-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
9600GT performing at 8800GTS levels???
- Thread starter Pugnate
- Start date
Quiksilver
Diamond Member
I believe that is a typo because in the links provided in the article their are no 8800GTS G80 core or G92 core shown in the benchmark, but rather the 8600GTS which then would make sense, unless of course DT is assuming we would compare other benchmarks to what is listed in the article (which I haven't done yet).
shadowofthesun
Member
Still, the 9600 GT consistently performs at or beyond the 3850 and 8800GS cards, both performance class cards. That's decent performance, although nothing to get too excited about; new mid-range cards generally perform around the bottom of the previous generation's high end. Example: 8600GTS = 7900GS, 7600 GT = 6800 Vanilla, etc.
justlnluck
Senior member
How does this compare to a 8800GT? And wasn't the 8800GT "supposed" to be $199 by now?
nitromullet
Diamond Member
It is a typo. It's supposed to be 8800GS, and not 8800GTS...
DT linked to their source: http://translate.google.com/tr...ws/0801/1205247_1.html
which shows that they compared the following cards:
DT linked to their source: http://translate.google.com/tr...ws/0801/1205247_1.html
which shows that they compared the following cards:
happy medium
Lifer
crisium
Platinum Member
Yeah it was a typo. It was not compared to an 8800GTS. They either mean 8800GS or 8600GTS.
But looking at the benchmarks, it beats the 3850 256mb in most things. I would have like it compared to the 512mb version b/c that could add a little. Oh well. $169? Yeah right. Just like 3870s are 'sposed to be $219. The price will be jacked up as usual.
But looking at the benchmarks, it beats the 3850 256mb in most things. I would have like it compared to the 512mb version b/c that could add a little. Oh well. $169? Yeah right. Just like 3870s are 'sposed to be $219. The price will be jacked up as usual.
CurseTheSky
Diamond Member
The *600 cards haven't always been "low end performance." Remember when THE cards to have were the ATI X800 series, or nVidia 6600GT / 6800GT / 6800Ultra / 7800GT / 7800GTX? Even though it was low on the spectrum, the 6600GT was a pretty decent card.
I remember people trying to convince me not to "waste" the money on my 6800GT, since the 6600GT would do just fine.
I remember people trying to convince me not to "waste" the money on my 6800GT, since the 6600GT would do just fine.
AzN
Banned
This is Nvidia's answer against 3850. 8800gt sells alright but big chunk of that money isn't really in high range prices but somewhere in middle 100-$150 range where AMD has been reigning supreme since 1950pro to now.
9600gt isn't bad considering for the price but if it cost more than 3850 it's really pointless to sell this card in this price segment.
I don't get this 8800gs and 9600gt? Why release one card that performs basically the same. 8800gs is geared more towards the future while 9600gt is get the better performance in current games but might not hold against the 8800gs on future titles.
toyota
Lifer
what? why would the 8800gs be any better than the 9600gt for future games? the 8800gs has 32sp more but is limited by the 192bit bus. on the 384mb model its also limited by the actual amount of memory. also the 8800gs appears to be a temporary card whereas the 9600gt will be normal production card.
AzN
Banned
You can see the gaming benchmarks changing. Older games tend to favor 9600gt by huge margin but the newer games it is really neck and neck except for higher resolutions where the bandwidth comes into play. Looking at the PC gaming trends it's moving into more shader than just bandwidth. 7900gs was actually neck and neck with 1950pro but as time progressed 1950pro was better card for newer titles. I see the trend will continue of course I could be wrong.
My question is, does the 9600GT have all the HD HW acceleration support of that of 8600GT?
And when will we get VC1 H264 HW acceleration a la ATI?
Looking at the price tag, I really don't expect much about its gaming performance.
As long as it has all the HW accel for HD video (and all codecs), along with passive cooling - I'll buy it!
And when will we get VC1 H264 HW acceleration a la ATI?
Looking at the price tag, I really don't expect much about its gaming performance.
As long as it has all the HW accel for HD video (and all codecs), along with passive cooling - I'll buy it!
Zap
Elite Member
It wasn't that the 6600GT was a "pretty decent card." The 6800GT/Ultra definately outperformed it. I think that back then people weren't as obsessed about graphics and expectations were lower, plus typical resolutions were lower.
These days people obsess about being able to hit 1920x1200 with 8xAA and all that jazz using the latest killer games. (I also have my theories about people convincing themselves that the game is "good" but I should upset them anymore)
I think it is the difference between people who got cards that were good enough for the games that they liked back then, to people going out of their way to find games that stress their GPU subsystem these days.
Bottom line of all these recent releases is that the price and selection of mid-range solutions has never been better. I can't remember a time there were so many cards in the $150-$250 range within spitting distance of the best performing single card solution that costs $400+. End result is that more gamers will be able to enjoy a high quality gaming experience with more capable video hardware in their rigs, meaning game devs will have more money from game sales and the flexibility to push the envelope further.