9600GT VS 8800GS VS 8800GT

[AzN]

1900x resolution? That has something to do with how much vram it has too.

http://en.expreview.com/2008/0...s-384mb-768mb/?page=23

3850 is better at handling with lower memory than NVidia cards too. You might want to look at your own link compare with 768mb version of the chip.

 

[Lithan]

The 768 version that costs as much as an 8800gt?

edit: and arent available anymore.

 

[AzN]

What are you trying to argue about? money or technology?

for 1900x resolution with AA a 9600gt isn't really good enough anyways and neither is 8800gs.

it all comes down to 1600x1200 and 1280x1024 resolution. 1600x1200 with AA 9600gt is definitely have an edge but raw performance no.

I think longevity is with 8800gs and not 9600gt.

 

[Lithan]

The review you linked, FEAR results are pointless. Yes, it wins with No AA, but at such a high FPS, you'd be dumb not to enable AA... and With AA on, it manages to stay just barely playable, whereas 9600gt is still comfortably playable.
The ONE instance the 8800gs is the better card is supreme commander... which appears system limited and won by fluke since pretty much all cards are neck and neck at all settings.


Im arguing 9600gt vs 8800gt vs 8800gs

9600gt is heads and tails above 8800gs 384 for the same price.
8800gt absolutely rips the 8800gs 784 to shreds for the same price (and is actually available)

You're argument is "well in the future, when games come out that are even more taxing than the current games these cards can't really play... my card will be slightly less unplayable than that one".

 

[AzN]

Isn't that what I said from the get go? That 9600gt is better with AA? Raw performance is better with 8800gs?

What do you deem playable? A 1950pro could play crysis @ medium detail @1280 around 30fps. A 7900gs can only pull 15fps @ 1024.

 

[Lithan]

Except it isn't 8800gs won in what, 2 games out of 10... and lost by MUCH larger margins than it won by... and 1 of its wins is a fluke.

 

[Lithan]

counting backwards.
WIC: Stomped
SC: fluke win in a system bottlenecked game
Prey: Stomped, but meaningless
FEAR: a few frames ahead @ 75fps in low def, stomped in high while the other card remains playable, so a loss overall
Crysis: Beat in low def, stomped in high
COH: Holy crap did it get stomped

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
Except it isn't 8800gs won in what, 2 games out of 10... and lost by MUCH larger margins than it won by... and 1 of its wins is a fluke.

I could name bunch of games really. Maybe you should look @ raw performance #'s too instead of just looking @ AA numbers.

 

[Lithan]

I am. 9600gt stomps 8800gs in MOST of those too. The ones it loses are in games where the FPS on both cards are so high that it's completely irrelevant. If there's another review that demonstrates the 8800gs beating the 9600gt in <50fps matches than please post it. I'm not saying it wont happen, only that given that stream procs have been found to impact performance comparatively little next to memory size and bandwidth on cards this fast; it's fallacious to base a purchase on the expectation that they will become more important and the rest of the card less important as time goes on... without evidence to back that assertion up.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
counting backwards.
WIC: Stomped
SC: fluke win in a system bottlenecked game
Prey: Stomped, but meaningless
FEAR: a few frames ahead @ 75fps in low def, stomped in high while the other card remains playable, so a loss overall
Crysis: Beat in low def, stomped in high
COH: Holy crap did it get stomped

NFS
Oblvion
Dirt
Crysis is a toss up
crysis test
All the Unreal 3 based engines
COD4 toss up

 

[Lithan]

that's an 8600gts... WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY slower than 9600gt.

And you know why?

The Mem bus is 128bit instead of 256bit.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
that's an 8600gts... WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY slower than 9600gt.

And you know why?

The Mem bus is 128bit instead of 256bit.

LOL. I just tested with my old card. Look at fps on the GS.

37.47 fps @ high detail? What does 9600gt pull?

 

[Lithan]

I stand corrected Not only did you beat a 9600gt. You beat a 8800gt and a 3870... both cards that are known to bench twice as fast as 8800gs... and they were only running medium.

http://arstechnica.com/reviews...ia-9600gt-review.ars/3

Thems some damn fine tweaks.

 

[AzN]

You might want to look at this.

9600gt raw performance is about 3850 in raw performance better with AA of course. http://www.computerbase.de/art...rmancerating_qualitaet

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
I stand corrected Not only did you beat a 9600gt. You beat a 8800gt and a 3870... both cards that are known to bench twice as fast as 8800gs... and they were only running medium.

http://arstechnica.com/reviews...ia-9600gt-review.ars/3

Thems some damn fine tweaks.

It's probably older drivers on that and crysis 1.0. Mine was patched to the latest drivers and 1.2 patch on crysis.

 

[Lithan]

http://xtreview.com/image-adde.../crysis-dx9.PNG&id=220
http://xtreview.com/image-adde...rysis-dx9-1.PNG&id=220

There ya go

clock for clock even in 8800gs's ideal scenario (ie low res) it only matches a 9600gt.

 

[AzN]

YEah I said it would be a toss up. @ 1600x1200 high detail neither is playable.

What does series 3 4 5 6 mean? Is that the resolution?

 

[Lithan]

Yes, but follow me here. If we set up the tests deliberately to favor the 8800gs, it STILL only performs on par with the 9600gt. When we don't do that, it get beat... badly in many cases. Also of note, that's a PREVIEW article and has the worst performance I've seen in any 9600gt review (Out of a dozen or more)... so it's highly likely that reflects unoptimized performance on 9600gt's part.

So WHY would you recommend to buy a card that all evidence suggests is technologically the weaker card
That costs the same
That runs hotter and requires more power
That performs worse in the majority of cases and no better in the minority of cases
That is being phased out

Your argument hinges on the role of shader units in future games expanding exponentially. So, it's not really responsible to recommend a purchase based on it without some evidence to back up this assertion.

 

[AzN]

I never said 9600gt doesn't perform at this case in point. But the industry is shifting to more shader. Just look at history of the PC industry within the last 3 years. When a game requires more shader that's where 9600gt will fall harder than 8800gs and gs will still scale how it scales with 8800gt currently.

8800gs might run a little warmer than 9600gt but the power requirement is same.

8800gs is cheaper than 9600gt. If you are on a 19" LCD it will be more future proof than 9600gt.

9600gt is better if you have a bigger monitor with AA and want the performance now.

Phased or not it's still covered by warranty. Who knows if your card breaks they will probably replace it with a 9600gt.

All cards have their weaknesses and strengths especially when they perform so relatively close to each other. You can't just be like oh 1 card is better when the other card because it beats it in few games.

I only recommended 8800gs to the O.P because he is on a 19" monitor. If he has 20-22" monitor I would have told him 9600gt, 3870, 8800gt depending on his budget.

 

[Lithan]

And when that happens, what games do you expect a card that manages 35fps in todays games to run?

That's impossible. It outputs more heat, it has more parts that require electricity (thats what those shader units seem to do best), thus the laws of thermodynamics declare that it must have larger power draw.

I stand corrected. 8800gs is $10 cheaper. There's nothing whatsoever to suggest that 8800gs is more future proof other than your own unsubstantiated assertions.

But replacing it with a 9600gt would be a bad thing according to you.


Basically he'll save $10 and lose an average of 10-15% performance in most games, which happens to fall right on a line that in most people opinions distinguishes CAN turn on AA or higher settinngs and Cant. There's no evidence that this will change at any point in time. The 8800gs is the slower card. That is fact and can and has been statistically proven. The idea that will change is not.

 

[AzN]

Now you are making up stories. Show me where I said replacing 9600gt is a bad thing according to me?

I just pointed out the strengths of the 8800gs sir because I have one and that raw performance of 9600gt and 8800gs is similar. I also pointed out 9600 strengths and weaknesses. You were saying how 9600gt is superior than 8800gs oh so every possible way.

10-15%? not when he's on 19" monitor.

Of course there's evidence shader will sway into the future. Look at the 7900gs vs 1950pro. They performed so close to one another when they were released and look at it now. 1950pro is still playable on all the new games while 7900gs perform half that of 1950pro. It performs worse than 1650xt with 128bit memory bus.

 

[Pabster]

Either card (8800GT or 9600GT) will do you perfect.

I'm running some 9600GT's and they're fantastic. 8800GT is a bit more powerful but take whichever is the better deal at the time price-wise. They're both excellent.

And neither will be sufficient in 3 or 4 years, so forget about future-proofing. It's a losing battle.

 

[Lithan]

True, it'll be more like 0-10% on 19inch without AA. Turn AA on and you're back at 10-20%. And at that reso theres no reason not to run AA except in Crysis.

 

[AzN]

Not true. Even then some games 8800gs wins and some 9600 wins.

@ 1280x1024 resolution is like blowing up your screen to 1900x1200 without AA.

384 mb is enough for that except crysis or wic. Bandwidth isn't the biggest issue it's the memory size of the 8800gs that hampers performance @ 1600x1200 with AA.

 

[Lithan]

Not really. Find me a review where 8800gs wins in more than 3 games... in circumstances where the difference is noticable (IE <50fps avg).