same here, i can;t overclock my x1950pro agp cuz it has too many problems when overclocking so i run it at stock.
the 8600gt hits a core speed of 650mhz, and thats just the starting point for the majority of them. most go even higher.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
8600GT 256MB - Under rated or what?!
- Thread starter mattyprice4004
- Start date
same here, i can;t overclock my x1950pro agp cuz it has too many problems when overclocking so i run it at stock.
the 8600gt hits a core speed of 650mhz, and thats just the starting point for the majority of them. most go even higher.
Even at 5+gig the celeron IS rubbish, for gaming even a regular Pentium D at 3.4gig would probably be faster...
The 8500 and 8600 line are underated imo - granted they sure ain't top end cards but they do very nicely at lower resolutions - if I stick to 800x600 or 1024x768 if I limit the FSAA I can max out most games - even bioshock on my media PC and still get playable framerates - granted if I up the resolution even to 1280x or the FSAA above 2x everything becomes a slide show... but its not like I'm having to use minimum settings to get playable fps on it.
The 8500 and 8600 line are underated imo - granted they sure ain't top end cards but they do very nicely at lower resolutions - if I stick to 800x600 or 1024x768 if I limit the FSAA I can max out most games - even bioshock on my media PC and still get playable framerates - granted if I up the resolution even to 1280x or the FSAA above 2x everything becomes a slide show... but its not like I'm having to use minimum settings to get playable fps on it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Oct 2003
- Posts
- 16,966
- Location
- Chengdu
I don't understand, what I took from the OP is that this is what he has and for the £70 at the time he paid he's impressed with the card.
The way people are speaking you'd think the 8600GT buckles trying to run the completion scene in Solitaire. (Which it unsurprisingly doesn't, especially at clocks around what the OP has specified...)
As for the celery, yeah, maybe it is rubbish especially given all the choice available now. At 5ghz though it'll be alright, I've only ever seen 4.5ghz benchies, from an overclock on these forums, and they weren't too bad. The OP didn't specify if he "plays" SuperPi, so I don't imagine it's too bad for him...
People are too quick to criticise stuff now because it's not what they would have bought comparing it to todays prices, or even not what they would have bought at the time.
If it suits the user then why can't people just see the good side?
The way people are speaking you'd think the 8600GT buckles trying to run the completion scene in Solitaire. (Which it unsurprisingly doesn't, especially at clocks around what the OP has specified...)
As for the celery, yeah, maybe it is rubbish especially given all the choice available now. At 5ghz though it'll be alright, I've only ever seen 4.5ghz benchies, from an overclock on these forums, and they weren't too bad. The OP didn't specify if he "plays" SuperPi, so I don't imagine it's too bad for him...
People are too quick to criticise stuff now because it's not what they would have bought comparing it to todays prices, or even not what they would have bought at the time.
If it suits the user then why can't people just see the good side?
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 20,802
- Location
- ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
the 8600 only uses 50W as well doesn't it? Good for those with lower end PSU's. 
Also, they are a little faster than 7800gt's aren't they? (or not)?
Also, they are a little faster than 7800gt's aren't they? (or not)?
if 'this statement' = true then
i best install it on my laptop and see how it runs. that would be awesome
funnily enough i have both cards, 8600GT in laptop and the X1900XT in my main rig
edit: end if
/geek
I have an 8600GT in my 'works' PC, (Which I game on in the evenings sometimes), and it handles my 1680x1050 widescreen monitor no problem.
Playing games like Supreme Commander, World of Warcraft... and other stuff I can play with high to very high options without any real slowdowns.
Sure it may be slower than a 7900GTX, but it doesnt bad compared to a 7900GT, and its a cheap mid range card. I'd say its not bad value for money, and compared to an x1900xt, its very power efficient, and not that much slower.
Playing games like Supreme Commander, World of Warcraft... and other stuff I can play with high to very high options without any real slowdowns.
Sure it may be slower than a 7900GTX, but it doesnt bad compared to a 7900GT, and its a cheap mid range card. I'd say its not bad value for money, and compared to an x1900xt, its very power efficient, and not that much slower.
the 8600 only uses 50W as well doesn't it? Good for those with lower end PSU's.
Also, they are a little faster than 7800gt's aren't they? (or not)?
would have to be a fair bit faster if it can play bioshock on full detail at 1024*768 smoothly.
1 gig ddr ram
msi nforce4(ultra i think)
amd 3700+
bfg 7800gt oc
bioshock runs ok on lowish settings @ 1024*768
if 'this statement' = true then
i best install it on my laptop and see how it runs. that would be awesome
funnily enough i have both cards, 8600GT in laptop and the X1900XT in my main rig
edit: end if
/geek
it could be ati's current crysis driver, or the additional optimisation crysis has for nvidia cards, or it could be that the 8600 has 32 true stream processors where as my x1900 has 48 shaders (cheaper versions on stream processors
)either way the 8600gt is a shocking card and iv come across a few single mothers who want a gfx card for their kids to get some pc gaming done, and the 8600gt has been my recommendation for quite some time. it truly is an under-rated card.
Associate
- Joined
- 17 May 2004
- Posts
- 1,585
The reason that they tend to get slated is that they are a mainstream card at a mainstream price. What seems to upset the people on these forums is that it isn't that big a leap up from the 7600 like the 6600 was from the 5600.
Maybe it isn't as fast as a 1950Pro, however it isn't meant to keep up with that card which is supposed to be a 7900 card competitor. It is supposed to compare with ATI's mainstream 2600 which I understand it does quite well against.
You play at 1280 x 1024 then yes the card does your needs. No I doubt it won't do Bioshock or Crysis at 1920x1200 but then again it isn't designed too. It is aimed at the occaisonal gamer, who doesn't neccessarily play the latest games at a more mainstream res 1024x768 or 1280x1024, and for that market the card is OK.
Sometimes these forums tend to get a bit blinkered on the latest and greatest and they tend to forget that Nvidia will make a heck of lot more monet off the 8400/8500/8600 then they will the 8800 cards that we are interested in. The mainstream cards are aimed at the mass market and OEM deals where they make there real money, the 8800 just grabs the headlines.
Maybe it isn't as fast as a 1950Pro, however it isn't meant to keep up with that card which is supposed to be a 7900 card competitor. It is supposed to compare with ATI's mainstream 2600 which I understand it does quite well against.
You play at 1280 x 1024 then yes the card does your needs. No I doubt it won't do Bioshock or Crysis at 1920x1200 but then again it isn't designed too. It is aimed at the occaisonal gamer, who doesn't neccessarily play the latest games at a more mainstream res 1024x768 or 1280x1024, and for that market the card is OK.
Sometimes these forums tend to get a bit blinkered on the latest and greatest and they tend to forget that Nvidia will make a heck of lot more monet off the 8400/8500/8600 then they will the 8800 cards that we are interested in. The mainstream cards are aimed at the mass market and OEM deals where they make there real money, the 8800 just grabs the headlines.
Another cool point to remember about the 8600-series...
Stick a Blu-ray/HD-DVD disc into your computer and your CPU can sit back and relax. The chaps with 2900XTs/8800-series card are going to have their CPU fans spin up as their video cards won't be any help the CPU in decoding HD material.
Neither will they make it look nice. Like the 8600-series will.
Stick a Blu-ray/HD-DVD disc into your computer and your CPU can sit back and relax. The chaps with 2900XTs/8800-series card are going to have their CPU fans spin up as their video cards won't be any help the CPU in decoding HD material.
Neither will they make it look nice. Like the 8600-series will.
Which would matter exactly ... why?
What Celeron runs at 3.46GHZ default ? ? ?
a celeron 360 like he said in the OP:
Intel® Celeron® D Processor 360
Processor Specifications:sSpec Number:
CPU Speed:
PCG:
Bus Speed:
Bus/Core Ratio:
L2 Cache Size:
L2 Cache Speed:
SL9KK
3.46 GHz
06
533 MHz
26
512 KB
3.46 GHz
Package Type:
Manufacturing Technology:
Core Stepping:
CPUID String:
Thermal Design Power:
Thermal Specification:
Core Voltage:
LGA775
65 nm
D0
0F65h
65W
64.4°C
1.25V-1.300V
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showpost.php?p=467003&postcount=2
Can't find a specific voltmod for the leadtek either, so just pointed you to that.
Can't find a specific voltmod for the leadtek either, so just pointed you to that.
I've never used the card myself, but reading what actual owners say it doesn't sound too bad... http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-058-OK&tool=3
My friend bought a dell, with a great spec except for graphics (7300 le), expect this would be a nice/cheap upgrade for him. Not everyone wants/can spend £150+ on a gpu.
My friend bought a dell, with a great spec except for graphics (7300 le), expect this would be a nice/cheap upgrade for him. Not everyone wants/can spend £150+ on a gpu.