Pixel filling power
We can handicap the 7800 GT's performance prospects to some extent by looking at some key theoretical performance numbers. The raw ability to paint pixels onscreen at a certain rate isn't exactly destiny for today's graphics cards, but it's still an important metric. Here's how the 7800 GT stacks up.

  Core clock
(MHz)		Pixels/
clock		Peak fill rate
(Mpixels/s)		Textures/
clock		 Peak fill rate
(Mtexels/s)		 Memory
clock (MHz)		 Memory bus
width (bits)		 Peak memory
bandwidth (GB/s)
GeForce 6800 32512390012390070025622.4
GeForce 6600 GT5004200084000100012816.0
Radeon X80040012480012480070025622.4
GeForce 6800 GT350165600165600100025632.0
Radeon X800 XL40016640016640098025631.4
GeForce 6800 Ultra425166800166800110025635.2
GeForce 7800 GT400166400208000100025632.0
Radeon X850 XT520168320168320112025635.8
Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition540168640168640118025637.8
XFX GeForce 7800 GT450167200209000105025633.6
GeForce 7800 GTX4301668802410320120025638.4

A stock 7800 GT has a higher theoretical peak multitextured fill rate (the more important kind, usually) than a GeForce 6800 Ultra, but a little less than a Radeon X850 XT. The XFX card we're testing today, though, can push more multitextured pixels than even a Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition. In terms of memory bandwidth, the 7800 GT is closer to the Radeon X800 XL. This mix of pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth puts the 7800 GT in an interesting place.

Let's see how the theory translates into performance with some basic synthetic fill rate benchmarks.

These results track pretty well with the theoretical capabilities of the cards. As one would expect, the XFX 7800 GT comes out just ahead of the Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition in multitextured fill rate. The 7800 GT doesn't trail the 7800 GTX by too terribly much, either. Let's see how these numbers translate into performance in games.