Wednesday, November 28th 2007

RV620 35% Faster than HD 2400

by
Jimmy 2004
 Discuss (24 Comments)
According to benchmarks which technology site Expreview claims to have carried out, ATI/AMD's new RV620 core could outperform the HD 2400 Pro by as much as 35% despite the two having the same core frequency. On the rather unusual test rig, which featured an Intel Celeron processor, the HD 2400 scored 1123 points in 3DMark06, with the upcoming RV620 scoring 1514 points. If these benchmarks are real, this would suggest that the architecture on the RV620 chip has been significantly improved over its predecessor, although bear in mind that 3DMark scores are by no means conclusive. The RV620 is expected to be named as the Radeon HD 3400 graphics card when it is released to consumers, which is planned to replace the current Radeon HD 2400 cards.
Source: Expreview

Related News

Add your own comment

24 Comments on RV620 35% Faster than HD 2400

#1
hat
Enthusiast
Genuine Intel(R) CPU 2.40GHz? Would be nice to know what kind of chip that is. E6600?
Posted on Reply
#2
ghost101
CPU score of 1026 means it cant be an e6600, way too poor.
Posted on Reply
#3
zekrahminator
McLovin
I certainly hope that such performance boosts carry over the the HD 3600 series, I may consider an HD 3600XT :).
Posted on Reply
#4
hat
Enthusiast
I can't think of any other chips at 2.4GHz. Unless they were using one of those weird S478 motherboards with PCI-E? If it was a core-based Celeron or a core-based Dual-Core "Pentium", it would have it's default clock then the clock it is running at.
Posted on Reply
#5
tkpenalty
"although bear in mind that 3DMark scares are by no means conclusive."

You mean scores.
Posted on Reply
#6
jydie
That is very promising! I love my passively cooled 2600 Pro... but if this carries forward to the 3600 line, then I may need to upgrade. Not only would you gain some performance, I would expect the 3600 line to run even cooler!! That would be amazing, because my 2600 Pro idles at a chilly 35 degrees (it is the DDR3 MSI version with the memory at 700MHz instead of 500). :)
Posted on Reply
#7
Jimmy 2004
hatI can't think of any other chips at 2.4GHz. Unless they were using one of those weird S478 motherboards with PCI-E? If it was a core-based Celeron or a core-based Dual-Core "Pentium", it would have it's default clock then the clock it is running at.
It does have the default and actual clocks.
tkpenalty"although bear in mind that 3DMark scares are by no means conclusive."

You mean scores.
Yes, thanks for pointing that out. I do use Word and proof read them but some mistakes slip through. :toast:
Posted on Reply
#8
[I.R.A]_FBi
and guess what? you wont be able to get them in stores and theyll be for 20% above msrp! brilliant!
Posted on Reply
#9
Ketxxx
Heedless Psychic
Its a celeron rig.... not exactly something reliable to run tests with. They could of at least made it a P4 3.0c to help remove any bottleneck.
Posted on Reply
#10
hat
Enthusiast
How do you know it's a celeron? It could just as easily be a Pentium?
Posted on Reply
#11
Ketxxx
Heedless Psychic
Nah, that score is too low even for a P4.
Posted on Reply
#12
hat
Enthusiast
I'm suprised this isn't the Inquirer... :nutkick:
Posted on Reply
#13
panchoman
Sold my stars!
it certainly would help to read the article fully ..
On the rather unusual test rig, which featured an Intel Celeron processor, the HD 2400 scored 1123 points in 3DMark06, with the upcoming RV620 scoring 1514 points.
:slap:
Posted on Reply
#14
hat
Enthusiast
damn, I tried. I didn't know conroe-based celerons came in 2.4ghz flavor. I searched the page for 6600 ;/
Posted on Reply
#15
Pinchy
Who said anything about conroe based celerons :p? Its just a normal, single core, celeron processor.


EDIT - after going to source:
Test bed: Intel Celeron 460(2.4GHz), Foxconn P35A-S, 1GB*2 memory, Windows Vista Ultimate, and a RV620 and a refrence HD 2400Pro.
Posted on Reply
#16
Xaser04
The Celeron 460 is a core 2 based celeron (basically a single core E2xxx series with only 512k L2 cache) - I assume they are possibly E2xxx series with a faulty core.
Posted on Reply
#17
Pinchy
Bah, I was confused with the Celeron 360.

Well arent the new c2d celerons just c2d's with 512k cache?

Score seems a little too low to be a c2d chip though...
Posted on Reply
#18
Xaser04
Remember the new Celerons are still only single core chips. 3DMark06 shows a stark difference between single and multi core processors.
Posted on Reply
#20
tkpenalty
Xaser04The Celeron 460 is a core 2 based celeron (basically a single core E2xxx series with only 512k L2 cache) - I assume they are possibly E2xxx series with a faulty core.
Nope, Celeron 4xx, or Conroe-Ls are manufactured with only one physical die.
Posted on Reply
#21
Xaser04
Thanks TK I didn't know that.
Posted on Reply
#22
Pinchy
Lol...i thought it was just a conroe with 512 cache :p...
Posted on Reply
#23
JrRacinFan
Served 5k and counting ...
PinchyLol...i thought it was just a conroe with 512 cache :p...
Basically, it is! I score better than that in 06 with this rig ..... :wtf:
Posted on Reply
#24
lemonadesoda
35% faster on very slow is still slow.

We want 35% faster on the 2600 and 2900 chipsets. (or 3600 and 3800).
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 24th, 2024 10:32 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts