-
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.
Differences Between 8800 And 8600
- Thread starter Jay123
- Start date
Jay123 said:
You dont really need to know the difference do you?
You just need to know that the 8600 is a poor card and the 8800 is a supreme card compared to it and any other card in fact at the moment.
If your thinking of buying a 8600 you need you head testing in my opinion.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
The 8600's are the mid range cards, and the 8800 series are the high end so are a lot faster. 
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 9,871
- Location
- UK
The 8600 has 32 shader processors vs 128/96 for the 8800GTX/GTS. The other main differance apart from the 128 vs 384/320-bit memory interface. Is the 8600's ratio increase of texture address units per SP from 1:4 to 1:2. Means it now has a 1:1 ratio of texture address to filter units. The 8600GTS is also clocked higher than the 8800GTS and uses less power
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2007/04/17/nvidia_geforce_8600_gts/2.html
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2007/04/17/nvidia_geforce_8600_gts/2.html
Last edited:
The 8600 GTS is not even up to beating an X1950 PRO or a 7950 GT in games like FEAR etc...
Anti Aliasing seems to kill it in a particularly heavy way, perhaps it is the limited number of shader processors? The smaller memory bus?
Or just the generally lower bandwidth available... It only has 32 GB/s of bandwidth - considerably less even than a 7900 GT!
In fact, according to the Guru 3D review (which I trust) it is not really that much better than a 7600 GT!
Anti Aliasing seems to kill it in a particularly heavy way, perhaps it is the limited number of shader processors? The smaller memory bus?
Or just the generally lower bandwidth available... It only has 32 GB/s of bandwidth - considerably less even than a 7900 GT!
In fact, according to the Guru 3D review (which I trust) it is not really that much better than a 7600 GT!
Cartho said:
32? What the **** ?
Thats just 1 elss than my 6800gs at stock, must suck heavily for anything above 1280x1024 and FSAA.
Ati's x800 series bere good, but chose nvidia for sm3.0, and now it pay's off, I can still run anything.
Personally, an 8800GTS is the better all round choice. An 8800GTX is for the "true gamers". An 8600GTS isn't a gaming card as such, it's ideal for a media center PC. However, you could say that a 7600GT isn't a gaming card either. Not true. If you game a lower resolutions such as 1280x1024 like me, then it's ideal. But anything above and it's got no chance. The 8600GTS is similar, except it performs better. But antialiasing really kills it. The 7600GT struggles with 4xMSAA or better. However, with 4xFSAA, it's not so bad. 2XMSAA and it doesn't even break a sweat in most things (FEARCombat: I can play that at full settings at 1280x1024 with 16xAF and 4xAA, and it's still smooth).
The point is, nVidia were supposed to be marketing it to replace the 7900GT. However, now it looks like it's simply replacing SLI 7600GT (Not the Fatal1ty edition though).
The point is, nVidia were supposed to be marketing it to replace the 7900GT. However, now it looks like it's simply replacing SLI 7600GT (Not the Fatal1ty edition though).
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
you must run on very low settings then. my gtx still takes a conciderable hit with everything ramped up
