NVidia's midrange offerings

[v8envy]

Was just browsing newegg's inventory, and found a few interesting things:

1. 8500GTs are now a sub-$100 part, after rebates - $90 8500GT
2. 8600GTs are now $150, with bonus: $150 passive 8600GT + bonus

So that didn't take much time at all. The biggest concerns with this cycle's low end and midrange -- the price relative to last gen's lower high end are now addressed. Wonder if there will be any market left for AMD by the time AMD releases their low end & midrange cards in June. NV is definitely seems out to annihilate the competition.

I guess not selling the HD2900 until the competition was ready for the whole family was a great move on AMD's part after all. </sarcasm>

 

[Extelleron]

8600GT @ $150 is not a good value at all. 8600GTS @ $150 would be fairly good. Right now you can get an 8600GT for $120 @ CC which is pretty good but still it would be nice if the price fell a little further ($100-110). The performance just isn't there to justify these high prices.

 

[superbooga]

Originally posted by: Extelleron
8600GT @ $150 is not a good value at all. 8600GTS @ $150 would be fairly good. Right now you can get an 8600GT for $120 @ CC which is pretty good but still it would be nice if the price fell a little further ($100-110). The performance just isn't there to justify these high prices.

New midrange video cards are about FEATURES and performance for NEW AND FUTURE GAMES, not performance for older games. Even at $150, the 8600GT does a very admirable job in this area.

 

[v8envy]

With low/midrange cards you know 1. FSAA is out of the question and 2. you'll be running at comparatively low resolutions (1280x1024, 1024x768). While it'd be nice to be able to do everything the enthusiast cards do, that's just simply not the design goal. Having DX10 functionality will let the casual gamer at least see what the fuss is about with new game titles.

A higher performing DX9 card will have a shorter lifespan in a mainstream system, even if it pushes more frames/sec today.

NV may pull off a repeat of the 6600GT with the 8600GT cards. Enough functionality to at least experience the next gen games, even if it's at 1024x768 without most eye candy.

These cards are designed to be inexpensive to manufacture, not perform like enthusiast cards.

BTW, looks like the $120 deal on the 8600GT is over. It's back up to $160 after rebate at CC. On the other hand, it's going to be at least a month before ATI unveils their midrange offerings. Plenty of time for the 8600GT to fall back to low 100s, and 8600GTS to 150s.

 

[Yreka]

Have there been any 8500 series w/ HDCP released yet ?

 

[tuteja1986]

Nvidia midrange offering is crap for Price vs performance.

7900gs ($150) , X1950pro ($130) , X1950XT ($200) , 7900GT ($200) still are much better offering than crapy 8600GTS. X1950XT 256MB could beat the living ****** out of the fastest 8600GTS. Now Midrange G80 are only good for Video decoding and maybe non exsistence DX10 games.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
Nvidia midrange offering is crap for Price vs performance.

7900gs ($150) , X1950pro ($130) , X1950XT ($200) , 7900GT ($200) still are much better offering than crapy 8600GTS. X1950XT 256MB could beat the living ****** out of the fastest 8600GTS. Now Midrange G80 are only good for Video decoding and maybe non exsistence DX10 games.

Actually i would say that the 8600GTS is a better value than the 7900GS but not against the X1950pro. (in terms of Video/3d performance and noise/size/power consumption)

When it comes to video related benchmarks, nothing can touch the 8600GTS thanks to its VP2/BSP and improved pure video engine.

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
Nvidia midrange offering is crap for Price vs performance.

7900gs ($150) , X1950pro ($130) , X1950XT ($200) , 7900GT ($200) still are much better offering than crapy 8600GTS. X1950XT 256MB could beat the living ****** out of the fastest 8600GTS. Now Midrange G80 are only good for Video decoding and maybe non exsistence DX10 games.

8600gt is pretty competitive in some of the newer games and it's currently 120 AR. So it depends on the game. Also, the older cards aren't likely to fall much more in price before being discontinued. The 8600 series just debuted and is likely to see price cuts as time passes.

 

[Acanthus]

I still fail to see the video decoding argument.

Who the hell does CPU intensive tasks while watching 1080P movies.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: superbooga

New midrange video cards are about FEATURES and performance for NEW AND FUTURE GAMES, not performance for older games. Even at $150, the 8600GT does a very admirable job in this area.

You think a card with anemic performance in current games is going to be magically faster in more demanding ones?

And please list those awesome new features, like DX10 which isnt out, and hardware video decoding no one really needs.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: superbooga

New midrange video cards are about FEATURES and performance for NEW AND FUTURE GAMES, not performance for older games. Even at $150, the 8600GT does a very admirable job in this area.

You think a card with anemic performance in current games is going to be magically faster in more demanding ones?

And please list those awesome new features, like DX10 which isnt out, and hardware video decoding no one really needs.

Dont be so quick to judgment. Why do you think P4s still sold? because many people out there do in fact encode and at the time, p4s offered superior performance in that area.

Quoting AT:
"Although we haven't been terribly impressed with the gaming performance of the GeForce 8600, it is currently the best option for anyone looking to watch Blu-ray or HD-DVD on their PCs. The full H.264 offload onto the GPU makes HD movie playback not only painless but also possible on lower speed systems"

Although the performance maybe around a 7900GS and even on par with the X1950pro, i think its pretty good value. I would buy one since i dont game much and dont need horsepower. But im sure theres product soon to be launched to fill the gap between the G84 and G80 to impress the others who were waiting for the successor to the 7600GT.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: superbooga

New midrange video cards are about FEATURES and performance for NEW AND FUTURE GAMES, not performance for older games. Even at $150, the 8600GT does a very admirable job in this area.

You think a card with anemic performance in current games is going to be magically faster in more demanding ones?

And please list those awesome new features, like DX10 which isnt out, and hardware video decoding no one really needs.

Dont be so quick to judgment. Why do you think P4s still sold? because many people out there do in fact encode and at the time, p4s offered superior performance in that area.

Quoting AT:
"Although we haven't been terribly impressed with the gaming performance of the GeForce 8600, it is currently the best option for anyone looking to watch Blu-ray or HD-DVD on their PCs. The full H.264 offload onto the GPU makes HD movie playback not only painless but also possible on lower speed systems"

Although the performance maybe around a 7900GS and even on par with the X1950pro, i think its pretty good value. I would buy one since i dont game much and dont need horsepower. But im sure theres product soon to be launched to fill the gap between the G84 and G80 to impress the others who were waiting for the successor to the 7600GT.

Ill concede that, if youre using a celeron with a 8600GT then yes, it will be nice to have video decoding, but then youre lacking even more in gaming than the charts show.

 

[superbooga]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
You think a card with anemic performance in current games is going to be magically faster in more demanding ones?

Not faster, but it won't be slower, as opposed to previous generation cards.

In STALKER, GTS is faster than 1950pro, GT is a bit slower.
In Oblivion, both GTS and GT outperform 1950pro.

You have basically said that the 1950pro and 7950GT have anemic performance, since they are on the same level as the 8600GTS.

Newer cards always emphasize shader power over fillrates. Just look at how big the gap is between the 7600GT and 6800 Ultra is now compared to when the 7600GT first came out.

 

[superbooga]

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: superbooga

Originally posted by: Acanthus
You think a card with anemic performance in current games is going to be magically faster in more demanding ones?

Not faster, but it won't be slower, as opposed to previous generation cards.

In STALKER, GTS is faster than 1950pro, GT is a bit slower.
In Oblivion, both GTS and GT outperform 1950pro.

You have basically said that the 1950pro and 7950GT have anemic performance, since they are on the same level as the 8600GTS.

Newer cards always emphasize shader power over fillrates. Just look at how big the gap is between the 7600GT and 6800 Ultra is now compared to when the 7600GT first came out.

None of those games are DX10, which is what i meant by "more demanding".

Alan Wake, Crysis, etc...