Whats a worthwhile best value upgrade from a 7950GT?

[Lithan]

Except they dont have similar performance. At the res he's running every single review posted so far shows 9600gt well ahead of 8800gs.

5 ties or within 3 fps
4 games 9600gt wins by ~10fps.

The avg at 1920x1200 is 9600gt @ 17% faster.

since when is that even?
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33913929

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
Except they dont have similar performance. At the res he's running every single review posted so far shows 9600gt well ahead of 8800gs.

5 ties or within 3 fps
4 games 9600gt wins by ~10fps.

The avg at 1920x1200 is 9600gt @ 17% faster.

since when is that even?
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33913929

Why are you constantly looking old prereleased benchmarks where 8800gs is using older drivers and 9600gt using new drivers just to make your 9600gt look so much better than it is? I think I had to mention that to you about 5 times already and yet it's still not sinking in?

Here look at a recently reviewed using exact same drivers for each card.

http://en.expreview.com/img/20...80vsg9x/8800gts640.png

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


Here;s the results since you don't like viewing pages you don't want to see.

1920x1200 resolution.

Dirt
9600gt = 25.553fps
8800gs = 28.543fps

ET Quake Wars
9600gt = 67.5 fps
8800gs = 72.4 fps

Half Life 2
9600gt = 98.46fps
8800gs =110.38fps

FEAR Persues Mendate with soft shadow off otherwise 8800gs would win here
9600gt = 106 fps
8800gs = 101 fps

Call of duty 4
9600gt = 49.1 fps
8800gs = 52.3 fps

UT3
9600gt = 71.09 fps
8800gs = 63.26 fps

Bioshock
9600gt = 44.998fps
8800gs = 49.281fps

Crysis
9600gt = 16.78fps
8800gs = 19.24fps

World in Conflict
9600gt = 28 ps
8800gs = 27 fps

Lost Planet dx10
9600gt = 19.6fps snow 25.4 fps cave
8800gs = 18.5fps snow 25.2 fps cave

8800gs 6 wins
9600gt 4 wins

In the end they are about equal. 9600gt does good with AA and 8800gs will do better with future shader intensive and texture demanding game.

 

[theAnimal]

Those benchmarks were for 8800GS 768MB.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: theAnimal
Those benchmarks were for 8800GS 768MB.

http://en.expreview.com/img/20...01/g80vsg9x/g80all.png

http://en.expreview.com/2008/0...ards-round-up/?page=13

Look for yourself. There are many standard clock for 8800gs if you look at newegg. The card is really a 8800gt without the 16SP, 4rop, 64 bit memory controller disabled and really should be clocked 600/1500/900 and overclock to 8800gt speedwise yet 768mb card is clocked the standard clocks and 384mb card is clocked slightly lower.

Only game that makes 384mb card seem to bottleneck is Crysis and WIC at 1920x1200 resolution but the benchmarks are so close together at different clock speeds or more vram. If anything it's the clock speed that is making the the fps jump 1-5 fps.

1920x1200 resolution.

8800gs 384mb vs 9600gt 512mb
Dirt
9600gt = 25.553fps
8800gs = 27.29fps

ET Quake Wars
9600gt = 67.5 fps
8800gs = 69.7 fps

Half Life 2
9600gt = 98.46fps
8800gs =105.57fps

FEAR Persues Mendate with soft shadow off other wise 8800gs would win here.
9600gt = 106 fps
8800gs = 99 fps

Call of duty 4
9600gt = 49.1 fps
8800gs = 50.7 fps

UT3
9600gt = 71.09 fps
8800gs = 61.94 fps

Bioshock
9600gt = 44.998fps
8800gs = 47.428fps

Crysis
9600gt = 16.78fps
8800gs = 15.865fps

World in Conflict
9600gt = 28 ps
8800gs = 23 fps

Lost Planet dx10
9600gt = 19.6fps snow 25.4 fps cave
8800gs = 17.8fps snow 24.3 fps cave

8800gs 5 wins
9600gt 5 wins

Still the same conclusion:
In the end they are about equal. 9600gt does good with AA and 8800gs will do better with future shader intensive and texture demanding game.

 

[Lithan]

Except that 3 of your 5 "wins" are cases where the 9600gt could turn on AA and still be perfectly playable and the 8800gs can't or can but gets it's ass whooped when it does... In other words you're cherry picking settings that NO ONE WOULD RUN to justify the weaker card. Your only two legitimate wins are almost pushes, Neither one being even 3 fps difference... whereas the 9600gt wins are...


1fps
15fps
9fps
10fps
10fps
1fps
5fps
2fps
1fps

So it's really 5 wins 9600gt and 6 approximate ties... or if you prefer 9 wins vs 2 wins.
Really, that review shows the 8800gs getting stomped more than most, I find it funny that you think it proves the cards are equal... their own calculations put the 9600gt ~ 6% above the 768meg 8800gs and put that card well above the 384meg one.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
Except that 3 of your 5 "wins" are cases where the 9600gt could turn on AA and still be perfectly playable and the 8800gs can't or can but gets it's ass whooped when it does... In other words you're cherry picking settings that NO ONE WOULD RUN to justify the weaker card. Your only two legitimate wins are almost pushes, Neither one being even 3 fps difference... whereas the 9600gt wins are...


1fps
15fps
9fps
10fps
10fps
1fps
5fps
2fps
1fps

So it's really 5 wins 9600gt and 6 approximate ties... or if you prefer 9 wins vs 2 wins.
Really, that review shows the 8800gs getting stomped more than most, I find it funny that you think it proves the cards are equal... their own calculations put the 9600gt ~ 6% above the 768meg 8800gs and put that card well above the 384meg one.

Why are you talking about AA again? Never said 9600gt isn't better with AA. What don't you understand and how many times do you need to be told the same thing again and again? The whole argument was without AA. :roll: In what modern games released within the last year does 9600gt pull enough frame rates to play 1920x1200 with AA? Play 3 year old engines with AA and you get average of 5 fps difference also limited by 384mb of vram. Who cares~ :music: When shader intensive games come it will become dramatically slower with 33% less SP. It's not even that long for it to come out. Within 6 months, Fallout will be released and many more games that have more shader count. I just wonder if you praise 9600gt AA performance when it can't even play the game properly @ 1280x1024.

The problem with you is that you can't seem to accept what I'm saying but I accept 9600gt is better with AA and never said it didn't. Go read my article and it says the exact same thing.

Do I need to point out to many hardware sites that mention same thing as I? I can link you if you'd like. Why bother you'll ignore it anyway and go back to your AA benchmarks and tell me G94 is much better. :disgust: You have no argument from the first response from the thread and making shit up and I was there to counter that argument. You just want to whine about how much better your 9600gt is but in the end both of these cards have strengths and weaknesses which was already mentioned in the thread.

 

[Lithan]

You have yet to provide any evidence, whatsoever, that the 8800gs will perform better in the future. It's purely speculative on your part and contrary to all evidence (such as its losing at high res in modern games. Since according to you, the only thing that makes a new game more taxing than an old game is shader use, one must wonder why 9600gt completely destroys the 8800gs in many modern game benchmarks.

9600gt wins every single bench of the bottom 4 (the most taxing) With AA turned OFF.
World in conflict AA OFF 9600gt wins by 35%

Modern games... the ones so loaded with shaders... 9600gt wins. Turn even low levels of AA on... which is only a slight bump in memory bandwidth and size usage... and 8800gs drops to single digit fps... that's a card that is at a brick wall. And you expect it to be able to run next gen games at decent settings? I guarantee you next gen games with no AA will stress vmem more than modern games with 4x0 AA.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
You have yet to provide any evidence, whatsoever, that the 8800gs will perform better in the future.

But I did in the other thread.

It's purely speculative on your part and contrary to all evidence (such as its losing at high res in modern games. Since according to you, the only thing that makes a new game more taxing than an old game is shader use, one must wonder why 9600gt completely destroys the 8800gs in many modern game benchmarks.

Speculative? When it's been history over again and again. These cards aren't meant to be high resolution and stay there. Sure you can play older games at high resolution but that's it. It's not going to happen with a $150 card. Within the last year shader count has doubled if not tripled which made cards like 7900gtx crap out.

Your 9600gt is getting "destroyed" by 8800gs in Crysis. :laugh:
Half Life 2? :laugh:
Dirt? :laugh:
bioshock? :laugh:
Call of Duty 4? :laugh:

9600gt wins every single bench of the bottom 4 (the most taxing) With AA turned OFF.
World in conflict AA OFF 9600gt wins by 35%

Modern games... the ones so loaded with shaders... 9600gt wins.

We had another thread testing this theory in the 9600gt thread a while back. Currently 64SP is enough with the games released as of today. Go ahead and try downclocking your SP clocks. Your frames will drop considerably.

World in Conflict uses more vram especially above 1280x1024 resolutions which is lmited by 384mb of vram. Anyone can see that. 5 more fps @ 1920x1200 without AA? 23fps vs 28fps. That's 35% alright. :disgust:

Oh wait I found another benchmark of WIC compared with 8800gs and 9600gt.

http://www.hardwarezone.com/im...s/2008/2501/WICa_1.gif

 

[Throckmorton]

The only game I have that uses less than 450mb is WoW. 8800GS is a bad idea.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
The only game I have that uses less than 450mb is WoW. 8800GS is a bad idea.

How about Crysis? The most demanding game today?

Why don't you check with rivatuner vram usage program and then come back when you have the data for each resolution.

 

[secretanchitman]

i would wait until july......you'll see better cards and better price drops imo.

 

[Lithan]

Apparently you never learned to tell which number is bigger than the other.

16.78 > 15.865
10.36 > 3.29

Halflife 2... oh yeah, 8800gs wins by 7 fps... @ 100fps. Of course at settings someone might, you know, actually USE...
69>63.7
53.73>44.74
Guess who won.

Dirt... 8800gs is 1.5fps ahead without AA
Bioshock... 2.5fps ahead without AA
COD4 1.5fps ahead without AA

Of course 9600gt wins with AA... so obviously it deals with its lack of shaders better than 8800gs deals with its lack of memory.

 

[AzN]

Here's some more benchmarks without AA and different sources.

http://www.hardwarezone.com/im...es/2008/2501/COH_1.gif

http://www.hardwarezone.com/im.../2008/2501/FearA_1.gif

http://www.hardwarezone.com/im...es/2008/2501/UT3_1.gif

http://www.hardwarezone.com/im...008/2501/CrysisA_1.gif

http://www.hardwarezone.com/im...s/2008/2501/SupA_1.gif

9600gt is getting destroyed here. :laugh:

Fact is 8800gs is more powerful card. About 25% more flops than a 9600gt It might not have the bandwidth or vram to pull high resolution with AA but these are budget cards that wasn't meant to be playing 1920x1200 resolution with AA. 9600gt is superior with AA and I can't deny about that because I'm just not ignorant enough.

 

[Lithan]

You seem to be under the impression that a cards capability to run AA isn't an accurate reflection of it's power. You're wrong.
8800gs wins in circumstances where the games so old and settings are so low that it masks the limitations of the card.
Hell look what measures you've sunk to, you actually found a set of benchmarks that max shader use and turn off AA to deliberately play up the 8800gs' one strong point... and 9600gt still wins most games at high res. It only serves to shine a spotlight on that big brick wall called memory capacity that the 8800gs is facing now, much less in these mythical future games that are made up of nothing but shadows and awnings.

 

[AzN]

NM

 

[Denithor]

Children, children...

Can't we all just get along?



To the OP: do you intend to spend $100-150 total or plus whatever you can get for your 7950GT (around $250 this way)?

If $100-150 go for the 8800GS or 9600GT, it's a tossup as these two duelists have shown.
If $250 go for the 8800GTS 512MB (can find for ~$200-220 after MIR).