Pixel-pushing power
We've already looked at the math briefly, but we'll pause again to consider pixel-pushing power, because it still determines performance to a large degree, especially at higher resolutions when video cards tend to hit their limits.

  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)
Radeon X1600 XT5904236042360138012822.1
GeForce 6800 3258260012390070025622.4
GeForce 6600 GT5004200084000100012816.0
Radeon X80040012480012480070025622.4
GeForce 6800 GS 42583400 1251001000 25632.0
GeForce 6800 GT350165600165600100025632.0
Radeon X800 XL40016640016640098025631.4
GeForce 6800 Ultra425166800166800110025635.2
GeForce 7800 GT400166400208000100025632.0
Radeon X1800 XL500168000168000100025632.0
Radeon X850 XT520168320168320112025635.8
Radeon X850 XT Platinum Edition540168640168640118025637.8
XFX GeForce 7800 GT450167200209000105025633.6
Radeon X1800 XT62516100001610000150025648.0
GeForce 7800 GTX4301668802410320120025638.4

The 6800 GS slots in between the two competitors from ATI. The Radeon X800 XL has more theoretical texel fill rate and the same memory interface type and speed. The X1600 XT, meanwhile, is long on pixel and vertex shading power as we've noted, but lacking in the fill rate and memory bandwidth departments.

The cards stack up as expected in 3DMark05's synthetic test of multi-textured (or texel) fill rate. The 6800 GS has a little bit less peak pixel-pushing power than the Radeon X800 XL, but it has more than twice the peak texel throughput of the Radeon X1600 XT.