ECS K7S7AG SiS 746 + Xabre200 Review (7)

	<![if lt IE 4]> <SCRIPT SRC="http://imgserv.adbutler.com/adserve/;ID=131075;size=468x60;setID=61435;type=js" LANGUAGE="JAVASCRIPT"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT> <a href="http://imgserv.adbutler.com/go2/;ID=131075;size=468x60;setID=61435"> <img src="http://imgserv.adbutler.com/adserve.ibs/;ID=131075;size=468x60;setID=61435;type=img" border="0" height="60" width="468"></a> </NOSCRIPT><![endif]>
中文版 \| News \| Archives \| Reviews \| Forum \| $ Deals \| Links \| History \| Contact \| Privacy

ECS K7S7AG SiS 746 + Xabre200 Review (7)
Overclocker 22 Dec 2002

Benchmarking

Quake 3 Demo 001

The test is done based on Q3 Demo 001 at 1024x768x32. The board is run in CAS 2, 2-2-5 aggressive timings. The EPoX 8RDA+ is running on Dual Channel DDR mode with 2 x 256M Module + Chaintech GF4 MX440 64M Graphics card. The ABIT KD7 is running on single pc of Corsair 512M + Chaintech GF4 MX440 64M Graphics card w/ 40.41 detonator drivers. The ECS K7S7AG is running with on board "integrated" Xabre 200 graphics chip. Aperture size are all set to 128M

From the chart, it can be clearly seen that the Xabre 200 is not as fast as the GF4 MX440 card. Something interesting is that if you were to o/c the Xabre 200 on board to 230/230 using the o/c utility provided, the scores went up by almost 10%. Perhaps what we could do is to test the platforms again when we receive the L7S7A which has an additional AGP slot.

3Dmark2001 SE Build 330

In 3DMark2001SE benchmarks, the results of K7S7AG on board Xabre 200 clearly can't be directly compared to the GF4 MX440. Although the figures looks quite far apart, the difference is merely 2.4%. When we o/c it upwards to 230/230, the graphics performance level jumped by almost 4%.

Comanche 4 Demo

Again, we see that there is a difference in the results between the Xabre 200 vs GF4 MX440. Even if we overclock it to 230/230, the performance difference isn't that much and it still lost to both ABIT and EPoX in this category.

Next