8600s are out now

[Bokishi]

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html...W50aHVzaWFzdA==

 

Oh man Geforce 8500 DX10 card for $89

 

You know what' s crap is that these cards got better HD-video processors than what's on the 8800s. And NV is like zomg but teh 8800 guyz probably already gotz teh Core 2s lawl forget about them. Which is true but geesus if I was still with my P4 and 8800 I'd be screwed out of those HD-Movies *kinda mad*

Edited April 18, 2007 by Bokishi

[Sand]

Kick ass! But first I need a new CPU and motherboard, along with new RAM.

[Deraldin]

I saw these cards were out, but the performance was kind of disappointing. They can't even beat the X1950Pro/7900GS. The saving grace is DX10+HD. I'd wait till I see the DAAMIT HD 2600 reviews before I buy anything.

[metadigital]

Keep your powder dry until the ATi 600 breaks cover ...

[Spider]

I saw these cards were out, but the performance was kind of disappointing. They can't even beat the X1950Pro/7900GS. The saving grace is DX10+HD. I'd wait till I see the DAAMIT HD 2600 reviews before I buy anything.

 

According to the article Bok linked to, the 8600 cards they tested beat the X1950 with a fair margin.

[Deraldin]

I saw these cards were out, but the performance was kind of disappointing. They can't even beat the X1950Pro/7900GS. The saving grace is DX10+HD. I'd wait till I see the DAAMIT HD 2600 reviews before I buy anything.

 

According to the article Bok linked to, the 8600 cards they tested beat the X1950 with a fair margin.

 

*reads the article*

 

Ah! Different game benchmarks and different card vendors! Oblivion is consistent with AnandTech. Toms uses a Sapphire Ultimate instead of ATi. Anandtech also used Battlefield 2, Prey and R6: Vegas in which the 8600 GTS is beaten by the 1950Pro in all three.

 

Anandtech Review

Toms Review

 

The article that Bok linked made them sound a lot more powerful than the articles that I had already seen.

[Spider]

Yeah, it certainly did (just read the anandtech one). Although there are two explanations for this.

 

1: In the Anandtech article they mention that the 8600 cards performed better on newer games where shaders mattered more. And since the other article mostly used that type of games, that would explain the discrepancy.

 

2: The H Enthusiast article used factory overclocked versions where I'm guessing Anandtech didn't. So that'd probably also have an impact.

 

However, when looking at those cards the jump in price to the cheaper 8800 cards is fairly negligible (roughly a 10% increase in price), so at the moment they're not really a good buy. When they drop in price, however, it's another story.

[Wistrik]

I'm considering a system somewhat like Bokishi's rig, but with faster memory and a different cpu cooler. I don't bother with HD-movies, so it's all about gaming for my build decisions. With DA, HL2:EP2 and NWN2's XP on the way, I need all the power I can get. My current system is just too slow.

 

I'm hoping the prices drop by the time I've got some money saved aside for this project. I'll probably buy it piece by piece and assemble it slowly, just so I can see progress being made. I can scavenge parts (dual SATA HDs, DVD R/W, 6800GT) from my current system to run until the less critical parts arrive, though WinXP's blasted hardware monitoring will probably drive me nuts.

[Joseph Bulock]

I'm building a new rig myself right now, and between the AMD x2's getting their prices cut in half, and these cards coming out, it's actually not going to kill the bank to build a rather capable gaming ring.

 

This is, of course, just me talking and I in no way represent the greater preferences of Obsidian Entertainment.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

Now is a fairly good time to upgrade... Or build a new rig.

[mkreku]

Actually, no. Wait until the R600 rears its ugly head. That's when it's a good time to build a new rig.

[Joseph Bulock]

Actually, no. Wait until the R600 rears its ugly head. That's when it's a good time to build a new rig.

 

Only if you want to go back to spending lots more money again. For the budget builders, today seems like a better day.

[metadigital]

Actually, no. Wait until the R600 rears its ugly head. That's when it's a good time to build a new rig.

 

Only if you want to go back to spending lots more money again. For the budget builders, today seems like a better day.

You don't have to buy the new card, it will push the price of other cards down.

[mkreku]

Actually, no. Wait until the R600 rears its ugly head. That's when it's a good time to build a new rig.

 

Only if you want to go back to spending lots more money again. For the budget builders, today seems like a better day.

I hope you didn't think I was advocating the so far untested R600 like some obnoxious ATI fanboy..

 

I was thinking what metadigital was thinking.

[metadigital]

ZOMG ATi Fanb01!

[Joseph Bulock]

Actually, no. Wait until the R600 rears its ugly head. That's when it's a good time to build a new rig.

 

Only if you want to go back to spending lots more money again. For the budget builders, today seems like a better day.

I hope you didn't think I was advocating the so far untested R600 like some obnoxious ATI fanboy..

 

I was thinking what metadigital was thinking.

 

 

 

Oooooh. That's a bit more reasonable, though I'm not sure how much the 8600's will drop given that Nvidia seems to have priced them to make the R600 less attractive before it hits the market.

[SamuraiGaijin]

I had been pricing upper/high-mid range components for a complete new build for about six months (it's been time for an upgrade for longer than that) ... when the 8800 GTS 320 hit the streets, quality 680i became reasonably priced, and most of Vista's initial release pains were realized, I figured that it was time to take the plunge.

 

With the exception of some Vista compatibility issues with some of the bundled nvidia software, I'm exceptionally happy with my brand new Antec 900/680i/C2D E6600/8800 GTS 320/2GB DDR 800/4x HDD RAID 5/Vista Home Premium rig - all for about $2000. I know I could have knocked this down to about $1000 by going with less reputable PCB brands, single HDD, older tech in a few areas, etc.

 

I bought what I wanted - solid, reliable, long-term performance.

 

I know I'll check the prices again in a month or so, and notice that I could have saved a few bucks here or there, and that some new gear has a better price/performance ratio, etc. Unless "a few bucks" becomes "a few hundred bucks" for the same performance - or my rig has a meltdown (unlikely, I'm not overclocking anytime soon) - I'll still be very happy.

 

If you're ready to take the plunge and upgrade or build a new rig, now's not a bad time - just my biased opinion.

Edited April 19, 2007 by SamuraiGaijin

[mkreku]

A not so kind review of the 8600GT:

 

"Now has the 8600 GT carried on the success of the 6600 GT and 7600 GT graphics cards?

 

Not at all, the 8600 GT is a joke in my opinion and does not deserve to be part of the x600 GT series."

 

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=637&p=0

[Pidesco]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the card they should be testing against the 7600GT is the 8600GTS, as it is the card that is in the 200$ price range. The 8600GT costs about 150$, which I guess makes it equivalent to the 7600GS.

 

Also, those benchmarks seem strange as I get a lot better that 30 FPS in F.E.A.R. at 1280x1024 with my 7600GT.

 

 

 

Edit:I just read their update at the end of the review, however they're still wrong. They have to compare the prices of the new cards with the prices of the other cards on release. Of course, if you have a 7600GT, you shouldn't upgrade to a 8600GT (or even a GTS), but I don't need a review to tell me that.

Edited April 24, 2007 by Pidesco

[Deraldin]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the card they should be testing against the 7600GT is the 8600GTS, as it is the card that is in the 200$ price range. The 8600GT costs about 150$, which I guess makes it equivalent to the 7600GS.

 

The 7600GT is considerably cheaper than $200. The 7600GT is in the $120 range. There really isn't anything worth buying around $200 at the moment. The X1950 Pro and the 7900GS Are pretty even and can both be found in the sub $200 range.

[Pidesco]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the card they should be testing against the 7600GT is the 8600GTS, as it is the card that is in the 200$ price range. The 8600GT costs about 150$, which I guess makes it equivalent to the 7600GS.

 

The 7600GT is considerably cheaper than $200. The 7600GT is in the $120 range. There really isn't anything worth buying around $200 at the moment. The X1950 Pro and the 7900GS Are pretty even and can both be found in the sub $200 range.

 

I know. But it wasn't at that price when it was released, which is what matters in context of this specific review.

[Deraldin]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the card they should be testing against the 7600GT is the 8600GTS, as it is the card that is in the 200$ price range. The 8600GT costs about 150$, which I guess makes it equivalent to the 7600GS.

 

The 7600GT is considerably cheaper than $200. The 7600GT is in the $120 range. There really isn't anything worth buying around $200 at the moment. The X1950 Pro and the 7900GS Are pretty even and can both be found in the sub $200 range.

 

I know. But it wasn't at that price when it was released, which is what matters in context of this specific review.

 

Why should it's introduction price point matter? Are you planning on going back in time to buy a 7600GT?

[Pidesco]

No, but they argue that 7600GT was a much better card because it gave much better performance than a 6600GT for the same price point. Except, of course that that is only true if you compare the 7600GT's price on its release with the 6600GT's price on it's release. At the time the 7600GT was released you could get a 6600GT for much less than $200. As such, by their reasoning, the 7600GT should be considered as a bad a card as the 8600GTS. Graphics cards are always too expensive at the point of release, and to criticize Nvidia's new cards while praising previous cards which suffered from the same problem is dumb. And this doesn't even take into account DX10 issues.

 

Edit: Note that I'm not arguing that the new cards are good cards. I'm arguing that that specific review is a bad review.

Edited April 25, 2007 by Pidesco

[Deraldin]

No, but they argue that 7600GT was a much better card because it gave much better performance than a 6600GT for the same price point. Except, of course that that is only true if you compare the 7600GT's price on its release with the 6600GT's price on it's release. At the time the 7600GT was released you could get a 6600GT for much less than $200. As such, by their reasoning, the 7600GT should be considered as a bad a card as the 8600GTS. Graphics cards are always too expensive at the point of release, and to criticize Nvidia's new cards while praising previous cards which suffered from the same problem is dumb. And this doesn't even take into account DX10 issues.

 

Edit: Note that I'm not arguing that the new cards are good cards. I'm arguing that that specific review is a bad review.

 

I just read the article now so I think I know where you are coming from now.

 

The article is arguing that the 7600GT had such a massive performance increase over the 6600GT that it was well worth it for people to upgrade from the 6600. Even though you could find a 6600GT for much less, the performance edge that the 7600GT had still made it a good buy. They argue that this is not the case with the 8600GT. According to their benchmarks the 8600GT is actually a worse performer than the now much cheaper 7600GT so there is no reason for a gamer to buy a 8600GT.