9600GT performing at 8800GTS levels???

[Pugnate]

Wow....

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=10397

This will help PC Gaming for sure.

PC Online was able to measure the performance of the 9600GT and the results confirmed NVIDIA's claims of a 100% performance increase over the 8600 series for the most part. The 9600GT reached an overall score of 10813 while the 8600GTS and 8800GS had scores of 6251 and 10391, respectively.

Additionally, the 9600GT scored higher than the 8800GTS in many of the tests including 3DMark06 and games such as Crysis, BioShock, and Unreal Tournament 3. The 9600GT came up just a little short behind the 8800GS in only a few games such as Need for Speed: ProStreet and Colin McRae Rally (coincidentally, both being auto-racing titles).

Testing of the 9600GT was performed using Beta drivers so we may see additional performance squeezed out of this card and variants from NVIDIA's partners upon official release of a final product and drivers.

 

[Quiksilver]

I believe that is a typo because in the links provided in the article their are no 8800GTS G80 core or G92 core shown in the benchmark, but rather the 8600GTS which then would make sense, unless of course DT is assuming we would compare other benchmarks to what is listed in the article (which I haven't done yet).

 

[shadowofthesun]

Still, the 9600 GT consistently performs at or beyond the 3850 and 8800GS cards, both performance class cards. That's decent performance, although nothing to get too excited about; new mid-range cards generally perform around the bottom of the previous generation's high end. Example: 8600GTS = 7900GS, 7600 GT = 6800 Vanilla, etc.

 

[vhx]

Well it says the 9600GT benched 10813 on 3dmark06, not sure how close that is to 8800GTS as I am too lazy to look it up.

 

[justlnluck]

How does this compare to a 8800GT? And wasn't the 8800GT "supposed" to be $199 by now?

 

[error8]

The 9600 GT is a bit weaker then the 8800 GT. I really don't understand what is Nvidia doing by releasing all these card so fast, and so close in performance. Are they trying to make the consumer dizzy?

 

[nitromullet]

It is a typo. It's supposed to be 8800GS, and not 8800GTS...

DT linked to their source: http://translate.google.com/tr...ws/0801/1205247_1.html

which shows that they compared the following cards:

GeForce 9600GT 512M (650/1950/SP: 1625)
GeForce 8800GS 384M(575/1700/SP:1438) GeForce 8800GS 384M (575/1700/SP: 1438)
GeForce 8600GTS 256M(675/2000/SP:1450) GeForce 8600GTS 256M (675/2000/SP: 1450)
Radeon HD 3850 256M(669/1660) 256M Radeon HD 3850 (669/1660)

 

[happy medium]

Originally posted by: shadowofthesun
Still, the 9600 GT consistently performs at or beyond the 3850 and 8800GS cards, both performance class cards. That's decent performance, although nothing to get too excited about; new mid-range cards generally perform around the bottom of the previous generation's high end. Example: 8600GTS = 7900GS, 7600 GT = 6800 Vanilla, etc.[/q]

The 7600gt was faster then the 6800 ultra.

 

[GDoes]

Originally posted by: justlnluck
How does this compare to a 8800GT? And wasn't the 8800GT "supposed" to be $199 by now?

I assume, when the 9600GT gets released, the 8800GT will drop in price!
So this should be around March...

 

[Munky]

I might believe if they say it performs close to the old 8800gts (and not in every game either), but there's no way I'm believing it comes close to the 8800gt or the new 8800gts. 64 shaders is a far cry from 112 or 128, and I'm not buying the hype.

 

[crisium]

Yeah it was a typo. It was not compared to an 8800GTS. They either mean 8800GS or 8600GTS.

But looking at the benchmarks, it beats the 3850 256mb in most things. I would have like it compared to the 512mb version b/c that could add a little. Oh well. $169? Yeah right. Just like 3870s are 'sposed to be $219. The price will be jacked up as usual.

 

[CurseTheSky]

The *600 cards haven't always been "low end performance." Remember when THE cards to have were the ATI X800 series, or nVidia 6600GT / 6800GT / 6800Ultra / 7800GT / 7800GTX? Even though it was low on the spectrum, the 6600GT was a pretty decent card.

I remember people trying to convince me not to "waste" the money on my 6800GT, since the 6600GT would do just fine.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: error8
The 9600 GT is a bit weaker then the 8800 GT. I really don't understand what is Nvidia doing by releasing all these card so fast, and so close in performance. Are they trying to make the consumer dizzy?

This is Nvidia's answer against 3850. 8800gt sells alright but big chunk of that money isn't really in high range prices but somewhere in middle 100-$150 range where AMD has been reigning supreme since 1950pro to now.

9600gt isn't bad considering for the price but if it cost more than 3850 it's really pointless to sell this card in this price segment.

I don't get this 8800gs and 9600gt? Why release one card that performs basically the same. 8800gs is geared more towards the future while 9600gt is get the better performance in current games but might not hold against the 8800gs on future titles.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: error8
The 9600 GT is a bit weaker then the 8800 GT. I really don't understand what is Nvidia doing by releasing all these card so fast, and so close in performance. Are they trying to make the consumer dizzy?

This is Nvidia's answer against 3850. 8800gt sells alright but big chunk of that money isn't really in high range prices but somewhere in middle 100-$150 range where AMD has been reigning supreme since 1950pro to now.

9600gt isn't bad considering for the price but if it cost more than 3850 it's really pointless to sell this card in this price segment.

I don't get this 8800gs and 9600gt? Why release one card that performs basically the same. 8800gs is geared more towards the future while 9600gt is get the better performance in current games but might not hold against the 8800gs on future titles.

what? why would the 8800gs be any better than the 9600gt for future games? the 8800gs has 32sp more but is limited by the 192bit bus. on the 384mb model its also limited by the actual amount of memory. also the 8800gs appears to be a temporary card whereas the 9600gt will be normal production card.

 

[Ika]

Originally posted by: toyota

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: error8
The 9600 GT is a bit weaker then the 8800 GT. I really don't understand what is Nvidia doing by releasing all these card so fast, and so close in performance. Are they trying to make the consumer dizzy?

This is Nvidia's answer against 3850. 8800gt sells alright but big chunk of that money isn't really in high range prices but somewhere in middle 100-$150 range where AMD has been reigning supreme since 1950pro to now.

9600gt isn't bad considering for the price but if it cost more than 3850 it's really pointless to sell this card in this price segment.

I don't get this 8800gs and 9600gt? Why release one card that performs basically the same. 8800gs is geared more towards the future while 9600gt is get the better performance in current games but might not hold against the 8800gs on future titles.

what? why would the 8800gs be any better than the 9600gt for future games? the 8800gs has 32sp more but is limited by the 192bit bus. on the 384mb model its also limited by the actual amount of memory. also the 8800gs appears to be a temporary card whereas the 9600gt will be normal production card.

Agreed; it seems like the 8800GS is a 2900 Pro type of card.

 

[sgrinavi]

Originally posted by: toyota
also the 8800gs appears to be a temporary card whereas the 9600gt will be normal production card.

These days all cards are temporary.. LOL.. seems like they go obsolete a few months after you purchase

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: toyota

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: error8
The 9600 GT is a bit weaker then the 8800 GT. I really don't understand what is Nvidia doing by releasing all these card so fast, and so close in performance. Are they trying to make the consumer dizzy?

This is Nvidia's answer against 3850. 8800gt sells alright but big chunk of that money isn't really in high range prices but somewhere in middle 100-$150 range where AMD has been reigning supreme since 1950pro to now.

9600gt isn't bad considering for the price but if it cost more than 3850 it's really pointless to sell this card in this price segment.

I don't get this 8800gs and 9600gt? Why release one card that performs basically the same. 8800gs is geared more towards the future while 9600gt is get the better performance in current games but might not hold against the 8800gs on future titles.

what? why would the 8800gs be any better than the 9600gt for future games? the 8800gs has 32sp more but is limited by the 192bit bus. on the 384mb model its also limited by the actual amount of memory. also the 8800gs appears to be a temporary card whereas the 9600gt will be normal production card.

You can see the gaming benchmarks changing. Older games tend to favor 9600gt by huge margin but the newer games it is really neck and neck except for higher resolutions where the bandwidth comes into play. Looking at the PC gaming trends it's moving into more shader than just bandwidth. 7900gs was actually neck and neck with 1950pro but as time progressed 1950pro was better card for newer titles. I see the trend will continue of course I could be wrong.

 

[bigpow]

My question is, does the 9600GT have all the HD HW acceleration support of that of 8600GT?
And when will we get VC1 H264 HW acceleration a la ATI?

Looking at the price tag, I really don't expect much about its gaming performance.
As long as it has all the HW accel for HD video (and all codecs), along with passive cooling - I'll buy it!

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: CurseTheSky
The *600 cards haven't always been "low end performance." Remember when THE cards to have were the ATI X800 series, or nVidia 6600GT / 6800GT / 6800Ultra / 7800GT / 7800GTX? Even though it was low on the spectrum, the 6600GT was a pretty decent card.

I remember people trying to convince me not to "waste" the money on my 6800GT, since the 6600GT would do just fine.

It wasn't that the 6600GT was a "pretty decent card." The 6800GT/Ultra definately outperformed it. I think that back then people weren't as obsessed about graphics and expectations were lower, plus typical resolutions were lower.

These days people obsess about being able to hit 1920x1200 with 8xAA and all that jazz using the latest killer games. (I also have my theories about people convincing themselves that the game is "good" but I should upset them anymore)

I think it is the difference between people who got cards that were good enough for the games that they liked back then, to people going out of their way to find games that stress their GPU subsystem these days.

 

[UTFan81]

so how much is this meant to cost AND what kind of power requirements does it have? I am currently using a heavily overclocked 8600gt until I save up for an 8800 but maybe this would be perfect for me especially if it's cheap.

 

[JACKDRUID]

*800gs has always performed about equal to *600gt in the past...

no surprise here.

 

[R3MF]

does this card come on a smaller PCB than is used by the G92 cards?

my LC16 case cannot take anything bigger than a 7950GT PCB and i would like an upgrade.................

 

[chizow]

Bottom line of all these recent releases is that the price and selection of mid-range solutions has never been better. I can't remember a time there were so many cards in the $150-$250 range within spitting distance of the best performing single card solution that costs $400+. End result is that more gamers will be able to enjoy a high quality gaming experience with more capable video hardware in their rigs, meaning game devs will have more money from game sales and the flexibility to push the envelope further.