Nvidia 6600GT or 6800NU?

[LiekOMG]

Most people seem to be recommending the 6600GT as the best bang for the buck right now. But I would like this new build to last me for a good 3 years or so. Looking ahead, the 128mb ram on the 6600GT would become a limiting factor in a year or two, so I would prefer to get a 256mb card.

The 6800GT is out of the budget range, so I'm thinking that a 6800 256mb card would do the trick, but they are pretty rare, and only come in PCI-E versions, meaning that I wouldn't be able to attempt a pipeline unlock. Very few manufacturers also make them, so there is a limited selection in the type of heatsink/fan combo's they come with, and I am looking for a pretty quiet solution, too.

What would you guys recommend? Also, do you know of any benchmarks that directly compare the 6800NU to the 6600GT? I couldn't find any, and would like to know if the $100 increase is worth it or not.

 

[Fenuxx]

I would say the 6800NU. It is faster in terms of memory bandwidth and AA\AF at higher resolutions, and it has 4 more pipelines than a 6600GT. Also, you could potentially OC the card to make it MUCH MUCH faster than a 6600GT. That, my friend, is about as future proof that you can get with your budget. And yes, IMHO, the additional "futureproofiness" of the 6800NU over the 6600GT is worth more money (though I don't believe that the difference is $100, but I could be wrong).

 

[Matthias99]

What would you guys recommend?

A 6600GT is pretty fast, but yes, will probably be fairly outdated in 3 years. Of course, so will a 6800GT. Consider that a 9700Pro was a high-end card about 3 years ago, and now is a midrange solution at best, with something like a 6800GT giving at least a 100% improvement over it.

I don't know why people get so hung over how much memory is on their graphics card when cards of the speed you're talking (6600GT/6800NU) really can't take advantage of it anyway. OK, so you run at 10FPS instead of 5FPS at 1600x1200 with AA/AF enabled. It's not going to make those settings playable. A 6600GT/6800NU with 256MB of RAM is not going to "last" any longer than one with 128MB of RAM.

If you're already looking at the 6800NU, have you considered the ATI X800XL? It's only about $300 in PCIe, and is about the same speed as a 6800GT. Given the threads in the last week, I feel compelled to tell you that it does not have SM3.0 support, for what it's worth (IMO, not that much).

Also, do you know of any benchmarks that directly compare the 6800NU to the 6600GT? I couldn't find any, and would like to know if the $100 increase is worth it or not.

How could you not be able to find these? They compare these cards everywhere.

Here's one good, pretty comprehensive set of benchmarks that is updated monthly: digit-lif 3Digest

Short answer: The 6800NU is maybe 10-20% faster than a 6600GT, slightly moreso with AA/AF enabled since it has more memory bandwidth than the 6600s.

 

[Munky]

I'd definitely get the 6800, it has significantly more power than a 6600gt. Twice the memory bus width, and 4 more pipelines, it's in a whole different league than a 6600gt.

 

[LiekOMG]

I don't know why people get so hung over how much memory is on their graphics card when cards of the speed you're talking (6600GT/6800NU) really can't take advantage of it anyway. OK, so you run at 10FPS instead of 5FPS at 1600x1200 with AA/AF enabled. It's not going to make those settings playable. A 6600GT/6800NU with 256MB of RAM is not going to "last" any longer than one with 128MB of RAM.

I'm NOT one of those crazy people who think that just cause my 5200FX has 256mb of ram that suddenly I have a top of the line card. But today's games (DOOM3, for example) have started to push the envelope of what 128mb can deliver, and I've seen many benchmarks where 128mb cards nosedive at high resolutions with AF and AA on because they don't have enough VRAM. Since I need this card to be capable for about 3-4 years, I think having 256mb of ram would be important for the next (and the next next) generation of games.

Edit: Whoops! I forgot a very important NOT in my first sentence! I am not insane, I swear!

 

[mwmorph]

if you are building a pc form scratch, go x800xl. costs same as a 6800nu and is just as fast as that 6800gt you want.

 

[LiekOMG]

Originally posted by: munky
I'd definitely get the 6800, it has significantly more power than a 6600gt. Twice the memory bus width, and 4 more pipelines, it's in a whole different league than a 6600gt.

Some benchmarks show that this isn't always the case though. For example THIS ONE (thank you for the link, Matthias99) shows the Stock 6800 and 6600GT to be performing identically. Of course, with overclocked RAM the 6800 gets a nice speed boost, but that OC isn't always possible.

 

[imported_Kensai]

If you're up to it, I'd take the 6800NU and attempt to softmod it. Sometimes you're lucky.
Was running two softmodded 6800NUs in SLI a while back.

 

[LiekOMG]

Originally posted by: mwmorph
if you are building a pc form scratch, go x800xl. costs same as a 6800nu and is just as fast as that 6800gt you want.

Hmm interesting. 16 pipelines, 256ram, available in a fanless solution, and within my pricerange. Seems like the perfect card that i'm looking for! The absense of PS 3.0 worries me a bit however.

 

[LiekOMG]

Originally posted by: Kensai
If you're up to it, I'd take the 6800NU and attempt to softmod it. Sometimes you're lucky.
Was running two softmodded 6800NUs in SLI a while back.

I would, except the 256mb versions of the 6800 only seem to come in PCI-E, and those can't be softmodded, as far as I can tell.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: DOACleric

I don't know why people get so hung over how much memory is on their graphics card when cards of the speed you're talking (6600GT/6800NU) really can't take advantage of it anyway. OK, so you run at 10FPS instead of 5FPS at 1600x1200 with AA/AF enabled. It's not going to make those settings playable. A 6600GT/6800NU with 256MB of RAM is not going to "last" any longer than one with 128MB of RAM.

I'm one of those crazy people who think that just cause my 5200FX has 256mb of ram that suddenly I have a top of the line card. But today's games (DOOM3, for example) have started to push the envelope of what 128mb can deliver, and I've seen many benchmarks where 128mb cards nosedive at high resolutions with AF and AA on because they don't have enough VRAM. Since I need this card to be capable for about 3-4 years, I think having 256mb of ram would be important for the next (and the next next) generation of games.

If you find the benches for the 256MB versus 128MB 6800NUs (they're out there; I dug them up once), you'll see that the 256MB versions also take a nosedive at high res with AA/AF, because they just don't have enough fillrate/bandwidth to take advantage of the extra RAM. The 256MB of RAM helps, but not enough to make a real difference. If you can softmod and OC the 6800NU, sure, but that's far from a sure thing (and is impossible, AFAIK, on the PCIe models).

More than 128MB of RAM is (IMO) really only worth it once you get up to the 6800GT/X800Pro and up, and even then I'm confident a 128MB 6800GT would pummel a 256MB 6800NU at any sane settings.

 

[LTC8K6]

No card is going to last you 3 years. Get the best you can afford now and don't worry about it. Don't worry about PS3.0 either.

It's a surefire bet that whatever card you choose now, there'll be one with more performance and a better price 6 months or a year from now. Nothing you can do about it at all.

As has already been said, only the high end cards can really take advantage of 256MB of ram. Middle and lower end cards with 256MB of ram are a waste of money. Unless they are the same price, and even then you may get stuck with slower memory anyway. The low end cards are not fast enough to make use of the extra memory.

I distinctly remember back in the day when the 64MB cards would beat the 128MB cards handily. The extra memory did not make up for the slower clocks. A 64MB ti4200 was faster than a 128MB ti4200SE.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

I went 6600GT because I got mine for under $160 and I know it will be worth at least $100 in 18-24 months at which time I'll sell and upgrade.

Video cards are expenses, you want to minimize the expense by selling and upgrading before your current card loses too much of it's value.

 

[Reiniku]

i went 6600gt because it does all its advertised to do...

 

[bluemax]

I'd either go 6800-NU or the Radeon X800pro. Not XT or 850... there's a big price difference. Save $100-200 and only lose 10% of the speed... yeah, the X800pro looks good. $280 well spent.

Hmm.... mind you... the 6800-NU is $40-50 less.....

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: DOACleric
Would like to be future proof for at least 3 years

If you are to have any hope at all of running games three years from now on a video card you purchase today, I would say you need a minimum of an X800XL or a 6800GT. The 6600GT isn't all that much faster than the three year old 9700 Pro. So you'll definitely need the extra horsepower that an X800XL/6800GT has over the 6600GT.

If you can get a 6800NU to successfully unlock its pipelines, more power to you. Same goes if you try it on an X800 Pro VIVO. But neither one is a guarantee. If this is the card you're definitely keeping for three years, I would save up awhile longer and get an actual X800XL/6800GT and not have to worry whether it will softmod or not.

 

[VIAN]

I'm one of those crazy people who think that just cause my 5200FX has 256mb of ram that suddenly I have a top of the line card. But today's games (DOOM3, for example) have started to push the envelope of what 128mb can deliver, and I've seen many benchmarks where 128mb cards nosedive at high resolutions with AF and AA on because they don't have enough VRAM. Since I need this card to be capable for about 3-4 years, I think having 256mb of ram would be important for the next (and the next next) generation of games.

I'd love to see you play doom3 with the 5200FX at High Quality and high res. Matthias99 is correct, there is no bandwidth. The GPU won't be able to get the RAM fast enough to make a difference in fps. This means the GPU has to WAIT, meaning you are losing frames.

The X800XL is definitely a good card and it will last you a good time. The 6800GT is also a good card. These cards will be able to take advantage of 256MB of RAM quite nicely. As for Shader Model support. I wouldn't worry about that.

 

[LiekOMG]

Originally posted by: VIAN

I'm one of those crazy people who think that just cause my 5200FX has 256mb of ram that suddenly I have a top of the line card. But today's games (DOOM3, for example) have started to push the envelope of what 128mb can deliver, and I've seen many benchmarks where 128mb cards nosedive at high resolutions with AF and AA on because they don't have enough VRAM. Since I need this card to be capable for about 3-4 years, I think having 256mb of ram would be important for the next (and the next next) generation of games.

I'd love to see you play doom3 with the 5200FX at High Quality and high res. Matthias99 is correct, there is no bandwidth. The GPU won't be able to get the RAM fast enough to make a difference in fps. This means the GPU has to WAIT, meaning you are losing frames.

The X800XL is definitely a good card and it will last you a good time. The 6800GT is also a good card. These cards will be able to take advantage of 256MB of RAM quite nicely. As for Shader Model support. I wouldn't worry about that.

Yikes, I just noticed that I forgot a very important NOT in my first sentence. I hope no one here thought I was insane. I've corrected that little mistake. Again, I do NOT believe that a 256mb 5200 is going to run DOOM3 well! It will run like absolute crap!

No one here seems very concerned about the lack of PS 3.0 support. Any reason for this? A lot of developers make it seem like all future games will be taking advantage of it in some way. It might not be wise to buy a high end card which is supposed to last for 3 years, only to be left out in the dark when there are special effects which the card won't support.

 

[VIAN]

PS 2 and PS 3 are very taxing on performance. Sure PS 3 is easier to implement and at times faster than PS 2, but it is still more taxing compared to the mainstream PS 1.1. PS 1.1 has been around since the Geforce4 and is widely used. Today for PS 3 to do the same things that PS 1.1 does, takes a heavy peformance hit. So if today's cards run like ass with PS 3 on, there is no way that they will run PS 3 games in the future. The future games, if they support PS 3, will also support PS 1.1 because it is less taxing on performance and is supported by older cards. Developers will skip over PS 2 because it is much worse to implement than PS 3, so all cards from the the 8500 all up to the X800 will probably run on PS 1.1. Even the 6800 might be running PS 1.1. Next gen cards should offer better performance in PS 3 if it is to replace the good old PS 1.1.

 

[cbehnken]

Newegg has refurb 6800NU with 256 MB Ram for $230 shipped.
I got mine today and it's a beast. It came with all accessories sealed and appeared to be new rather than refurbed. Even using the nvidia autoclock feature it hits 433/840

The 256MB ram helps a ton in texture intensive games. Maybe benchmarks don't show it, but actual game play is much better.

 

[Hadsus]

Originally posted by: DOACleric
Most people seem to be recommending the 6600GT as the best bang for the buck right now. But I would like this new build to last me for a good 3 years or so. Looking ahead, the 128mb ram on the 6600GT would become a limiting factor in a year or two, so I would prefer to get a 256mb card.

The 6800GT is out of the budget range, so I'm thinking that a 6800 256mb card would do the trick, but they are pretty rare, and only come in PCI-E versions, meaning that I wouldn't be able to attempt a pipeline unlock. Very few manufacturers also make them, so there is a limited selection in the type of heatsink/fan combo's they come with, and I am looking for a pretty quiet solution, too.

What would you guys recommend? Also, do you know of any benchmarks that directly compare the 6800NU to the 6600GT? I couldn't find any, and would like to know if the $100 increase is worth it or not.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/gef..._6600_GT_scaling_performance_pentium4/

The 6800nu is decidedly the faster card.

 

[Machine350]

I agree with Creig. The way things are moving right now, even a 6800NU will be completely obsolete in 3 years. If you honestly want to futureproof for that long, you gotta get at LEAST a 6800GT. A 6600gt may last you a little more than a year, a 6800nu maybe two years. But it all depends on what resolutions you run and how far up you crank the settings.

 

[OS]

AFAIK, an unlocked/overclocked 6800NU can get pretty close to a 6800GT.

Originally posted by: cbehnken
Newegg has refurb 6800NU with 256 MB Ram for $230 shipped.
I got mine today and it's a beast. It came with all accessories sealed and appeared to be new rather than refurbed. Even using the nvidia autoclock feature it hits 433/840

The 256MB ram helps a ton in texture intensive games. Maybe benchmarks don't show it, but actual game play is much better.

I knew a girl that worked at newegg, she said alot of their "refurb" stuff are just RMA exchanges they get back from the manufacturers.

 

[VIAN]

Yes, I also agree with Creig.

X800XL or 6800GT, which ever is cheaper.

I knew a girl that worked at newegg, she said alot of their "refurb" stuff are just RMA exchanges they get back from the manufacturers.

That's exactly why I don't recommend buy refurbished hardware from Newegg. If you knew the kind of Fcks that OC the card and kill it and then return it, it's amazing. Or they fck with it an RMA it. I don't trust em. nope.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Clerics are pansies.