8600GT Performance Revealed...

http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...6221ebe023.gif
http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...6bc0d0cd15.jpg
http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...17ca02acbe.jpg
http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...524595e36b.jpg
http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...2c3fd5e7a8.jpg
http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...dfaf1478f5.jpg
http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...f5d590164c.jpg
http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...762ea243bf.jpg
http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...8fcac2f794.jpg
http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...f8e2b03a47.jpg
http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...2cbb1d9825.jpg

Link to full review: http://www.hardspell.com/doc/hardwar...page17174.html

mmmm.... Ouch

OMG 48 Shaders only on GT ?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Meaning two in sli would be slower than a single 8800gts ?!?!?!??!

Nvidia can go s.h.i.t. itself to heck...I can't believe my freakin eyes...nvidia pulled an ATI on the 8600GT...its SLOWER than the 7600GT...in some games !!!!!!!

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

OMG 48 Shaders only on GT ?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Meaning two in sli would be slower than a single 8800gts ?!?!?!??!

Nvidia can go s.h.i.t. itself to heck...I can't believe my freakin eyes...nvidia pulled an ATI on the 8600GT...its SLOWER than the 7600GT...in some games !!!!!!!

Perkam

---

you mean that the x1600pro isn't a good card?

More good news:

http://my.ocworkbench.com/bbs/showth...threadid=61518

And btw xlink, i have no desire to get into that right now.

Link to full review added to post made by Stym...the $100 7600GT is faster than the $150 "nex gen pos" 8600GT and the $150 7900gs BLOWS the $150 8600GT out of the water:

http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...f8e2b03a47.jpg

http://www.hardspell.com/pic/2007/4/...2cbb1d9825.jpg

Welcome to 2006...Nvidia can keep its $200 GTS to itself, when u can get an 8800GTS for $50-$60 more, and an X1950XT for $10 more !!!!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102067 .. not to mention, those $120 X1900GT's (which are ~7900GS performance) look mighty fine right now, plus they're 256-bit...

THE ONLY THING that would console me after Nvidia pulling this, is if it runs games with newer engines...at least 5-10 fps faster than the 7600GT...my main concern being how it will handle et:qw...

Perkam

Come on perkam, give Nvidia some time to get reasonable drivers to the market. :) Still sad nonetheless.

Wow, so much for going the 8600 route. I think I might have a 8800GTS as soon as prices drop below $250.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nanometer

Come on perkam, give Nvidia some time to get reasonable drivers to the market. :) Still sad nonetheless.

---

Nvidia had time...all the time it needed...sitting there with their happy faces snickering at themselves thinking the fact that ATI hasn't put out their dx10 offerings means they get a free ride...

I mean...you want me to give them a break? REMEMBER that they bench these cards in their own labs...THEY SAW THIS AND STILL RELEASED THEM !!! And they could not have had updated drivers when they were testing the final cards before release...cos updated drivers come AFTER the card is released...so they saw these EXACT numbers and said "OK"....

I feel sick to the stomach....first the x1600, now the 8600...the $150 card should AT LEAST have been equal to the $150 cards out today...here its losing to its $100 previous gen counterpart.

Go fricken matrox...

Perkam

Then if these number still hold true, it's obvious what will happen to the price. Give it time and this card will find its matched price range in the market.

I'm with Perkam on this one.

I've got 8600GT to...but the NDA ends at 17April !
I don't know how they managed to take out results...

The drivers are still not good..but they are updating them very very often.

wow pathetic performance atm , not even better then the old models :stick: :nono:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

THEY SAW THIS AND STILL RELEASED THEM !!!

---

thats the first lil problem they aint released yet.

and seeing that the card beats the 7600 in NFS Carbon but loses big time in Prey pretty much shows that the drivers are poorly optimized.

we could very easily see proper drivers released before or at launch.

Perkam's completely overreacting.

It's plain to see that if this card can manage over 50% improvement over the 7600GT in one game, it has potential. There's most likely a driver issue with OpenGL games. Don't scream the end of the world having seen one brief benchmarking session.

The 8600GTS will be SIGNIFICANTLY faster than the GT too, 64 SPs versus 48 is over 30% more, plus the 25% clockspeed increase, means NVIDIA definitely has a chance to beat anything AMD releases. I can't wait to see that card benchmarked in games.

I wouldn't be so optimistic, although its obvious that there are some improvements to be garnered by improved drivers.

Still I think it would have been better if nvidia had slapped a 256bit bus on it, then they would have been sure to wipe the floor in lower midrange. There is no excuse that to this day 128bit memory rules the $100-200 pricepoint (after 5+ friggin years).

blech.

Ryan

Gentlemen, i'm not buying this at $150 so that its faster than the 7600GT by 5 fps....i would buy this over the 7900GS if it was faster than that !!! No amount of driver updates will change that...

Obviously if official performance reviews on the 17th find that this is not the case and it is on par with a 7900GS or X1950GT/Pro...then it has done its part...but that looks very unlikely.

The X1650XT had the EXACT thing happen where it got high marks in benchies but sucked in games...I don't want to have this happen to the 8600 or the X2600...but I'm not going to sit back thinking "oh yea it'll improve by a WHOLE lot" as i can tell what kind of limits even new drivers are bound by.

@ Cybercat, the price range for the GTS is $200 to $250...and even at $200 it will be compared to the x1950pro 512mb, the 7900gt and the $210 X1950XT.

Not to mention, if the gap between it and the 8800gts is too big, then paying $50 more for the 8800 is a far better option.

Perkam

Those are disappointing results. :stick:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Gentlemen, i'm not buying this at $150 so that its faster than the 7600GT by 5 fps....i would buy this over the 7900GS if it was faster than that !!! No amount of driver updates will change that...

Obviously if official performance reviews on the 17th find that this is not the case and it is on par with a 7900GS or X1950GT/Pro...then it has done its part...but that looks very unlikely.

The X1650XT had the EXACT thing happen where it got high marks in benchies but sucked in games...I don't want to have this happen to the 8600 or the X2600...but I'm not going to sit back thinking "oh yea it'll improve by a WHOLE lot" as i can tell what kind of limits even new drivers are bound by.

@ Cybercat, the price range for the GTS is $200 to $250...and even at $200 it will be compared to the x1950pro 512mb, the 7900gt and the $210 X1950XT.

Not to mention, if the gap between it and the 8800gts is too big, then paying $50 more for the 8800 is a far better option.

Perkam

---

they want you to spend that extra $60.
It will go down to about $180~160

Let's wait and see how will it perform in the end since there are obviosly driver problems in PREY and 3DMARK03 + it performs very good in Carbon.

Quote:

---

Cybercat, the price range for the GTS is $200 to $250...and even at $200 it will be compared to the x1950pro 512mb, the 7900gt and the $210 X1950XT.

---

Those video cards aren't DX10 and I hope that the difference between 8600GTS and 7900GT/X1900XT will be seen in DX10 games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cybercat

Perkam's completely overreacting.

It's plain to see that if this card can manage over 50% improvement over the 7600GT in one game, it has potential. There's most likely a driver issue with OpenGL games. Don't scream the end of the world having seen one brief benchmarking session.

The 8600GTS will be SIGNIFICANTLY faster than the GT too, 64 SPs versus 48 is over 30% more, plus the 25% clockspeed increase, means NVIDIA definitely has a chance to beat anything AMD releases. I can't wait to see that card benchmarked in games.

---

yes and I also have a definite chance to release a graphics card that is faster than the 8800Ultra this year, however it is rather unlikely; Just like the bolded text that you posted

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

yes and I also have a definite chance to release a graphics card that is faster than the 8800Ultra this year, however it is rather unlikely; Just like the bolded text that you posted

---

their is always a chance :rolleyes: but who knows both AMD and Nvidia looks dump this time :p:

im gonna wait for gorillakos results....

Looks like DX10 for the sake of DX10.

Hmm an x1950Pro for $170 even here with 20% VAT looks more and more appealing...

When will the first dx10 and dx10-only games appear? I think that will be a half-
generation of cards till then, and maybe something better will come along (like
X2800GTO or 8900GS).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank M

Hmm an x1950Pro for $170 even here with 20% VAT looks more and more appealing...

When will the first dx10 and dx10-only games appear? I think that will be a half-
generation of cards till then, and maybe something better will come along (like
X2800GTO or 8900GS).

---

you can get the 1950 pro for 125€ including 19% vat , same for the 7900 gs

the old gen rocks the new cards

and for those hoping DX10 games running better on these new cards, i doubt that they have the performance to display DX10 effects with reasonable performance at reasonable resolutions (1280x1024)

so yes, nvidia screwed it the same way as ati did it with the x16xx series

end of april will show what amds x26xx can do in this segment ;)

[Rant=turtle]

First of all, I don't think I understand the complaining (aka b&m'ing) in this thread. Who was looking forward to the GT? Who was planning on buying the GT? Let's see, 3/4 the shaders, 3/4 the clock of GTS...crappy memory...at 3/4 the price. That's like saying you were looking forward to the 6600 vanilla, or the 7600gs. What did you expect? When the GTS looks like it will actually add playable settings and compete well with the last generation highend, just like the 6600gt and 7600gt before it, who can really complain? I wouldn't count it out yet.

Oh yeah, and Fuad says 8600gts is $199 MSRP, and I tend to completely believe it. It has to be to make sense versus the GTS 320.

That puts this card prolly at around $150 MSRP, IOW, prolly will be found for $130...Right where it belongs. It's not fair to compare this gen's established pricing versus MSRP of an expected part. We all know they will fall quickly and are never as high as planned except when inventory is low and demand is high (usually only in the very beginning). I agree with the dude whom said the GTS will be $160-180 relatively quickly, and at that price they will be probably $100 less than a 8800gts (A $299.99 card, which can be found for $270 now that it's saturated the market), where they should be, and worth their money. Sure, the GT looks crappy, but so did the compatible parts from generations before it. The only difference is they changed the suffix scheme so the crappy part has the suffix we used to all associate with greatness. GTS is the new GT. GT is the new vanilla. Vanilla sucks, and always has...Get used to the change. [/rant]

uh, so when will we be able to see how these cards perform under DX10 benchmarks?

None of the benchmarks are using DX10...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by turtle

First of all, I don't think I understand the complaining (aka b&m'ing) in this thread. Who was looking forward to the GT?

---

I was...and thats surprisingly ignorant, coming from you Turtle.

What I can get for $150 or less:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814133186
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102034
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102022

What I can get for $199 or less:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130074
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102075

Come April 17th, if the 8600 Series cannot match up to what is already available, Nvidia will have launched a crappy mainstream dx10 line-up.

Why? Cos all those with 8800s got herrendously superior dx9 performance with their cards...why should I be satisfied with dx10 cards in the mainstream losing to mainstream dx9 cards?

Would ppl who have an 8800GTX have bought it if it was marginally faster than a 7900gtx or x1950xtx ? Answer is an astounding No, so PLEASE don't preach to me about what i should be expecting and what I should not...I've had it with ppl defending companies for taking out crappy products...not to mention, all the info I have atm says these scores (at least the 3dMark scores) are reliable.

Perkam

I abgree with perkham here. results are poor, and being honest i can't see AMD/ATI doing any better either. also when i think of the mainstream,. the last good card i can think of was the 6600gt. All other good mainstream cards have ended up being defective high ends, which eliminates the point of producing a mainstream card.

Why not make the basis of the cards strong, and use less shaders. weaker in dx10 maybe, but will last you longer. anyways, a x1900 has 48 shaders and does just fine!

- Paul

It seems every generation has its' share of crappy mainstream cards. From my point of view, We're bound to see a weaker 8800 to replace them, hopefully as competitive as 6800GS and 7900GS some time ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

@ Cybercat, the price range for the GTS is $200 to $250...and even at $200 it will be compared to the x1950pro 512mb, the 7900gt and the $210 X1950XT.

---

Hasn't that almost always been the case with graphics cards? I highly doubt it will go above $200. At that price, if you don't care about features, go with the X1950XT. Personally I have confidence the 8600GTS will keep toe-to-toe with the X1950XT, making the features the deciding factor. Unless of course all you care about is Prey and some outdated benchmarks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

yes and I also have a definite chance to release a graphics card that is faster than the 8800Ultra this year, however it is rather unlikely; Just like the bolded text that you posted

---

Well, I should have clarified I was talking about the mainstream segment. I was hoping the context that I said it in would make that clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cybercat

Personally I have confidence the 8600GTS will keep toe-to-toe with the X1950XT

---

Good...thats real good :)

http://www.hothardware.com/articleim...em908/Prey.png

I will hold you to it tho. Check sig :)

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cybercat

Hasn't that almost always been the case with graphics cards? I highly doubt it will go above $200. At that price, if you don't care about features, go with the X1950XT. Personally I have confidence the 8600GTS will keep toe-to-toe with the X1950XT, making the features the deciding factor. Unless of course all you care about is Prey and some outdated benchmarks.

Well, I should have clarified I was talking about the mainstream segment. I was hoping the context that I said it in would make that clear.

---

just an innocent question . :)
do you consider 3D mark 06 as an outdated benchmark because the X1950XT @ stock will beat the 8600GTS OC with ease and dont talk to me about the mods :p:
PS the X1950XT sometimes even beat the 8800GTS 320 in some games

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kemo6600

just an innocent question . :)
do you consider 3D mark 06 as an outdated benchmark because the X1950XT @ stock will beat the 8600GTS OC with ease and dont talk to me about the mods :p:
PS the X1950XT sometimes even beat the 8800GTS 320 in some games

---

Benchmarks always come second place to game play

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Good...thats real good :)

http://www.hothardware.com/articleim...em908/Prey.png

I will hold you to it tho. Check sig :)

Perkam

---

Hey, if Prey is the only game you care about, then that's great for you, that means you don't have to wait for these cards to come out. You can just buy a last gen card now and be set for life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kemo6600

just an innocent question . :)
do you consider 3D mark 06 as an outdated benchmark because the X1950XT @ stock will beat the 8600GTS OC with ease and dont talk to me about the mods :p:
PS the X1950XT sometimes even beat the 8800GTS 320 in some games

---

3DMark06 outdated? Certainly not! Actually that's one of the areas the 8600GT impresses, it's around 40% faster than the 7600GT. Imagine what the GTS could do! :slobber:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cybercat

Hey, if Prey is the only game you care about, then that's great for you, that means you don't have to wait for these cards to come out. You can just buy a last gen card now and be set for life.

---

Heh...prey is the only one we can compare against atm...believe me, they'll be lots of game tested on the 17th and I'm hoping for MY own sanity that you win this bet :)

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Heh...prey is the only one we can compare against atm...believe me, they'll be lots of game tested on the 17th and I'm hoping for MY own sanity that you win this bet :)

Perkam

---

I look at NFS and smile. Wear that sig proudly, because like I said, I'm confident in that statement. ;)

Yeah, Perkam is jumping to conclusions as usual...

http://forum.donanimhaber.com/m_13340017/tm.htm

Maybe the rig used for these results didn't have a Silverstone PSU :rolleyes:

Have I won already? :O

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cybercat

Have I won already? :O

---

Well I have no idea bout the credibility of this link, but if it is credible then I would say so.

Either way I am in your camp.

im also in Cybercats camp.

but the benches in the link J-Mag posted.
i dunno if they are trustworthy as the 8600GTS beats the X1950 @ a res of 2560x1600 in half life 2.

is that possible with a 128bit bus?

i wish those benches r true but im having my doubts. if the benches ARE true then the GTS is a killer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J-Mag

Yeah, Perkam is jumping to conclusions as usual...

http://forum.donanimhaber.com/m_13340017/tm.htm

Maybe the rig used for these results didn't have a Silverstone PSU :rolleyes:

---

I have two reasons for that site being fake, one of which I can say in public.

This is what Shamino got on his 8600GTS voltmodded, oced to 1ghz core and 2400 mem w/ an oced X6800:

http://resources.vr-zone.com.sg/Shamino/86oc/14.jpg

And this is what Coolaler got with a stock GTS:

http://img6.picsplace.to/img6/27/5938.JPG

No flippin way a stock GTS is getting 8.5k...

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

I was...and thats surprisingly ignorant, coming from you Turtle.

What I can get for $150 or less:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814133186
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102034
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102022

What I can get for $199 or less:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130074
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102075

Come April 17th, if the 8600 Series cannot match up to what is already available, Nvidia will have launched a crappy mainstream dx10 line-up.

Why? Cos all those with 8800s got herrendously superior dx9 performance with their cards...why should I be satisfied with dx10 cards in the mainstream losing to mainstream dx9 cards?

Would ppl who have an 8800GTX have bought it if it was marginally faster than a 7900gtx or x1950xtx ? Answer is an astounding No, so PLEASE don't preach to me about what i should be expecting and what I should not...I've had it with ppl defending companies for taking out crappy products...not to mention, all the info I have atm says these scores (at least the 3dMark scores) are reliable.

Perkam

---

Didn't me to preach, apologies if it was taken that way. You should know by now it's never my intention to piss someone off. It's hardly an ignorant statement taken in context. I'm not telling you what you should expect, I'm saying history is repeating itself for the nth time. The position the GT is in has always been a less than stellar card from generation to generation compared to the depreciation of a high-end card from the last gen. The X600pro, the X1600, the 6600, the 7600gs. When those were released, there were cards available from the previous generation that provided better value, sometimes immensely, but perhaps not the feature set. Sometimes it even occurs with the refresh, like the instance of the x1800xt versus the x1900gt when it was first released. It is especially true now given how long some of the cards have been on the market, and the delay of the release of the new mid-range parts. That's just reality of the sitch. It's going to be especially true moving from DX9 to DX10, although a tougher pill to swallow. I agree it sucks.

In essence, I agree with DZ. The moment will come when these too are replaced by a 8800gs, or the like, and it will probably be a better value than the 9600gt, or whatever it is, when it comes around. I'm not making excuses for them at all, make no mistake...but I'm glad those parts do and will exist, as when they become available they are an excellent value, although certainly angering some for where they fall in the market both at release, and when the next mid-range comes around. There is only so much time though between product cycles, so many price brackets, and so many SKUs to hack from a limited number of original chips.

Personally, I think the 8600gts will go toe-to-toe with the x1950xt exactly as cybercat said, with the dx10 feature set giving it the victory, if not the DX9 benchmarks, which I expect to be close. The XT may win slightly, but was obviously meant to be in a more expensive bracket and be high-end DX9; I imagine it gets a reocurring single-digit framerate in DX10. The 86gts obviously is starting a new bar that can't be compared in that respect for this gen's midrange, because it is the first <$200 DX10 part; created for that purpose.

@3dmark06, I'd like to see where the stock x1950xt beats the overclocked 8600gts. I see ~7k from the GTS, ~6k stock, which is similar to the x1950xt, obviously the XT does a little better. Shader scores a few hundred less in both sm2 and sm3 for the XT when compared stock to GTS overclock.

EDIT: Yes, those 8600GTS benches are bunk.

One last thing:

...Perkam, can I have a hug?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

No flippin way a stock GTS is getting 8.5k...

---

The link I posted claimed they ran '06 @ 1024x768 and Shamino was @ 1280x1024.

Whats your other reason?

Keep in mind that we have no idea what cpu speed Shamino ran the cards with.
And unfortunately he is away for 3 weeks, so I cant ask :/

From 2.4ghz to like 4ghz will boost the score quite a bit, when I look at my 7300GTs in SLi that get similar results.

But 8.5k with a stock x6800 with the 8600Gts doesnt seem to be real in comparison to Shaminos and Coolalers benches.

Edit: Ok ignore what I wrote above. Since when does anyone run 3D Marks at non default resolution? Thats no good to compare it with default settings scores :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr3ak

Keep in mind that we have no idea what cpu speed Shamino ran the cards with.
And unfortunately he is away for 3 weeks, so I cant ask :/

---

Shammy benched at 2.8 and 3.2ghz. You can see it in the bench pics.

If this numbers are true, it can be a good thing. Just look at this/last gen.

ATI's TRUE mid-range cards were junk. ATI had to release something based on their high-end to be competitive and forced Nvidia to do the same. We had great cards in the $200 range last year: 1900gt, 1950pro/gt, 7900gs/gt. Those cards trounced both 7600gt and X16xx. That can happen again.

I don't see this as a bad thing. Cheap mainstream DX10 cards will hopefully help push DX10 support in games. Its just like how Intel flooded the market with cheap dual-core 805's. It gives software developers more incentive to stop writing single threaded programs.

I'm keeping my 7600GT, then i'll volt mod it and overclock it even more, and within six month i hope Nvidia and AMD come with some acceptable mid-range DX10 cards + good drivers... for God's sake.

We have seen some good midranged cards from nvidia last year.

6600gt

6800gs

7600gt

7900gs !

apparently someone already has the 8600gts

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...=715719#bottom

this is a joke right? all you people who come on hear saying it is way worse than the 7600gt and nvidia should burn and all that stuff are blind. there is OBVIOUS issues with drivers. you can't score that much higher in carbon and 3dmark06 and score that low in others without there being issues. also has anyone thought that this might be a load of BS.

be really guys get some brains there are some issues that need to be worked out with the drivers and compatibility but this is clearly a faster card than the 7600gt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAMMAN

apparently someone already has the 8600gts

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...=715719#bottom

---

The GTS in Australia costs $320 AUS, which is $260 USD, and the GT costs $260 AUS, which is $210 USD.

http://staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=8600GT

Considering that the 8800 gtx 320mb costs $420 AUS, which is $350 USD, prices are on average 17&#37; higher, meaning prices here would be around $225 for the gts, and $175 for the gt. Though I have a feeling the GT would be closer to $150...with 512 mb editions of the gts getting closer to the $250 mark....and newegg noobs going ALL over it X(

Perkam

this should be interesting

http://www.au-ja.de/review-club3d8600gts-4.phtml

obvious driver issues in fear and doom3, my two favourite games :( .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAMMAN

this should be interesting

http://www.au-ja.de/review-club3d8600gts-4.phtml

obvious driver issues in fear and doom3, my two favourite games :( .

---

Good Synthetic performance....not to mention riddick performance is also good...I might lose my bet after all.

*sigh* if only i could lose my bet on the 8600GT :S .. it'd actually be beneficial to me.

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

The GTS in Australia costs $320 AUS, which is $260 USD, and the GT costs $260 AUS, which is $210 USD.

http://staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=8600GT

Considering that the 8800 gtx 320mb costs $420 AUS, which is $350 USD, prices are on average 17% higher, meaning prices here would be around $225 for the gts, and $175 for the gt. Though I have a feeling the GT would be closer to $150...with 512 mb editions of the gts getting closer to the $250 mark....and newegg noobs going ALL over it X(

Perkam

---

yeah roughly right there

looks like 8800GTS 320MB is the card to get

they will drop further down i'm sure....i reckon end of april we'll be buying them ~AUD$370-380 here


i'll see how my 86xx goes in testing when then send me the card/s :) i really hope it will be a tad better than some of these benchmarks are showing atm but i'm going all out with phase and mods heheheh :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Good Synthetic performance....not to mention riddick performance is also good...I might lose my bet after all.

*sigh* if only i could lose my bet on the 8600GT :S .. it'd actually be beneficial to me.

Perkam

---

every body wants you to lose the best but apparently you wont :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZhaoYun

Those are disappointing results. :stick:

---

Only if the picture quality is worse. Seems to me a 256 bus would have made that card awesome. With 48 shader procs ? what a way to choke a card .

stalker performance aint bad...

http://www.au-ja.de/review-club3d8600gts-10.phtml

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J-Mag

Yeah, Perkam is jumping to conclusions as usual...

http://forum.donanimhaber.com/m_13340017/tm.htm

Maybe the rig used for these results didn't have a Silverstone PSU :rolleyes:

---

that review was done with a 512mb 8600gts.perhaps the 256mb version is crippled in doom3/fear?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650

this is a joke right? all you people who come on hear saying it is way worse than the 7600gt and nvidia should burn and all that stuff are blind. there is OBVIOUS issues with drivers. you can't score that much higher in carbon and 3dmark06 and score that low in others without there being issues. also has anyone thought that this might be a load of BS.

be really guys get some brains there are some issues that need to be worked out with the drivers and compatibility but this is clearly a faster card than the 7600gt.

---

I also think (and hope) that these weird scores are indications of driver issues...

Really we wont know till DX10 is mainstream after all thats what these cards are made for, wait till 3dwankmark releases a DX10 variant then we can really see how well these cards go, and of course with some real DX10 games aswell, After all isnt technology suposed to move forward? Why would they bother with DX9 performance DX10 is on the way like it or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenetixx

Really we wont know till DX10 is mainstream after all thats what these cards are made for, wait till 3dwankmark releases a DX10 variant then we can really see how well these cards go, and of course with some real DX10 games aswell, After all isnt technology suposed to move forward? Why would they bother with DX9 performance DX10 is on the way like it or not.

---

Yeah, but performance should be at least enough for dx-9 titles @ 1024x768 or 1280x1024...and thats why we are afraid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAMMAN

that review was done with a 512mb 8600gts.perhaps the 256mb version is crippled in doom3/fear?

---

Good catch... I don't have FEAR anymore but many newer games I have tested use over 256mb of memory when running up at 1600x1200 with some sort of AA enabled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenetixx

Why would they bother with DX9 performance DX10 is on the way like it or not.

---

Well, right now there's about ZERO DX10 games on the market. If this card sucks on DX9 it won't sell. Even if there was DX10 games around, people would want to be able to play DX9 games at decent speed/IQ.

To get he 8600 to be a killer card whats needed is

a) polished drivers
b) picking a card with as fast a memory as you can get
c) good cooling to allow a good overclock.

all those will come in time, whether it is enough fto beat off the R6xx midrange is another story though.

Could nvidia be about to lose the midrange edge? They still might be able to chuck it out for cheap on that old 76 PCB though so a,b,c above might not apply if it gets really low in price where nobody cares....

Regards

Andy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caparroz

Well, right now there's about ZERO DX10 games on the market. If this card sucks on DX9 it won't sell. Even if there was DX10 games around, people would want to be able to play DX9 games at decent speed/IQ.

---

Definitely. To say DX9 performance doesn't matter is about as silly an argument as you can get. DX9 is still current. What dictates that? The games available. So they are definitely important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cybercat

Definitely. To say DX9 performance doesn't matter is about as silly an argument as you can get. DX9 is still current. What dictates that? The games available. So they are definitely important.

---

not to mention that DX10 is definitely more demanding

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAMMAN

apparently someone already has the 8600gts

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...=715719#bottom

---

This guy's work has been indicating that:
1. the stock sink is crap and needs to be replaced for ANY overclocking (and I wonder if it is even sufficient for stock).
2. the card is performing pretty poorly overall, even with overclocking
3. takes a hit with both SM2 and SM3

Rats, and this was the card I was hoping to buy too...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kemo6600

not to mention that DX10 is definitely more demanding

---

DX10 is less demanding....

DX10 is about performance increases, not special effects.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xVeinx

This guy's work has been indicating that:
1. the stock sink is crap and needs to be replaced for ANY overclocking (and I wonder if it is even sufficient for stock).

---

I respect the guy a lot for being the first on the net with a GTS and taking requests for tests and benchies from the oc crowd...but...

he has the overclocking skills of a goat.

Wait for April 17th as some of our XIPs will be able to overclock it the right way.

Also, looks like the inq story about there being two revs of 8600 being true: http://www.gamedude.com.au/

With rev 1 not being able to clock down from its max 3d clock in 2d.

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

I respect the guy a lot for being the first on the net with a GTS and taking requests for tests and benchies from the oc crowd...but...

he has the overclocking skills of a goat.

Wait for April 17th as some of our XIPs will be able to overclock it the right way.

Also, looks like the inq story about there being two revs of 8600 being true: http://www.gamedude.com.au/

With rev 1 not being able to clock down from its max 3d clock in 2d.

Perkam

---

LOL, I'll grant you that. I have however noticed that the stock cooler appears the same as that used on the 7900 GS, and I assumed that this would be insufficient based on the results of 8800 heat output. The latest silicon from nvidia runs hot, no way around it.

I love ATi :D

Hey, talking about the Prey benchmark results, remember that Prey uses OpenGL.

Maybe they should call it the FX8600... lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

The GTS in Australia costs $320 AUS, which is $260 USD, and the GT costs $260 AUS, which is $210 USD.

http://staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=8600GT

Considering that the 8800 gtx 320mb costs $420 AUS, which is $350 USD, prices are on average 17&#37; higher, meaning prices here would be around $225 for the gts, and $175 for the gt. Though I have a feeling the GT would be closer to $150...with 512 mb editions of the gts getting closer to the $250 mark....and newegg noobs going ALL over it X(

Perkam

---

8800GTS goes for like 260USD...

so it's really a lot worse than that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [LCN]Knowledge

Hey, talking about the Prey benchmark results, remember that Prey uses OpenGL.

---

And currently unified shader gpus seem to not like opengl much, going by the xbox360(quake 4, prey only being able to run at 30fps on the 360), the 8800GTX/GTS, and now apparently the 8600GTS.

The 8600GTS is at least an upgrade to those that use 7800, 7600, 7300, 6xxx based cards. Even on a basic A64 3500+, 1GB PC3200 & a single 7800GT (500/1150) gets about 4k on 3DMark06 (old rig).

It's my old mans birthday in May so I hope there's 512MB versions of the 8600GTS around then as he'll appreciate the upgrade (he's using a 6600LE).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

DX10 is less demanding....

DX10 is about performance increases, not special effects.

---

If only more people realized this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cybercat

If only more people realized this.

---

the major change from DX10 to DX9 is that the GPU wont be relaying much on the CPU ,,,,,,,, will be more efficient ??? yes >>>>validating recourse will be executed once instead millions of times on the other hand more registers will be used and more textures + larger texture size ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, that performance increase will come when developers can fully manipulate DX10 and by that time they will be using more effects


any way Crysis is coming ,, we will wait and see :D

But since there are no games that use DX10 how does one know?...i'd assume DX10 games will be more advanced then anything previous and as such put more strain on the GPU then ever before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kemo6600

the major change from DX10 to DX9 is that the GPU wont be relaying much on the CPU ,,,,,,,, will be more efficient ??? yes >>>>validating recourse will be executed once instead millions of times on the other hand more registers will be used and more textures + larger texture size ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, that performance increase will come when developers can fully manipulate DX10 and by that time they will be using more effects


any way Crysis is coming ,, we will wait and see :D

---

Well you're probably right, it's like Shader Model 2.0, or even 3.0, they enabled a lot of effects to be done faster, but by the time they were really used to large degree in games, all the effects in general made them perform worse.

DX10 has the potential to perform even worse because, like you said, a lot of things that used to be done on the CPU can be done on the GPU.

But speaking of Crysis, I think that since it's a transitional game from DX9 to DX10, it will provide a performance benefit in DX10 mode, because there won't be a huge amount of new effects added from the different modes.

personally, im more excited about the ATi midrange R6xx offerings.


There is just nothing exciting about the nv cards so far, we will see though.

edit: nvmd. =P


whatever, maybe Nvda will learn it's lesson when another company gives it heat for the same prices... and let capitalism take into effect.


We need more GPU companies out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cybercat

Well you're probably right, it's like Shader Model 2.0, or even 3.0, they enabled a lot of effects to be done faster, but by the time they were really used to large degree in games, all the effects in general made them perform worse.

DX10 has the potential to perform even worse because, like you said, a lot of things that used to be done on the CPU can be done on the GPU.

But speaking of Crysis, I think that since it's a transitional game from DX9 to DX10, it will provide a performance benefit in DX10 mode, because there won't be a huge amount of new effects added from the different modes.

---

That link in your sig .. is borked.

HardwareZone has posted a Performance preview...its in the stickied 8600 review thread.

It is on even ground with the x1950 pro...but loses to the X1950XT, which stays equal to the 8800gts in a lot of the games, miserably.

Not bad...but I was expecting x1950pro performance from the 8600GT not the 8600GTS.

I have yet to see how the 8600GT overclocks tho, not to mention official drivers aren't out yet...

Perkam

They have released them and I'd wait and see what AMD has to offer.

I'll buy an 8600GTS if it falls to around $110 USD... that's about what it's worth

I think they want to charge extra for the DX10 cards because they're the only game in the DX10 town. meanwhile Nvidia continues to make money where ATI I'm sure is in the red ;)

Wow, I am shocked by this. I thought the market was moving fast, and I was scared my poor 7900gs were going to suck... Really, how many games are going to be DX10 and how many people are going to get them, and how many people are going to replace their wonderful "cheap" cards with this even s***tier card????

people should just skip the 86xx Gxx and go with a 8800GTS 320MB.

yes, no sense in gettin the 8600gts its only a $50 difference, you would be crazy not to get the 8800gts 320mb.