System setup and notes
Hardware
| Graphics card(s) | Inno3D GeForce 7950GT Accelero S1M 256MiB (560/1500) | ECS N8800GTS-320MX 320MiB (513/1600) | ASUS EAX1950Pro 256MiB (580.5/1404) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CPU | Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 (2.93GHz, 4MiB L2 cache, LGA775) | ||
| Motherboard | EVGA nForce 680i SLI | ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe (975X+ICH7R) | |
| Memory | 2GiB (2 x 1024) Corsair PC8500 EPP | 2GiB (2 x 1024) Patriot XLBK | |
| Memory timings and speed | 4-4-4-12 2T @ 800MHz (PC6400) | ||
| PSU | FSP Epsilon 600W | ||
| Monitor | Dell 2405FPW - 1920x1200 | ||
| Disk drive(s) | Seagate 160GB SATAII (ST3160812AS) | ||
| Mainboard software | NVIDIA platform driver 9.53 | Intel Inf 8.0.1.1002 | |
| Graphics driver | ForceWare 93.71 | ForceWare 97.02 | CATALYST 7.1 |
| Operating System | Windows XP Professional, w/ SP2, 32-bit | ||
Software
| 3D Benchmarks |
Far Cry v1.33 Quake 4 v1.30 Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory v1.05 |
|---|
Notes
We've decided to compare the Inno3D GeForce 7950GT Accelero S1M 256MiB against a couple of card that, on first glance, don't appear to be its immediate competitors.The reason for choosing the £180 ECS GeForce 8800 GTS 320 and the £115-priced ASUS EAX1950Pro lies with determining just how much performance benefit/deficit you receive by spending £25 more or £40 less. The point here is to determine whether the Inno3D card offers performance value-for-money, and that's best achieved by looking at SKUs in the neighbouring price brackets than by comparing to a whole host of cards on the same GPU: they will offer near-identical performance, anyway.
Benchmarks were conducted with our premium testing platform. As such, our trio of games were run at 1600x1200 4xAA 8xAF and 1920x1200 4xAA 8xAF, although Quake 4 was run with 16xAF.
