ATI's HD 2600 XT is a pretty nice card. It plays games acceptably well, consumes a negligible amount of power, and has flawless video acceleration. It's my first choice for the mainstream. So where does that leave the HD 2600 Pro? Being a cut-down, budget version of a cool card, what, then, is missing? The HD 2600 Pro is targeted to anyone who wants a discreet video card, the casual gaming ilk, but doesn't really want either the lowest-end model or to spend over a hundred dollars. All that seems reasonable, but it's just not true. I think the GDDR3, 256MB HD 2600 Pro should be skipped altogether. It does a couple things right, but misses the mark too often.
Del med dine venner