Originally posted by: mentalcrisis00
I've been running a socket 939 system with an X2 4400+, 2GB DDR333 ram, and a 7800GT for 2 years now and my friend just got a new system running an 8600GT and he actually gets a lower score than I do in 3dmark06 by about 200 points. He has comparable hardware to my own and it seems the 8600 isn't much better than my 2 year old geforce 7 card. Of course the 8600 is lower end but looking at the specs for the 9600 it's lacking in pixel pipelines and mediocre clocks compared to the 8800GS and 8800GT's so I figure it's not much better than those cards for the same price.
Anyhow I can see how the 9600 might compare to your 7900GTX, I haven't been impressed with nvidias "new technology" thus far and I don't think I'm alone. Given the choice in terms of performance to price ratio I would buy the 8800GS. I also don't overclock so diddling around with voltages and memory timings doesn't seem to be worth it IMO.
You are obviously not very well informed, the 9600GT is a better card than the 8800GS in most cases due to the higher memory bandwidth and higher clocks, it's only limiting factor is shader units but those aren't as much a limiting factor as memory bandwidth.
3DMark is useless not only because it's not a representative of real world performance but because the CPU score is very important so it's not for card to card comparisons (unless both systems are identical) but rather system to system comparison.
The 9600GT is leaps and bounds and then some more above the 7900GTX, they just don't compare at ALL, a 9600GT is only a bit slower than a 8800GT and definitely better than the 8800GTS based on the G80 core.
Facebook
Twitter