Trusted Reviews reviewed the Leadtek WinFast 7600 GS and HIS X1600 XT IceQ Turbo. Here're results:

3DMark06 usually tallies with the overall results we see in games, but in this case it couldn't be more wrong, putting the X1600 XT a good 10 per cent ahead of the 7600 GS. Naturally the 7600 GS can't support HDR and FSAA simultaneously, so there is very little comparison data anyway.

In Battlefield 2, at 1,280 x 1,024 (which is the resolution that really matters) the X1600 XT pulls away with a very slight lead, which is especially noticeable when FSAA and AF are switched on. At 1,600 x 1,200 and above though, the roles reverse with the 7600 GS taking a significant lead in places.

Call of Duty 2 is barely playable on either of these cards, but at 1,280 x 1,024 with no FSAA and AF the 7600 GS takes a lead significant enough to almost brand it playable with 27.39 frames per second. Anything above 1,280 x 1,024 ran at speeds a milk float would consider slow. Remember though that this is at maximum detail settings so you could get away with 1,280 x 1,024 if you lower the detail.

Counter-Strike: Source also showed an affinity towards nVidia hardware with a 10 per cent improvement over the X1600 XT. This bought CSS to 45.5 frames per second, which is a comfortable frame rate considering this is a tough level involving HDR. Even with 4x FSAA and 8x AF enabled, all three cards were playable at around 30 frames per second.

Quake 4 was very much skewed towards nVidia hardware too due to its superior OpenGL implementation and support for UltraShadow II. In places, there is much as 50 per cent speed difference.