Geforce 8600GT 256mb. Is it really that bad?

[jediphx]

I just sold my old system which had a GF 6800 vanilla which softmodded perfectly to a 6800GT. My new system will have a Q6600 Quad Core processor 2 gigs ram and a 8600GT 256 meg. I dont play games as much as I used to but I still like to play some newer and older games from time to time. Is the 8600GT really that bad of a card for gaming? I have searched and read and seem to get mixed reviews.

 

[Piuc2020]

It's not THAT bad but it just doesn't cut it by today's standards, excellent cards can now be found for under $120 so I see little point in getting a 8600GT, it's too slow for gaming and overkill/too noisy/pricey for HTPC when a 8500GT would suffice for that.

If you can get your new system with the not-much-more-expensive 9600GT, 8800GS, HD 3850, HD 3870, any of those cards will be pretty great for gaming but a 8600GT not so much.

 

[I4AT]

As long as you didn't spend more than $50 on it it's a decent card. It shines in newer shader heavy games such as Oblivion when compared to 6/7 series cards, for older HL2/Doom3 era games it's equivalent to about a 7600gt. No matter how you look at it though, it's definitely hitting the lower end and isn't gonna provide much longevity.

Like Piuc said, the 9600gt/8800gs are the best mainstream cards available for this generation if you're willing to spend about $125. There's a PNY 8600gt at Buy.com right now for $49.99AR, $29.99 if you got the GCO discount. At that price it holds its value for a light gamer card assuming you'll be playing in lower resolutions.

 

[AzN]

I had a 8600gts. Could play COD4 at max 1440x900 50fps average. So it's not a bad card. It's just that some games you need to turn some stuff off or run it medium settings which doesn't look half bad. Long as you are not running anything higher than 1280x1024 you should be good for the mean time.

 

[j0j081]

UT3 even ran decently on a heavily ocd one.

 

[brandonb]

I bought one for a secondary computer of mine, and played EQ2 on it (uses decent amount of shaders and has a high polygon count.) While it wasn't a superstar performer (compared to my 8800gts or 7800 gtx), it was fairly solid. Maybe not 40 fps, but more like 20-25 fps with medium/high settings.

In your situation, I'd consider buying one. Just don't expect to get high framerates with graphics heavy games such as Crysis, or things like FSX. If you are just tooling around in some older games and don't care too much about framerate, its solid.

 

[IL2SturmovikPilot]

Its NOT as bad as SOME people like you to believe,its far from the best though.

 

[angry hampster]

My 8600GTS would max out stalker at 1280 wide. Don't play crysis and you'll be fine

 

[Maximilian]

Nah its a good card, ive got one in my laptop, runs everything i need except crysis. Im not even gonna try crysis since it ran like ass on my 7900 GTO.

I believe it got mixed reviews because it didnt improve much over the 7600GT which was considered a pretty good midrange card. Its better than the 7600GT but it wasent good enough for most people, unlike the new 9600GT which apparently rocks.

 

[onlyCOpunk]

As long as you aren't going to try to play games at insane resolutions it will work fine.

 

[andylawcc]

I had the 8600GT (not GTS)

and I played UT3, CoD4, HL2 at 1024 no problem with detail set to med-high
I even played Crysis demo with med details and 800x600.

 

[jediphx]

great. My system will have a Q6600 Quad Core processor as well so that you help with pushing it through games as well. Though im pissed now my Dell system was supposed to ship today and I just got an email that it has been delayed till the 8th now WTF?

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
It's not THAT bad but it just doesn't cut it by today's standards, excellent cards can now be found for under $120 so I see little point in getting a 8600GT, it's too slow for gaming and overkill/too noisy/pricey for HTPC when a 8500GT would suffice for that.

If you can get your new system with the not-much-more-expensive 9600GT, 8800GS, HD 3850, HD 3870, any of those cards will be pretty great for gaming but a 8600GT not so much.

I have to agree with what he said. When some of those cards are only $119.99 after rebate, I can't see getting a lesser card. Those cards are more than twice as good as a 8600GT.

 

[andylawcc]

it really comes down to how often you play the games; then, how much are you paying for the 8600GT. Currently, the 8600GT is $70 after rebate; factoring in sales tax and not shipping it would be $80 card. Now, next card up would be the 9600GT ($150 after rebate and taxed). It's a 70 dollar premium but I would say it a wise investment because the 9600 will last you a longer time than the 8600. You will be itching for an upgrade sooner with the 8600.

That's what happen to me: I play on 17-incher so 1024x768 is fine, but to play with AA and AF turned on, the 8600GT is just barely enough, in heavy action scenario it would choke.
I just got my bonus so I dumped the 8600 (which I got for $120) and bought the 9600 instead.

in the mean time, since you are ordering through Dell, check how much are they ripping you off with the 9600.

 

[BladeVenom]

8800GS $139.99 - $30.00 MIR = $109.99

HD 3850 $129.99 - $10.00 MIR = $119.99

 

[Inspector Jihad]

like others have said, the next step up (3850, 3870, 9600gt, 8800gs) will get you much greater performance at not that much more cost.

 

[AstroManLuca]

It probably got mixed reviews because just a couple short months ago it was being sold for $160+, the same price (at the time) as the far superior Radeon HD3850. In early February the 8600GT was the next best nVidia card behind the 8800GTS, which was still $200+ at the time, and it was a very bad deal.

I'm a little pissed because I got my 3850 less than two months ago for $170 and now I'd be able to get a significantly faster card for quite a bit less money, but that's how things go. The 8600GT isn't a bad card, but it's a bad deal unless you can get one for really, really cheap.

 

[SoulAssassin]

I have one in my current machine, power supply in the dell e521 can't do much more. I can play everything fine now at 1280x1024 but Crysis is a little choppy. CoD4 ran perfectly.

 

[Dimmu]

I have the mobile version (8600M GT) in my laptop, and it runs all new games quite well, with some exceptions (read: Crysis), albeit with some of them I have to run at a reduced resolution (1280x1024, etc), and not my native 1680x1050. As many others have previously said, it would be much more worthwhile for you to get another a better card, many of which are quite cheap. The only reason I have an 8600M GT is because it was the best mobile card available when I purchased my laptop.

 

[frythecpuofbender]

Crysis runs sloppy on a 8600, cause it only packs 48 shader units, compared to 96 on the older 8800GTS and 112/128 on the newer 8800GT and 9800GTX.
If you want to run Crysis with SHADERS on HIGH, which imo is a must to make the game feel alive, 48 shaders just don't cut it. The performance is basically half that of a card with 96.

 

[IL2SturmovikPilot]

Originally posted by: frythecpuofbender
Crysis runs sloppy on a 8600, cause it only packs 48 shader units, compared to 96 on the older 8800GTS and 112/128 on the newer 8800GT and 9800GTX.
If you want to run Crysis with SHADERS on HIGH, which imo is a must to make the game feel alive, 48 shaders just don't cut it. The performance is basically half that of a card with 96.

Uh no,8600GT/GTS has 32 Shader Processors,IDK where you're getting 48 from.