hd3870 vs 9600gt

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Azn



Current games it is.

:laugh:

I wonder 6 months from now when "Fallout" is released.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Azn

I wonder 6 months from now when "Fallout" is released.

the 9600GT is the better card. Faster, less noise and power draw.

Unless your time travel machine can produce some made up future benchmarks, you are just talking out of your serial port.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Azn

I wonder 6 months from now when "Fallout" is released.

the 9600GT is the better card. Faster, less noise and power draw.

Unless your time travel machine can produce some made up future benchmarks, you are just talking out of your serial port.

Please wreckage. I know you are crazy for Nvidia but please no more.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Azn

I have nothing to back my statements up with

Fair enough.

 

[Lithan]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Lithan
You should really take an economics course. The first thing they teach you is that correlation is not causation.

It isn't economics. It's history of video card. I am not the only who believes this since it only makes sense. :music:

Of course, the fact that the 8800gs only ever beats the 9600gt in games from 2+ years ago and gets absolutely destroyed in modern games despite how they are so dependent on shaders as per you, will sink in eventually, Im sure.

What are you talking about? Please make some sense. I was talking about 8600gt vs 7950gt which you asked for proof and how it relates 9600gt, 3870, and 8800gs.

It isnt complex. You say that 7800series losing to 8600series in modern games proves that modern games are shader heavy... but you also argue that the reason 9600gt beats 8800gs is that modern games aren't shader heavy but FUTURE games will be, so even though 8800gs is a slower card, it will be faster when these future games are released. It's doublespeak.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Azn

I have nothing to back my statements up with

Fair enough.

Perhaps you need to read from page before.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Lithan
You should really take an economics course. The first thing they teach you is that correlation is not causation.

It isn't economics. It's history of video card. I am not the only who believes this since it only makes sense. :music:

Of course, the fact that the 8800gs only ever beats the 9600gt in games from 2+ years ago and gets absolutely destroyed in modern games despite how they are so dependent on shaders as per you, will sink in eventually, Im sure.

What are you talking about? Please make some sense. I was talking about 8600gt vs 7950gt which you asked for proof and how it relates 9600gt, 3870, and 8800gs.

It isnt complex. You say that 7800series losing to 8600series in modern games proves that modern games are shader heavy... but you also argue that the reason 9600gt beats 8800gs is that modern games aren't shader heavy but FUTURE games will be, so even though 8800gs is a slower card, it will be faster when these future games are released. It's doublespeak.

You sure make it more complex than it is. By your reply you still don't seem to get it.

FUTURE games will be more shader heavy where 64SP will be the limiting factor. Currently it is NOT. 8800gs isn't slower than 9600gt. Only in bandwidth limited situations particularly with AA.

http://en.expreview.com/2008/0...ards-round-up/?page=10

What is double speak?

 

[Lithan]

Ok now follow me here. 8800gs loses by a large margin, 10-20% depending on the review. You choose to ignore this fact and pretend that bandwidth and memory usage doesn't increase with new games, because this allows you to maintain your fantasy that a low-mid end card will be able to play future gen games. It wont. Get over it and stop pretending that some aspect of performance that you will never see the potential of because it's crippled by a choked out memory architecture is going to tip the scales two years down the road. 9600gt beats 8800gs. The only cases that 8800gs wins in are when you deliberately set some arbitrary circumstance No one would ever play in, such as running UT 2007 @ 150fps with AA off because 9600gt wins as soon as you enable it. Now this is based on reviews. Some reviews show the 174's giving an increase to 8x00's some show a decrease. We'll see fairly soon which is the case. Then you may or may not be justified in arguing that there are circumstances where an 8800gs is a better buy than a 9600gt. Until then, you're just making shit up with no data to back any of it up.

You know, an ati rage 3d isn't slower than a 8800ultra. Only in 3d situations and games.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
Ok now follow me here. 8800gs loses by a large margin, 10-20% depending on the review. You choose to ignore this fact and pretend that bandwidth and memory usage doesn't increase with new games, because this allows you to maintain your fantasy that a low-mid end card will be able to play future gen games. It wont. Get over it and stop pretending that some aspect of performance that you will never see the potential of because it's crippled by a choked out memory architecture is going to tip the scales two years down the road. 9600gt beats 8800gs. The only cases that 8800gs wins in are when you deliberately set some arbitrary circumstance No one would ever play in, such as running UT 2007 @ 150fps with AA off because 9600gt wins as soon as you enable it. Now this is based on reviews. Some reviews show the 174's giving an increase to 8x00's some show a decrease. We'll see fairly soon which is the case. Then you may or may not be justified in arguing that there are circumstances where an 8800gs is a better buy than a 9600gt. Until then, you're just making shit up with no data to back any of it up.

You know, an ati rage 3d isn't slower than a 8800ultra. Only in 3d situations and games.

I call it BS because all the reviews you saw is where 9600gt is using 174.xx drivers where G92 was using 169.xx. Look it up. When G92 used the same drivers it improved 6.43%.

http://en.expreview.com/2008/0...e-scaling-test/?page=5

Let's see what happens when 8800gs used the exact same drivers as 9600gt. It beats it in raw performance and is slightly slower with AA.

http://en.expreview.com/2008/0...ards-round-up/?page=10


Now you follow me here. Memory bandwidth isn't a problem long as you have enough which 8800gs does with 1ns @ 48GB/S to play 1920x1200 without AA in games like COD4. If memory told us performance 8600gt with only 22gb/s shouldn't be enough to play any game but it does. What good is AA when you can't even pull 40fps in games like fallout? Will you be adding AA then? Who cares if it you get 65fps 9600gt and comparable cards doing 60fps with AA now.

Making shit up? No data? What have I been doing in this thread with links and proof backing up my claims? You haven't brought anything other than you telling me to take a economic course.

 

[idiotekniQues]

well back on topic, between the 9600gt and the 3870 i took the 3870 because a) new drivers make it quite close to the 8800gt, and b) i think it is more forward looking than the 9600GT and c)i prefer intel chipsets so i can go crossfire not sli.

i was picking this last week between the 9600GT, 8800GT & 3870

 

[lopri]

My choice would be clearly an HD 3870. This comes from an owner of a HD 3850 setup and an 8800 GT SLI setup. Just in case maybe I should add that I have been off of XP for some time and I happen to enjoy HD playback as well.

Also let me add that there is increasingly visible trend of large performance difference on a per-title basis. If you play Call of Duty 4, 9600 GT will be undoubtedly better. If you play Oblivion, HD 3870 will be notably better.

 

[idiotekniQues]

oh i forgot to also add the last reason i went with a 3870 is for the HD playback and audio. i will be buying an hdmi cable to run my pc into my plasma, and it seems to be the general consensus that ati does HD playback better. and since audio goes out the hdmi from the 3870, that is a nice convenience as well.

 

[Lithan]

You ever going to stop trying to pass off that 768 card's benchies as the 384? Just because you say it 3-4 times in every thread doesn't make it true.

 

[AzN]

It makes 1 or 2 fps difference because of clock speed differences. Only thing is AA @ 1920x1200 is where the 384mb card is limiting. Not that 9600gt has enough power to play any modern engines at that resolution with AA. Hell it can't even play Crysis @ 1280x1024 better than 8800gs 384mb card. :laugh:

 

[Lithan]

Not in modern games it doesn't. Look at the chart. It's actually close to the 9600gt in modern games... meaning they both have 2-3x the fps of the 384meg card at high res. How you're failing to notice this I can't understand.

And actually it plays crysis a good bit better than the 8800gs... it just so happens that most places bench crysis in low res at "high" detail setting, which is the one situation that the 8800gs has the advantage (we've been over this). Even in that case it wins by 1-2 fps at best. Drop settings to medium so the game's actually playable, or bump the res up a notch to see which card has more muscle and guess which one wins.

 

[AzN]

NM

 

[JACKDRUID]

these cards perform similiarly... just get the cheaper one..

note: 8800gs doesn't do hd.. does it?

 

[kmmatney]

Both are good cards, but at the same price, I'd take the HD3870 over the 9600GT. I think the HD3870 does better with older games, which is important for me. Currenty, it seems like the 9600GT is significantly cheaper, though.

 

[caldran]

ok....who is the winner..........9600gt...8800gs or hd 3870.....Azn.....dont tell it depends on this and that......which one....

 

[jjzelinski]

Can you get a 3870 for ~$130? That was the selling point for me.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
the reviews i have seen with the latest cat drivers put the 3870 much closer to the 8800gt on two sites, including toms latest review of the 9800 which includes the 3870 with cat 8.3

i cant figure out everybody's testing methodology cause i want to know the real deal

3870 has artificially caught up somewhat to 8800gt b/c nvidia is still using older drivers for the 8800gt. It seems they were afraid that 9800 wouldn't look any good if it had a fair fight with 8800gt...

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: caldran
ok....who is the winner..........9600gt...8800gs or hd 3870.....Azn.....dont tell it depends on this and that......which one....

3870 is the stronger card than both really. 9600gt does good with AA. 8800gs has the Raw horsepower 9600gt doesn't have but tend to be slower with AA.

There is no such thing as a winner. I wish it was that simple when they perform so relatively close each other with different configurations. People have different needs and ideas.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID


note: 8800gs doesn't do hd.. does it?

It's a G92. It has purevideo 2.0

 

[IndieSnob]

I ended up picking up the Palit 9600GT. I upgraded from a 7600GT, which I really only had in my machine for a couple of months. Seeing as how I've been out of the PC gaming world for so long I don't have anything concrete to compare the 9600GT to, but I will say that I absolutely love it so far.

 

[Lithan]

They're even... but functionally, you probably made the right choice. 3870 makes up a lot of points in old games with AA off, but loses when you turn AA on... so it's win in those cases are meaningless. If you look at playable settings the 9600gt is ahead, artificial settings (low res 4 year old games getting 100+ fps) the 3870 is ahead. Basically the 3870's AA performance is a little lacking right now. It may improve in the future, but as it is; I'd go with a 9600gt over it unless the 3870 was cheaper.

http://www.techspot.com/articl...eon-hd3870/page10.html