Synthetic Benchmarks

As usual we start of the benchmark analysis by going through the different benchmark suites coming from Futuremark, and normally also AquaMark 3. These will provide a good indication on the game play of today's games. Although with AquaMark 3 we experienced since the Radeon HD 2000 series some issues being that it doesn't show the final score at the end of the benchmark. So, due to that we will only be using the suites from Futuremark starting with 3DMark05, followed by 3DMark06. We will reboot our system each time for each of the different synthetic API's used and leave all processes running in the background. We put the PowerColor Radeon HD 3650 Xtreme accelerator against the Radeon HD 2600 XT graphics card provided by Sapphire featuring high speed GDDR4 memory, and doing so analyze the performance figures.

Futuremark 3DMark05

The following version from Futuremark came as 3DMark05, and is best suited for the latest generation of DirectX 9.0 graphics cards. It is the first benchmark to require a DirectX 9.0 compliant hardware with support for Pixel Shaders 2.0 or higher! By combining high quality 3D tests, CPU tests, feature tests, image quality tools, and much more, 3DMark05 is a premium benchmark for evaluating the latest generation of gaming hardware. In fact 3DMark05 is the answer to the continuously growing challenge in benchmarking. Designed for higher image quality and the new processing capabilities, it will show some input and what is possible with compliant hardware.

Benchmark Results - 1280x1024 - E6700 2.66GHz - 2GB RAM
	Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB	3DMark05 Score
0x AA/Optimal	800/2200MHz (Ref - Single)	8987
4x AA/8x AF	800/2200MHz (Ref - Single)	5554
8x AA/16x AF	800/2200MHz (Ref - Single)	4173
	Radeon HD 3650 Xtreme 512MB	3DMark05 Score
0x AA/Optimal	800/1800MHz (Ref - Single)	9208
4x AA/8x AF	800/1800MHz (Ref - Single)	5652
8x AA/16x AF	800/1800MHz (Ref - Single)	4198
Results Interpretation: Higher index values are better.

With Futuremark developing updates, it soon came out with a newer version that was fully based upon DirectX 9.0c and that offered even more visual goodies. As of 3DMark05 the processing capabilities that make the difference is all about the graphics accelerator and less linked with the central processing unit used on the computer itself. Looking at the results, it does show us that the Radeon HD 2600 XT is a great performer though its nicely outperformed by the new series, and certainly by the Radeon HD 3650 Xtreme edition. With the GDDR4 edition however it becomes clear that the Radeon HD 2600 XT can still handle the load, though is caught up by the lesser GDDR3 memory which powers the PowerColor graphics card. One thing is certain this is a cheap graphics card, with all DirectX 10 features and with some great processing improvements.

Benchmark Results - 1600x1200 - E6700 2.66GHz - 2GB RAM
	Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB	3DMark05 Score
4x AA/8x AF	800/2200MHz (Ref - Single)	4492
	Radeon HD 3650 Xtreme 512MB	3DMark05 Score
4x AA/8x AF	800/1800MHz (Ref - Single)	4593
Results Interpretation: Higher index values are better.
Benchmark Results - 2560x1600 - E6700 2.66GHz - 2GB RAM
	Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB	3DMark05 Score
4x AA/8x AF	800/2200MHz (Ref - Single)	1752
	Radeon HD 3650 Xtreme 512MB	3DMark05 Score
4x AA/8x AF	800/1800MHz (Ref - Single)	2716
Results Interpretation: Higher index values are better.

Since we got a very nice and decent widescreen 30" LCD display, and due to the fact that quite some gamers are going for bigger screens and the true HD gaming resolutions, we took the liberty to run our benchmarks as well at some higher resolution. As you might already know, both ATI and NVIDIA are now really pushing for the High Definition standards to provide the gamer just that little extra and an even more realistic gaming experience. Well the Radeon HD 3650 Xtreme could please us to a certain extent, naturally the ultimate HD resolutions is just a bit too much to handle for this mid-range graphics card. But the capability is certainly present; the gaming experience is trailing a bit behind. Lowering the resolution does make a difference and gives a much smoother impression.

Futuremark 3DMark06

To complete the view and Futuremark performance figures we also run a 3DMark06, which is the worldwide standard in advanced 3D game performance benchmarking. A fundamental tool for every company in the PC industry as well as PC users and gamers, 3DMark06 uses advanced real-time 3D game workloads to measure PC performance using a suite of DirectX 9.0c 3D graphics tests, CPU tests, and 3D feature tests. 3DMark06 tests include all new HDR/SM3.0 graphics tests, SM2.0 graphics tests, AI and physics driven single and multiple cores or processor CPU tests and a collection of comprehensive feature tests to reliably measure next generation gaming performance today.

Benchmark Results - 1280x1024 - E6700 2.80GHz - 2GB RAM
	Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB	3DMark06 Score
0x AA/Optimal	800/2200MHz (Ref - Single)	5117
4x AA/8x AF	800/2200MHz (Ref - Single)	3347
8x AA/16x AF	800/2200MHz (Ref - Single)	2464
	Radeon HD 3650 Xtreme 512MB	3DMark06 Score
0x AA/Optimal	800/1800MHz (Ref - Single)	5154
4x AA/8x AF	800/1800MHz (Ref - Single)	3427
8x AA/16x AF	800/1800MHz (Ref - Single)	2598
Results Interpretation: Higher index values are better.

The latest version brings the Shader Model 3.0 into the picture, which is only available in 3DMark06 which was released as the beginning of last year. It makes you wonder when the new version will be coming, to go and use the DirectX 10 technology. And yes, you can draw the same conclusion as the Radeon HD 2600 XT with the GDDR4 memory is again trailing behind. Being clocked similar for the core, but higher on the memory it was somehow expected that the newer version with its optimized core would come out on top. The difference in the end isn't that extensive but still it does show that the extra optimizations done by ATI do have an advantage. So we do have to say that ATI has taken a good approach with going for the faster RV635 redesign and sticking with the high clock speeds, though option for less expensive memory chips.

Benchmark Results - 1600x1200 - E6700 2.80GHz - 2GB RAM
	Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB	3DMark06 Score
4x AA/8x AF	800/2200MHz (Ref - Single)	2621
	Radeon HD 3650 Xtreme 512MB	3DMark06 Score
4x AA/8x AF	800/1800MHz (Ref - Single)	2739
Results Interpretation: Higher index values are better.
Benchmark Results - 2560x1600 - E6700 2.80GHz - 2GB RAM
	Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB	3DMark06 Score
4x AA/8x AF	800/2200MHz (Ref - Single)	962
	Radeon HD 3650 Xtreme 512MB	3DMark06 Score
4x AA/8x AF	800/1800MHz (Ref - Single)	1684
Results Interpretation: Higher index values are better.

And finally as well the high definition gaming resolution which does show another improvement with delivering a decent score for a mid-range graphics card. Somehow this does smell like the optimized core has something to do with it, since it was able to beat the Radeon HD 2600 XT once again. What is very impressive is the anti-aliasing performance, as it did do a lot better than the older RV630, which really shows that whatever ATI has done to the RV635 has paid of the development efforts. The hype about HD gaming has actually started and it does show that both mid-range graphics card do come a bit short in processing power. But we are convinced that the high definition gaming is a great experience and giving just that little extra punch. Both cards have excellent image quality and clarity. And although we did expect a bit more from the Radeon HD 3650 accelerator, it does nonetheless unleash true gaming power especially this Xtreme edition.