card:</th>
<td>Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE and ASUS GeForce FX 5800</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Harddisk:</th>
<td>Maxtor 200GB SATA</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Power Supply:</th>
<td>Chieftec 340W</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Software:</th>
<td>Windows XP SP2, with nLite, Catalyst 5.9, ForceWare 78.01</td>
</tr>
</table>
<table border="1" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0" class="systable">
<tr><th colspan="2" style="font-size:larger;text-align:center">Test System - PEG</th></tr>
<tr>
<th width="100">CPU:</th>
<td>AMD Athlon64 3500+</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Motherboard:</th>
<td>DFI Lanparty nF4 SLI-DR</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Memory:</th>
<td>2x 512 MB OCZ PC 3200 EL CL 2 2-2-5</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Video Card:</th>
<td>Gainward GeForce 6800 Ultra (430/1200)</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Harddisk:</th>
<td>2x Western Digital Raptor 740 GD</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Power Supply:</th>
<td>Enermax EG 701 (600W)</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Software:</th>
<td>Windows XP SP2, Forceware 78.01</td>
</tr>
</table>
Antialiasing and anisotropic filtering was stressed through the drivers unless otherwise noted.
The FX 5800 benchmarks were run using 8x AF.
Before we move on to the benchmarks, I’d like to point out that the AGP test system has a pretty weak PSU (only 340W, with 15A on +12V); however I did not experience any stability issues no matter how much I stressed the whole system (and the card for that matter). That just proves that not all high-end cards have to be power hungry, and you won’t necessarily have to dish out another $80-$100 for a decent PSU to run the card.
[Page=3D Mark & Aquamark]
3D Mark
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmark05.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmark03.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmark01.gif
In lower resolution benchmarks, we can see that ATI has a lead in 3D Mark 05, however in the previous versions of this benchmark, Gainward's 6800 Ultra has a slight edge. At higher resolutions, the X850 takes the lead without doubt, leaving both nVidia cards behind.
Aquamark 3
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/aquamark3.gif
Aquamark 3 shows a similar situation to 3D Mark - the 6800 Ultra has the lead in the lower resolution tests, however as soon as the details are cranked up, Sapphire's X850XT PE takes the lead once again. It is also worth noting that the FX 5800 is about half as fast as the Radeon on default settings. Interestingly, when antialiasing and anisotropic filtering is turned on, the Radeon shows only minimal changes in score.
[Page=3D Mark feature tests & Ragtroll]
3D Mark feature tests, Ragtroll
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmarkf4.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmarkf5.gif
When OC'ed, the X850 matches up to the 6800 Ultra without much difficulty, however, at default settings, it does struggle to beat the 6800 Ultra in the Single Texturing test.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmarkf6.gif
The 6800 Ultra just about manages to take the lead, the OC'ed X850 is very close behind - in this test, the overclock makes about 10 FPS difference.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmarkf7.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmarkf8.gif
Definitely a discipline that suits the X850. In both cases it leaves the 6800 Ultra in the dust.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/ragtroll.gif
[Page=UT 2004 & Serious Sam-The 2nd Encounter]
Unreal Tournament 2004
Unreal Tournament 2004 results were obtained from an average of 3 time demos.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/UT2004.gif
A very interesting result for the FX 5800 here - just 10 FPS short of the Radeon on the lower resolution test! If you intend on playing UT2004 at 1024x768 without anti-aliasing or anisotropic filtering, you might as well stick with your older hardware.
Serious Sam-The second Encounter
Serious Sam was benched using The Grand Cathedral Timedemo
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/serioussam.gif
ATI wins both cases fair and square.
[Page=Doom 3, Half Life 2 & Far Cry]
Doom 3
Doom 3 was benchmarked using Timedemo 1.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/doom3.gif
Doom 3 is well known for running better on nVidia cards, and our tests proved just that. As soon as we cranked up the effects, the 6800 lead was minimal, with the X850 breathing right at it's back.
Half-Life 2
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/hl2g.gif
Very even scores at first, even the FX 5800 seems to pull off decent framerates. Turn up the details and you can say bye bye to playing HL2 on your FX 5800. Sapphire's X850 goes for the win, managing an extra 24 FPS over its nearest rival.
Far Cry
Far Cry was benchmarked using the Volcano timedemo.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/farcry.gif
Gainward's 6800 Ultra takes first place by a whopping 30 FPS over the X850, the X850 wins in the 1600x1200 category.
[Page=Call of Duty 2, FEAR & Battlefield 2]
Call of Duty 2 Demo
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/cod2.gif
Call of Duty 2 is a new game with spectacular graphics. Our Radeon X850XT PE lost 15 FPS to the 6800 Ultra on low details, the 6800 Ultra just about managed to take the lead in the high resolution test.
F.E.A.R.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/fear.gif
Similarly to Call of Duty 2, F.E.A.R. also offers some mind-boggling effects and graphics. Here, the FX 5800 just doesn't cut it - the framerate on the other cards is quite tied. Running the F.E.A.R. benchmark was quite "painful" on the FX 5800 - the benchmark was very slow, rendering frame by frame.
Battlefield 2
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/battlefield2.gif
Battlefield 2 was the last game on our benchmark list. The 1600x1200, 4x AA and 16x AF result was particularly interesting, as the X850 managed to draw double the amount of frames that the 6800 Ultra was capable of doing.
[Page=Overclocking]
Overclocking
The card ran perfect at stock so I decided to try out its overclocking potential. Using ATI Tool, I first opted for the auto detect feature, which gave me 600 on the Core and 600 on the memory. I had to back down the core to 585 (which is still a 45MHz OC), as it was unstable at 600, the memory seemed OK at 600 during testing.
Next I proceeded to try Sapphire’s TRIXX utility and see how far that could OC the card. TRIXX is more automated than ATI Tool, basically it suits the needs of people new to overclocking as well as those who are more advanced. Hardcore overclockers will undoubtedly choose ATI Tool though.
I opened up TRIXX and immediately proceeded to the overclocking section. Once there, I selected the “Extreme” mode, which cranks up the fan to 100%. Then I let the utility scan for maximum clocks. The system locked up at 595MHz for the memory clock, and 623 for the core. After this the screen turned off and I restarted the system. Once in Windows, TRIXX automatically informed me about the fact that my system had crashed during the test and asked me if I would like to proceed in further testing. I clicked “No” and left the card at 623/595. Unfortunately, the core was not stable with such a high clock, and had to back down to the previously stable 585 MHz.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/Stable.jpg
[Page=Value & Conclusion]
Value and Conclusion
<table width="100%" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" id="result">
<tr><th>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/dollar.gif</th>
<td>
Most probably the last high-end AGP card is priced at approximately $415. If you are looking for a 3D card that will be able to prolong the gaming life of your system by a considerable amount (unless you already are running a GeForce 6800 or something from the Radeon X800 series) then I think that this card is worth purchasing.</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/thumbup.gif</th>
<td>
Great performance
Good GPU overclock
Complete bundle
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/thumbdown.gif</th>
<td>
Fan noise at start up
Poor memory overclock
</td></tr>
<tr>
<th>9.6</th>
<td>Is AGP dead? Not quite. If you want to game and absolutely have to stick to AGP for whatever reason, then I can only recommend this card. Great performance comes at a price though, and it is up to you to decide if you want to invest into this card or wait a bit and do a whole system upgrade. Unless some new AGP cards hit the market, this might well be the last high-end one.
</td></tr>
<tr><th></th><td>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/editorschoice.gif</td></tr>
</table>
Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE AGP
First of all, I would like to thank Sapphire (http://www.saphiretech.com) for providing the test sample.
Sapphire Technology has been around for over 10 years, striding to provide the best graphic card (and nowadays motherboard) solutions. It has a wide selection of ATI products, ranging all the way from the budget segment up to high end 3D accelerators. Sapphire is usually among the first to implement ATI’s new chips, and is not scared to experiment on its own, for example with its liquid-metal cooled BLIZZARD cards.
Today, we will take a look at Sapphire’s Radeon X850XT Platinum Edition for AGP. With nForce 4 for AMD and the i9XX chipsets for Intel, it seemed that the long era of AGP was over once and for all. However, about a year later, this is not quite the case, and many people still use AGP. Is there still some life left in the dying standard? Or would you be better off upgrading to PCI-Express right this minute? Read on to find out…
It has been quite a long time since ATI released its X850 series, and as the new X1K series have been introduced, I think a small overview will be quite useful:
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" class="resulttable" style="font-size:11px">
<tr>
<th align="center">Product</th>
<th align="center">Manufacturer</th>
<th align="center">Core</th>
<th align="center">Pixel<br>
Pipelines</th>
<th align="center">Process <br>
Size (µm)</th>
<th align="center">Core <br>
Clock<br>
(MHz)</th>
<th align="center">Memory<br>
Clock<br>
(MHz)</th>
<th align="center">Memory<br>
Bus Width<br>
(bits)</th>
<th align="center">Memory<br>
Size<br>(MB)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X850XT PE</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R481</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">540</td>
<td align="right">1180</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X850XT</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R481</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">520</td>
<td align="right">1080</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X850 PRO</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R481</td>
<td align="right">12</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">520</td>
<td align="right">1080</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X800XT PE</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R420</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">520</td>
<td align="right">1120</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X800XT</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R420</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">500</td>
<td align="right">1000</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X800 PRO</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R420</td>
<td align="right">12</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">475</td>
<td align="right">900</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Radeon X800XL</td>
<td>ATI</td>
<td>R430</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.11</td>
<td align="right">400</td>
<td align="right">1000</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>GeForce 6800 Ultra</td>
<td>NVIDIA</td>
<td>NV40</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">400</td>
<td align="right">1100</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>GeForce 6800 GT</td>
<td>NVIDIA</td>
<td>NV40</td>
<td align="right">16</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">350</td>
<td align="right">1000</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>GeForce 6800</td>
<td>NVIDIA</td>
<td>NV40</td>
<td align="right">12</td>
<td align="right">0.13</td>
<td align="right">325</td>
<td align="right">700</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
<td align="right">256</td>
</tr>
</table>
Keep in mind that this table considers the AGP version of the card, not the PCI Express version.
With the introduction of the X1K series, it looks that ATI is retracing nVidia’s steps at cancelling out AGP. Only the low-end X1K series are officially announced for AGP (X1300 series). It remains to be seen if the X1600s will make it to AGP.
Architecture
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/x850architecture.jpg
As you can see, the card has 16 pixel pipelines (equal to the 6800's pipeline count, but 8 short of the number present on the 7800GTX), 6 vertex pipes and a 256-bit GDDR3 memory interface.
[Page=Packaging & Specifications]
Packaging
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxfrontt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxfrontb.jpg)http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxbackt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxbackb.jpg)http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxholdt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/boxholdb.jpg)http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/bundlet.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/bundleb.jpg)
The card itself comes in a relatively small box; nonetheless the box is really packed with goodies. The thing I probably like best about the design is the see through window, through which you get to see the actual card. The bundle is something that Sapphire should be proud of, I have yet to see a company that gives away so many CDs with recent games and programs, you also receive all the cables that you need to get the card going (as well as cables for full ViVo functionality); the case badge is like a cherry on top.
In the bundle, you will find:
Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE
DVI to VGA Converter
Molex Pass-through cable
Composite cable
S-Video Cable
Input cable
Prince Of Persia Sands of Time
Splinter Cell Pandora Tomorrow
Power DVD
Power Director
Sapphire Redline tweaking utility
Specifications
According to ATI (http://www.ati.com/products/radeonx850/specs.html):
Technology Features
Over 160 million transistors
Sixteen parallel pixel pipelines
Six parallel vertex processing engines
256-bit quad-channel GDDR3 memory interface
PCI Express® x16 lane native support
SmartShader™ HD
Full hardware acceleration of Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0 programmable vertex and pixel shaders in hardware
DirectX 9.0 Vertex Shaders
Vertex programs up to 65,280 instructions with flow control
Single cycle trigonometric operations (SIN & COS)
Direct X 9.0 Extended Pixel Shaders
Up to 1,536 instructions and 16 textures per rendering pass
32 temporary and constant registers
Facing register for two-sided lighting
128-bit, 64-bit & 32-bit per pixel floating point color formats
Multiple Render Target (MRT) support
Complete feature set also supported in OpenGL® via extensions
SmoothVision™ HD
2x/4x/6x Anti-Aliasing modes
Sparse multi-sample algorithm with gamma correction, programmable sample patterns, and centroid sampling
Lossless Color Compression (up to 6:1) at all resolutions, including widescreen HDTV resolutions
Temporal Anti-Aliasing
2x/4x/8x/16x Anisotropic Filtering modes
Up to 128-tap texture filtering per AA sample
Adaptive anisotropic filtering algorithm with bilinear (performance) and trilinear (quality) options
3Dc™
High quality 4:1 Normal Map Compression
Works with any two-channel data format
HyperZ™ HD
3-level Hierarchical Z-Buffer with Early Z Test
Lossless Z-Buffer Compression (up to 48:1)
Fast Z-Buffer Clear
Z cache optimized for real-time shadow rendering
Optimized for performance at high display resolutions, including widescreen HDTV resolutions
VideoShader™ HD
Seamless integration of pixel shaders with video in real time
FullStream™ video de-blocking technology for Real, DivX, WMV9, and WMV10 formats
VideoSoap™ noise removal filtering for captured video
MPEG1/2/4 decode and encode acceleration
DXVA Support
Hardware Motion Compensation, iDCT, DCT and color space conversion
All-format DTV/HDTV decoding
Adaptive Per-Pixel De-Interlacing and Frame Rate Conversion (temporal filtering)
Display Features
Dual integrated display controllers
Dual integrated 10 bit per channel 400 MHz DACs
Integrated 165 MHz TMDS transmitter (DVI 1.0 compliant / HDMI interoperable and HDCP ready)
Integrated TV Output support up to 1024x768 resolution
YPrPb component output for HDTV display connection*
Single and dual link external TMDS transmitter support for high resolution and/or multi-monitor DVI configurations
Compatible with ATI’s THEATER™ video decode and capture devices for VIVO (Video Input / Video Output) configurations
Unfortunately, the bundle we received was not the newer version. If you purchase a card now, you should receive a Sapphire Select CD, with a series of games that you can play for a limited time each, and then choose and unlock a game of your choice. This is a nice addition, as you are more likely to find a game that will interest you, and also if you buy two PCI-Express cards for Crossfire, you’re not stuck with the same game bundled with each card. Also, Sapphire’s OC utility called Sapphire TRIXX should be available with new cards.
[Page=3Dc]
3Dc
3Dc is a technology that ATI developed under the aim of providing better image quality. How does it work? All games have to use some sort of texture compression, because the textures would simply be too big to fit into you video card’s memory. Direct X has DXTC compression, whereas 3Dc is a new form of compression, resulting in better textures. Let’s have a look at a picture so I can show you what I mean:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dct.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dcb.jpg)
The details of the picture on the right are far better that those on the left. Normal maps are used, they are special textures that add detail to 3D objects. Normal maps allow the card to determine the direction in which incoming light will reflect off a surface at any given point. To create a Normal map, a high polygon count and a low polygon count model is used. The two models are compared, and the Normal map is created. The Normal map is then used on the low polygon count model. This way, the low polygon count model looks realistic, with fine details.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/normalmapt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/normalmapb.jpg)
3Dc comes into all of this, as it is used to compress the Normal maps, so that they can be applied to the models, thereby adding detail. The difference between 3Dc normal map compression and DXTC (Direct X texture compression) can be seen below
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/comparisont.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/comparisonb.jpg)
3Dc is not perfect - it is what we call a lossy form of compression. Lossy means that some of the data that is input (in this case the normal map data) is lost during compression and decompression. This means that some detail is lost, but compared to lossless compression (where no information would be lost), the size of the map is much smaller.
3Dc compresses normal maps, therefore it allows more maps with more details to be stored in the 3d card's memory, without exceeding the onboard memory limit.
[Page=Description & Installation]
The Card
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/cardfrontt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/cardfrontb.jpg) http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/cardbackt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/cardbackb.jpg) http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/X850portst.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/X850portsb.jpg) http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/coolingt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/coolingb.jpg) http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/ragett.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/ragetb.jpg)
The first thing I noticed after opening the package (other than the perfect bundle) was the card’s red PCB, just a tad lighter than blood red, and the two-slot cooling setup. The card is shorter than my nVidia 6800 Ultra, which will definitely please all owners of a small case. The card also appears less power hungry, as it only features one power connector. The yellow connector is for VIVO. The cooling system on this card is the reference one by ATI (unlike the Arctic Cooling Silencer that Sapphire mounts onto some of its cards) and occupies two slots, compared to the one slot solution on the X800 series. I would not count this as a major disadvantage, as very little people need all the five or six PCI slots on their motherboard, and can afford to sacrifice one to aid cooling. The advantage, of course, is that hot air can be expelled directly out of the case as fresh, colder air is taken in. There is also a L-shaped piece of metal that provides passive cooling to the memory on the back of the card.
Unlike its PCI Express brother, this card only has 1 DVI output and one VGA (wheras the X850XT PE for PCI-Express boasts 2 DVI connectors). This is a bit of a shame, as nVidia's 6800 Ultras have dual DVI regardless of the bus type. The only reason why ATI might have opted for 1 VGA output would be that it was expecting people with AGP to have a CRT monitor, and thereby allow CRT users to plug in their monitor without much hassle.
Installation
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/installt.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/installb.jpg)
This card’s installation was no different than the countless number of AGP cards I have installed before. Just “pop” the card into the slot, check that the AGP security tab is holding the card in place and finally secure the bracket with 2 screws. Nothing out of the ordinary. I fired up my PC, expecting a sound similar to the “whoooosh” of my GeForce FX 5800, but the sound took me by surprise. It was more like “grrrrrr”, as if the card was getting ready to rip out of my motherboard. A few seconds later, the noise vanished, and I could barely hear the sound of a fan spinning, definitely much quieter than a GeForce FX 5800 or the 6800. The screen then came on and I proceeded to install a fresh copy of Windows.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/caset.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/caseb.jpg)
Test Systems
<table border="1" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0" class="systable">
<tr><th colspan="2" style="font-size:larger;text-align:center">Test System - AGP</th></tr>
<tr>
<th width="100">CPU:</th>
<td>AMD Athlon64 3200+</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Motherboard:</th>
<td>MSI K8T Neo</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Memory:</th>
<td>2x 512 MB Micron DDR 333MHz CL 2.5 3-3-6</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Video Card:</th>
<td>Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE and ASUS GeForce FX 5800</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Harddisk:</th>
<td>Maxtor 200GB SATA</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Power Supply:</th>
<td>Chieftec 340W</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Software:</th>
<td>Windows XP SP2, with nLite, Catalyst 5.9, ForceWare 78.01</td>
</tr>
</table>
<table border="1" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0" class="systable">
<tr><th colspan="2" style="font-size:larger;text-align:center">Test System - PEG</th></tr>
<tr>
<th width="100">CPU:</th>
<td>AMD Athlon64 3500+</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Motherboard:</th>
<td>DFI Lanparty nF4 SLI-DR</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Memory:</th>
<td>2x 512 MB OCZ PC 3200 EL CL 2 2-2-5</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Video Card:</th>
<td>Gainward GeForce 6800 Ultra (430/1200)</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Harddisk:</th>
<td>2x Western Digital Raptor 740 GD</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Power Supply:</th>
<td>Enermax EG 701 (600W)</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>Software:</th>
<td>Windows XP SP2, Forceware 78.01</td>
</tr>
</table>
Antialiasing and anisotropic filtering was stressed through the drivers unless otherwise noted.
The FX 5800 benchmarks were run using 8x AF.
Before we move on to the benchmarks, I’d like to point out that the AGP test system has a pretty weak PSU (only 340W, with 15A on +12V); however I did not experience any stability issues no matter how much I stressed the whole system (and the card for that matter). That just proves that not all high-end cards have to be power hungry, and you won’t necessarily have to dish out another $80-$100 for a decent PSU to run the card.
[Page=3D Mark & Aquamark]
3D Mark
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmark05.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmark03.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmark01.gif
In lower resolution benchmarks, we can see that ATI has a lead in 3D Mark 05, however in the previous versions of this benchmark, Gainward's 6800 Ultra has a slight edge. At higher resolutions, the X850 takes the lead without doubt, leaving both nVidia cards behind.
Aquamark 3
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/aquamark3.gif
Aquamark 3 shows a similar situation to 3D Mark - the 6800 Ultra has the lead in the lower resolution tests, however as soon as the details are cranked up, Sapphire's X850XT PE takes the lead once again. It is also worth noting that the FX 5800 is about half as fast as the Radeon on default settings. Interestingly, when antialiasing and anisotropic filtering is turned on, the Radeon shows only minimal changes in score.
[Page=3D Mark feature tests & Ragtroll]
3D Mark feature tests, Ragtroll
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmarkf4.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmarkf5.gif
When OC'ed, the X850 matches up to the 6800 Ultra without much difficulty, however, at default settings, it does struggle to beat the 6800 Ultra in the Single Texturing test.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmarkf6.gif
The 6800 Ultra just about manages to take the lead, the OC'ed X850 is very close behind - in this test, the overclock makes about 10 FPS difference.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmarkf7.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/3dmarkf8.gif
Definitely a discipline that suits the X850. In both cases it leaves the 6800 Ultra in the dust.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/ragtroll.gif
[Page=UT 2004 & Serious Sam-The 2nd Encounter]
Unreal Tournament 2004
Unreal Tournament 2004 results were obtained from an average of 3 time demos.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/UT2004.gif
A very interesting result for the FX 5800 here - just 10 FPS short of the Radeon on the lower resolution test! If you intend on playing UT2004 at 1024x768 without anti-aliasing or anisotropic filtering, you might as well stick with your older hardware.
Serious Sam-The second Encounter
Serious Sam was benched using The Grand Cathedral Timedemo
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/serioussam.gif
ATI wins both cases fair and square.
[Page=Doom 3, Half Life 2 & Far Cry]
Doom 3
Doom 3 was benchmarked using Timedemo 1.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/doom3.gif
Doom 3 is well known for running better on nVidia cards, and our tests proved just that. As soon as we cranked up the effects, the 6800 lead was minimal, with the X850 breathing right at it's back.
Half-Life 2
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/hl2g.gif
Very even scores at first, even the FX 5800 seems to pull off decent framerates. Turn up the details and you can say bye bye to playing HL2 on your FX 5800. Sapphire's X850 goes for the win, managing an extra 24 FPS over its nearest rival.
Far Cry
Far Cry was benchmarked using the Volcano timedemo.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/farcry.gif
Gainward's 6800 Ultra takes first place by a whopping 30 FPS over the X850, the X850 wins in the 1600x1200 category.
[Page=Call of Duty 2, FEAR & Battlefield 2]
Call of Duty 2 Demo
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/cod2.gif
Call of Duty 2 is a new game with spectacular graphics. Our Radeon X850XT PE lost 15 FPS to the 6800 Ultra on low details, the 6800 Ultra just about managed to take the lead in the high resolution test.
F.E.A.R.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/fear.gif
Similarly to Call of Duty 2, F.E.A.R. also offers some mind-boggling effects and graphics. Here, the FX 5800 just doesn't cut it - the framerate on the other cards is quite tied. Running the F.E.A.R. benchmark was quite "painful" on the FX 5800 - the benchmark was very slow, rendering frame by frame.
Battlefield 2
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/battlefield2.gif
Battlefield 2 was the last game on our benchmark list. The 1600x1200, 4x AA and 16x AF result was particularly interesting, as the X850 managed to draw double the amount of frames that the 6800 Ultra was capable of doing.
[Page=Overclocking]
Overclocking
The card ran perfect at stock so I decided to try out its overclocking potential. Using ATI Tool, I first opted for the auto detect feature, which gave me 600 on the Core and 600 on the memory. I had to back down the core to 585 (which is still a 45MHz OC), as it was unstable at 600, the memory seemed OK at 600 during testing.
Next I proceeded to try Sapphire’s TRIXX utility and see how far that could OC the card. TRIXX is more automated than ATI Tool, basically it suits the needs of people new to overclocking as well as those who are more advanced. Hardcore overclockers will undoubtedly choose ATI Tool though.
I opened up TRIXX and immediately proceeded to the overclocking section. Once there, I selected the “Extreme” mode, which cranks up the fan to 100%. Then I let the utility scan for maximum clocks. The system locked up at 595MHz for the memory clock, and 623 for the core. After this the screen turned off and I restarted the system. Once in Windows, TRIXX automatically informed me about the fact that my system had crashed during the test and asked me if I would like to proceed in further testing. I clicked “No” and left the card at 623/595. Unfortunately, the core was not stable with such a high clock, and had to back down to the previously stable 585 MHz.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/Radeonx850xtpeagp/images/Stable.jpg
[Page=Value & Conclusion]
Value and Conclusion
<table width="100%" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" id="result">
<tr><th>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/dollar.gif</th>
<td>
Most probably the last high-end AGP card is priced at approximately $415. If you are looking for a 3D card that will be able to prolong the gaming life of your system by a considerable amount (unless you already are running a GeForce 6800 or something from the Radeon X800 series) then I think that this card is worth purchasing.</td>
</tr><tr>
<th>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/thumbup.gif</th>
<td>
Great performance
Good GPU overclock
Complete bundle
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/thumbdown.gif</th>
<td>
Fan noise at start up
Poor memory overclock
</td></tr>
<tr>
<th>9.6</th>
<td>Is AGP dead? Not quite. If you want to game and absolutely have to stick to AGP for whatever reason, then I can only recommend this card. Great performance comes at a price though, and it is up to you to decide if you want to invest into this card or wait a bit and do a whole system upgrade. Unless some new AGP cards hit the market, this might well be the last high-end one.
</td></tr>
<tr><th></th><td>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/editorschoice.gif</td></tr>
</table>