Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Benchmark teasers of 8600GT/GTS! Look out ATI?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 14, 2007 10:25:05 PM

Nvidia has been quoted in recent interviews to say that they have most of their 8900GS OEM boards ready to be pushed out, they're just waiting for ATI to pull the trigger.

With that in mind, they aren't waiting for ATI so they can push out their mid range video cards.

VR-Zone G84/86 Info/Pictures

8600GTS


8600GT


"On a Core 2 Extreme X6800 processor, GeForce 8600 GTS scored a pretty impressive 5,7xx pts in 3DMark06 which is slightly faster than the 7950GT while 8600 GT churned out 4,7xx pts in 3DMark06 overshadowing a 7900GS."

I'm assuming they were benchmarking the 512 and 256 versions of the 8600GTS/GT.

This definitely makes things interesting, as one will wonder-
How will the 512MB version of the 8600GTS rate against the 320MB version of the 8800GTS? Will the increased memory allow it to be more friendly to higher resolutions and AA/AF features? Will the 320-bit memory interface and increased shaders make the 8800GTS the king of the $250-300 market? Will the 512MB of memory make the 8600GTS comparable? Will the 8600GTS 256MB be the real sweet spot at the $200 range?
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2007 12:41:30 AM

Quote:
Nvidia has been quoted in recent interviews to say that they have most of their 8900GS OEM boards ready to be pushed out, they're just waiting for ATI to pull the trigger.


Is that a typo like the following?

Quote:
Will the 256-bit memory interface and increased shaders make the 8800GTS
:?: :!: :?:

What are you going on about with that? None of the information you posted matches that statement in anyway, nor does your opening statement.

I think you need a few edits in there. :|
March 15, 2007 1:02:38 AM

Must just be your machine unless he edited it since.
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2007 1:10:27 AM

I'm not talking about the bolds, I'm talkig about there being no mention of a GF8900GS, and nothing about a 256bit anything in that link.

So where's his source, or WTH is he talking about?
March 15, 2007 1:12:50 AM

Quote:
Nvidia has been quoted in recent interviews to say that they have most of their 8900GS OEM boards ready to be pushed out, they're just waiting for ATI to pull the trigger.


Is that a typo like the following?

Quote:
Will the 256-bit memory interface and increased shaders make the 8800GTS
:?: :!: :?:

What are you going on about with that? None of the information you posted matches that statement in anyway, nor does your opening statement.

I think you need a few edits in there. :|

Are you retarded? I wasn't talking about the 8900GS anywhere in my post.

My mention of the 8900GS is merely there to show that the 8600GT and 8600GTS aren't the only cards in Nvidia's arsenal. In fact, read the sentence again- "8900GS OEM boards ready to be pushed out, they're just waiting for ATI to pull the trigger."

Also, no the second statement wasn't a typo, you're just an idiot that looks for ways to flame people. The 8600GT and 8600 GTS don't have 256 bit memory buses. I was talking about the 8800GTS when I said that. Want to know why? Because the 8600 GTS is $250 in 512 MB variation and the 8800GTS 320MB can be had for as little as $275 after rebate, definitely cheaper once the 86-- cards surface.

There were no typo's. This post wasn't just about the 8600GT/GTS, it was about how Nvidia has 8900GS's waiting, the 8600GTS will have to compete with the 8800GTS 320 market and how Nvidia won't push out the 8900GS until ATI pulls the trigger.

But nice job forcing me to retype everything a 13-year old would be able to read just because you couldn't comprehend it.
March 15, 2007 1:16:42 AM

Quote:
I'm not talking about the bolds, I'm talkig about there being no mention of a GF8900GS, and nothing about a 256bit anything in that link.

So where's his source, or WTH is he talking about?


Here, in fine print for you-

Guru3d, read the second news posting down "8600 Details"

"GeForce 8600GT shares the same 128-bit memory interface as the 8600GTS"

Hence, me saying, "Will the 256-bit memory interface on the 8800GTS give it a considerable lead over the 8600GTS". The 8900GS specs haven't been finalized, but from what most understand, it only has a smaller amount of shaders and slightly lower clock speed compared to the 640MB 8800GTS.

It makes me rather frustrated that I can't just post a thread and have people use their common sense and English literary skills to read what I typed. Did I list the 8900GS in the thread title? Did I talk about the 8900GS when I compared the cards? No, the tidbit about the 8900GS was merely to show that Nvidia has more than just "tomorrow" in the plans when it comes to their PCBs.

I did make a mistake, but it was only in listing a 256-bit memory interface instead of 320-bit interface on the 8800GTS. 320-bit is a very awkward memory interface, a lot of people would make that mistake, but no, I don't need "a few edits", you were just being a jerk. I smell "ATI fan".
March 15, 2007 1:43:02 AM

Quote:
Are you retarded? I wasn't talking about the 8900GS anywhere in my post.
Did you just call TheGreatGrapeApe retarded? He's probably the most knowledgeable member on this forum when it comes to graphics hardware.
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2007 1:46:20 AM

I dont think the Ape is a ATI fanboy. Anyway, so the gts is say equivilant to the 1900 xt? I ask cause thats what I currently have
March 15, 2007 2:17:34 AM

Quote:
Hence, me saying, "Will the 256-bit memory interface on the 8800GTS give it a considerable lead over the 8600GTS". I smell "ATI fan".


8800GTS is 320BIT,
THEGREATAPE IS NOT A FANBOY.
March 15, 2007 2:37:59 AM

Quote:
Hence, me saying, "Will the 256-bit memory interface on the 8800GTS give it a considerable lead over the 8600GTS". I smell "ATI fan".


8800GTS is 320BIT,
THEGREATAPE IS NOT A FANBOY.

Hey cmon lets all calm down here :|

The great APE is Not Retarded and he did not mean to insult you , so no need for insults .

Lets all behave in a educated manner shall we :|

very interesting find , Ati will really have to get of their ass now .

It is going to be a HOT summer :D 
March 15, 2007 2:50:58 AM

Ya man, sorry for the hostality. I just cant wait for AMD\ATI and Nvidia's midrange cards
March 15, 2007 2:58:55 AM

Quote:
Ya man, sorry for the hostality. I just cant wait for AMD\ATI and Nvidia's midrange cards


8) Yeah me neither i mean in the sense i am just kind of bored by what is happening in the video card market , which is basically NOTHING :( 

People are flaming each other over non-exsistant benchmarks and dumb ass numbers :lol: 

R600 this and that and 8900 , i mean what the hell is going on :roll:

Any way peace :) 
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2007 3:22:39 AM

Quote:

Are you retarded? I wasn't talking about the 8900GS anywhere in my post.


Sure you didn't talk about it anywhere in your post, except to 'mention' it? :roll:

Quote:
My mention of the 8900GS is merely there to show that the 8600GT and 8600GTS aren't the only cards in Nvidia's arsenal. In fact, read the sentence again- "8900GS OEM boards ready to be pushed out, they're just waiting for ATI to pull the trigger."


Like I said, got anything to support that other than the bogus list posted and re-posted a bazillion times before? Hard evidence is the currency to back up your title, not the OCW or Level505 type stuff.

Quote:
Also, no the second statement wasn't a typo, you're just an idiot that looks for ways to flame people.


Nah, don't have to look for ways, they just appear out of thin air like that list. If I were trying to flame you I'd post something like this:

But I didn't, I was pretty specific about my questions. I'm just pointing out either you've got some typos, or you're simply misleading people with your misunderstanding of the hardware and faith in unsubstantiated rumours.

Quote:
The 8600GT and 8600 GTS don't have 256 bit memory buses. I was talking about the 8800GTS when I said that.


Since when does the GTS have 256bit memory?
Again, typo, or do you just not know what you're reading?

Quote:
Want to know why? Because the 8600 GTS is $250 in 512 MB variation and the 8800GTS 320MB can be had for as little as $275 after rebate, definitely cheaper once the 86-- cards surface.


That statement doesn't make sense either. A lower performing card comes out is going to drop the price of the GTS-320? Sure the MSRP might be higher than the GTS-320 may be selling for, but for dang sure the below MSRP 8600GTSs will also be selling as well below as well, so the cheapest 8600GTS-512 will still be less than the cheapest 8800GTS on places like NewEgg. BTW, you do know that the GTS-320 went up $10 buck last week, eh?!? I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the GTS-320 rebates dry up right before the 8600 launch, to not cut into the GF8600. So wait and see what happens, I doubt the GTS-320 will drop enough between now and then. Not that the GTS-320 won't still be the better choice when compared to a GF8600GTS right at launch time. After the first few weeks they shoudl settle into a good balance.

Quote:
There were no typo's. This post wasn't just about the 8600GT/GTS, it was about how Nvidia has 8900GS's waiting, the 8600GTS will have to compete with the 8800GTS 320 market and how Nvidia won't push out the 8900GS until ATI pulls the trigger.


I thought you said you weren't talking about the 8900GS? :twisted:

BTW, S3 is waiting for ATi and nV to pull the trigger, SIS is waiting for S3 to pull the trigger, and intel for everyone to pull the trigger....

All I said was that your info didn't support your statements.
So either you've found something else about a 256bit GTS (doubtful) that would be of great interest to most of us here, or you had a typo(s).

Quote:
But nice job forcing me to retype everything a 13-year old would be able to read just because you couldn't comprehend it.


Too bad you didn't just correct your typo instead of being a tool.
Most 13 year olds know the difference between 256bit and 128bit/320bit.

You type about a spec not in nV's lineup, and a card that's sofar only appeared in make-believe charts; kinda like the mystical mythical 256bit GF8600Ultra, and you wonder why I bring it up. Considering your accuracy of the GTS-320 I question your source for the GF8900GS, which isn't in that Guru3D link.

I could care less what wins/loses, but I do care about people getting confused because someone posts a typo but gets mad when it's pointed out. In a topic about a GF8600 series, putting 8900GS makes me question whether there were two typos or one, because there's was also talk of the GF8600GS before too: http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=4991

Like I said posting supporting evidence of what you wrote would be great. 8)
March 15, 2007 3:33:17 AM

Quote:

Are you retarded? I wasn't talking about the 8900GS anywhere in my post.


Sure you didn't talk about it anywhere in your post, except to 'mention' it? :roll:

Quote:
My mention of the 8900GS is merely there to show that the 8600GT and 8600GTS aren't the only cards in Nvidia's arsenal. In fact, read the sentence again- "8900GS OEM boards ready to be pushed out, they're just waiting for ATI to pull the trigger."


Like I said, got anything to support that other than the bogus list posted and re-posted a bazillion times before? Hard evidence is the currency to back up your title, not the OCW or Level505 type stuff.

Quote:
Also, no the second statement wasn't a typo, you're just an idiot that looks for ways to flame people.


Nah, don't have to look for ways, they just appear out of thin air like that list. If I were trying to flame you I'd post something like this:

But I didn't, I was pretty specific about my questions. I'm just pointing out either you've got some typos, or you're simply misleading people with your misunderstanding of the hardware and faith in unsubstantiated rumours.

Quote:
The 8600GT and 8600 GTS don't have 256 bit memory buses. I was talking about the 8800GTS when I said that.


Since when does the GTS have 256bit memory?
Again, typo, or do you just not know what you're reading?

Quote:
Want to know why? Because the 8600 GTS is $250 in 512 MB variation and the 8800GTS 320MB can be had for as little as $275 after rebate, definitely cheaper once the 86-- cards surface.


That statement doesn't make sense either. A lower performing card comes out is going to drop the price of the GTS-320? Sure the MSRP might be higher than the GTS-320 may be selling for, but for dang sure the below MSRP 8600GTSs will also be selling as well below as well, so the cheapest 8600GTS-512 will still be less than the cheapest 8800GTS on places like NewEgg. BTW, you do know that the GTS-320 went up $10 buck last week, eh?!? I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the GTS-320 rebates dry up right before the 8600 launch, to not cut into the GF8600. So wait and see what happens, I doubt the GTS-320 will drop enough between now and then. Not that the GTS-320 won't still be the better choice when compared to a GF8600GTS right at launch time. After the first few weeks they shoudl settle into a good balance.

Quote:
There were no typo's. This post wasn't just about the 8600GT/GTS, it was about how Nvidia has 8900GS's waiting, the 8600GTS will have to compete with the 8800GTS 320 market and how Nvidia won't push out the 8900GS until ATI pulls the trigger.


I thought you said you weren't talking about the 8900GS? :twisted:

BTW, S3 is waiting for ATi and nV to pull the trigger, SIS is waiting for S3 to pull the trigger, and intel for everyone to pull the trigger....

All I said was that your info didn't support your statements.
So either you've found something else about a 256bit GTS (doubtful) that would be of great interest to most of us here, or you had a typo(s).

Quote:
But nice job forcing me to retype everything a 13-year old would be able to read just because you couldn't comprehend it.


Too bad you didn't just correct your typo instead of being a tool.
Most 13 year olds know the difference between 256bit and 128bit/320bit.

You type about a spec not in nV's lineup, and a card that's sofar only appeared in make-believe charts; kinda like the mystical mythical 256bit GF8600Ultra, and you wonder why I bring it up. Considering your accuracy of the GTS-320 I question your source for the GF8900GS, which isn't in that Guru3D link.

I could care less what wins/loses, but I do care about people getting confused because someone posts a typo but gets mad when it's pointed out. In a topic about a GF8600 series, putting 8900GS makes me question whether there were two typos or one, because there's was also talk of the GF8600GS before too: http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=4991

Like I said posting supporting evidence of what you wrote would be great. 8)

Good to see everyone getting along :lol: 
March 15, 2007 5:27:52 AM

Quote:

Sure you didn't talk about it anywhere in your post, except to 'mention' it? :roll:

Like I said, got anything to support that other than the bogus list posted and re-posted a bazillion times before? Hard evidence is the currency to back up your title, not the OCW or Level505 type stuff.

Nah, don't have to look for ways, they just appear out of thin air like that list. If I were trying to flame you I'd post something like this:

But I didn't, I was pretty specific about my questions. I'm just pointing out either you've got some typos, or you're simply misleading people with your misunderstanding of the hardware and faith in unsubstantiated rumours.

Since when does the GTS have 256bit memory?
Again, typo, or do you just not know what you're reading?

That statement doesn't make sense either. A lower performing card comes out is going to drop the price of the GTS-320? Sure the MSRP might be higher than the GTS-320 may be selling for, but for dang sure the below MSRP 8600GTSs will also be selling as well below as well, so the cheapest 8600GTS-512 will still be less than the cheapest 8800GTS on places like NewEgg. BTW, you do know that the GTS-320 went up $10 buck last week, eh?!? I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the GTS-320 rebates dry up right before the 8600 launch, to not cut into the GF8600. So wait and see what happens, I doubt the GTS-320 will drop enough between now and then. Not that the GTS-320 won't still be the better choice when compared to a GF8600GTS right at launch time. After the first few weeks they shoudl settle into a good balance.

I thought you said you weren't talking about the 8900GS? :twisted:

BTW, S3 is waiting for ATi and nV to pull the trigger, SIS is waiting for S3 to pull the trigger, and intel for everyone to pull the trigger....

All I said was that your info didn't support your statements.
So either you've found something else about a 256bit GTS (doubtful) that would be of great interest to most of us here, or you had a typo(s).

Too bad you didn't just correct your typo instead of being a tool.
Most 13 year olds know the difference between 256bit and 128bit/320bit.

You type about a spec not in nV's lineup, and a card that's sofar only appeared in make-believe charts; kinda like the mystical mythical 256bit GF8600Ultra, and you wonder why I bring it up. Considering your accuracy of the GTS-320 I question your source for the GF8900GS, which isn't in that Guru3D link.

I could care less what wins/loses, but I do care about people getting confused because someone posts a typo but gets mad when it's pointed out. In a topic about a GF8600 series, putting 8900GS makes me question whether there were two typos or one, because there's was also talk of the GF8600GS before too: http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=4991

Like I said posting supporting evidence of what you wrote would be great. 8)


First: I edited both my original post and my reply to you that the ONLY mistake I made was listing a 320-bit bus instead of 256-bit bus for the 8800GTS. It's not my fault you don't know a thing about the 8600GT/GTS but jump into the boat to flame anyone who does. If you knew the 8800GTS had a 320-bit bus, why didn't you correct that ONE error in my post instead of flipping around nearly 5 other parts in my post to make it seem like the 256-bit tidbit was the correct info, and everything about the 8900GS, 8600GT/GTS, price, analysis was incorrect?

Oh look, if you simply change the 320-bit for 256-bit in my original post, the whole thing makes sense! Well maybe to me and anyone else that's unbiased and intelligent it does.

(Psst: You're not one of those people.)

8900GS Info

(Btw, this is a very broad and "subject to change" road map. Most people have the consensus that the road map is targeted for June-July. The 8600 Cards are due April 17th. The 8900GS is merely the June response to ATI's road map.)

And no, the post wasn't about the 8900GS. The post, again, since you can't seem to get it through your thick skull, mentioned the 8900GS as a contrasting point to what possibilities people will have to consider when thinking of future cards. My original post HAD NO TYPOS OTHER THAN THE 256-BIT/320-BIT ERROR, FOR THE LAST TIME.

YOU are the one that keeps shoving the 8900GS into this discussion.

Get it through your head for the LAST time - I only mentioned the 8900GS in my first post, first sentence and it was DIRECTLY dependent on my second sentence, which starts with, "WITH THAT IN MIND" which is a dependent clause, meaning "KEEPING THAT IN MIND, READ THE FOLLOWING BECAUSE IT'S THE REAL INFORMATION I'M GIVING YOU".

I'm sorry that your English literature teachers failed so miserably, but I'm not going to hold your hand again. You want 8900GS info? Read it yourself Mr. Genius and then go eat some graham crackers with your 3rd grade teacher.

The facts, as we know them (They are subject to change):
8800GTS 320mb $299 (320mb, 320-bit memory, 500 core, 1600 memory)
8600GTS 512mb $250 (512mb, 128-bit memory, 700 core, 2000 memory)
8600GTS 256mb $200 (256mb, 128-bit memory, 700 core, 2000 memory)
8600GT 256mb $169 (256mb, 128-bit memory, 600 core, 1400 memory)
8600GT 128mb $149 (128mb, 128-bit memory, 600 core, 1400 memory)

These are set for April 17th.

The 8900GS is way down the line. I brought it up just to mention that Nvidia has it READY to ship out to OEM manufacturers, but you won't get to see it until ATI's mid-high range cards flood the market so the 8900GS can come out to dominate the $250-300 market.

But its stats if you're concerned:
8900GS 512mb (512mb, 256-bit memory, 550 core, 1600 memory)

The difference is in the shaders, but I'm tired, I would've posted that information, if I didn't have to defend myself from a forum nazi.
March 15, 2007 8:16:12 AM

Here we go again :lol: 

I can seriously see some damage being done over here , :|
March 15, 2007 8:58:07 AM

so, NamelessMC is all like

"hey gyus check my sweetinfoz"

and TheGreatGrapeApe is all like

"your infoz lame! maybe if you are not teh stoopidest ever all your typos"

and then NamelessMC comes backs with

"you a 12yr aol retraded aol person who s never read b4"

TheGreatGrapeApe counters with

"uh..." (giant wall of text! now with 15% content!!)

and then theprod is all like

"this is lame, peace."
March 15, 2007 9:01:03 AM

Do you smell something burning?
March 15, 2007 9:12:35 AM

Oh, and I just wanted to add my 2cents to the "debate"
Maybe you (NamelessMC) were basically correct with your info and the Ape was just nitpicking. Maybe the Ape was right and your first post was more confusing than clarifying.
But when you start with the name-calling it's you who sounds like a 13yo, and it's your arguments that start to lose their weight and, yes, it's you who's starting to look like an idiot.
:wink:
March 15, 2007 9:27:38 AM

I'm sick of those "benchmarks".

Who the fk is gonna couple a mid-range card like 8600 with an x6800 which costs slightly under a grand?

Let's face the truth: in a normal, balanced set-up, that card will never score 5700 marks, coz there will be no expensive-ass tight-timed RAM, and no overclocked quad-cores to help it.
March 15, 2007 10:23:26 AM

Funniest post of the Century :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 

The big ape ---Classic pic :lol: 

rofl
March 15, 2007 10:23:45 AM

Quote:
I'm sick of those "benchmarks".

Who the fk is gonna couple a mid-range card like 8600 with an x6800 which costs slightly under a grand?

Let's face the truth: in a normal, balanced set-up, that card will never score 5700 marks, coz there will be no expensive-ass tight-timed RAM, and no overclocked quad-cores to help it.
I'll agree with that any day...

I'm just sick of the whole teasing thing. They should show us what we want to know (thorough game benchies) or just bloody leave the whole thing. It just irritates the crap out of me.
March 15, 2007 10:46:12 AM

Oh they look cute and cuddly. I hope ATI can top this out and more importantly offer us better price.
March 15, 2007 12:46:45 PM

I have heard that before and from seasoned members. :wink:
March 15, 2007 1:22:16 PM

Quote:
so, NamelessMC is all like

"hey gyus check my sweetinfoz"

and TheGreatGrapeApe is all like

"your infoz lame! maybe if you are not teh stoopidest ever all your typos"

and then NamelessMC comes backs with

"you a 12yr aol retraded aol person who s never read b4"

TheGreatGrapeApe counters with

"uh..." (giant wall of text! now with 15% content!!)

and then theprod is all like

"this is lame, peace."


LOL. Well put. :trophy:


Quote:
I'm sick of those "benchmarks".

Who the fk is gonna couple a mid-range card like 8600 with an x6800 which costs slightly under a grand?

Let's face the truth: in a normal, balanced set-up, that card will never score 5700 marks, coz there will be no expensive-ass tight-timed RAM, and no overclocked quad-cores to help it.


Testers put the 8600 with the x6800. And presumably they put the 7950 and 7900 with the x6800 too. That way, the graphics card is biggest bottleneck and thus the comparison is most effective.

The point isn't how many 3dmarks you're going to get, it's how the cards compare to the 7 series.
March 15, 2007 2:02:55 PM

Im personally not a big fan of Doritos.
March 15, 2007 2:05:02 PM

what is the price of the nvidia 8600?
March 15, 2007 2:06:16 PM

I dunno, I like some of their classic flavours, like nacho cheese. Some of the weird new things they tried were kinda questionable though.
March 15, 2007 3:00:38 PM

Quote:
so, NamelessMC is all like

"hey gyus check my sweetinfoz"

and TheGreatGrapeApe is all like

"your infoz lame! maybe if you are not teh stoopidest ever all your typos"

and then NamelessMC comes backs with

"you a 12yr aol retraded aol person who s never read b4"

TheGreatGrapeApe counters with

"uh..." (giant wall of text! now with 15% content!!)

and then theprod is all like

"this is lame, peace."
Great post. :lol: 
March 15, 2007 3:21:57 PM

*insert flame post about how it dosnt matter cuz Nvida Drivers suck*

*get flamed by how ATI blows and that they need to stop delaying*

*insert random AMD Is better then Intel Flame rant*

*Insert how Intel core2 is better w/ benchmarks*

*insert amd retort with them being cheaper*

*insert 1 random person saying something that has something to do with the topic*

*insert the fact that ATI is holding back the R600 due to the fact they want to release there whole line up High end-Low end all at once; something no company has done yet*

Wee thats the end of the flame war back to topic everyone :D 
March 15, 2007 3:39:18 PM

Quote:
*insert flame post about how it dosnt matter cuz Nvida Drivers suck*

*get flamed by how ATI blows and that they need to stop delaying*

*insert random AMD Is better then Intel Flame rant*

*Insert how Intel core2 is better w/ benchmarks*

*insert amd retort with them being cheaper*

*insert 1 random person saying something that has something to do with the topic*

*insert the fact that ATI is holding back the R600 due to the fact they want to release there whole line up High end-Low end all at once; something no company has done yet*

Wee thats the end of the flame war back to topic everyone :D 


Are you a BM copycat? :twisted:


Why do the 8600 cards have 128bit memory interface? Why not 256bit?
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2007 4:08:03 PM

Quote:

First: I edited both my original post and my reply to you that the ONLY mistake I made was listing a 320-bit bus instead of 256-bit bus for the 8800GTS.


You did that after coming back at me as if the 256bit was right, instead of you checking your information first, then everyone else pointed out to you that you were in fact wrong. So don't expect me to ignore your post directed at me. :roll:

Quote:
-It's not my fault you don't know a thing about the 8600GT/GTS but jump into the boat to flame anyone who does.

-why didn't you correct that ONE error in my post instead of flipping around nearly 5 other parts in my post


- Actually I probbaly know more about it than you, I just don't post alot of rumours with typos as if it were gospel.

- There weren't 5 parts, I highlighted the 2 things you had no support for in your thread. You still have posted a single thing to support either other than the FUDy OCW excel sheet I mentioned earlier. Instead of correcting them from the start you decided to challenge my questioning your mistakes. You accuse me of being biased, except the two thing I pointed out you have no support for but you came out screaming like a little childish fanboi.

Quote:
(Btw, this is a very broad and "subject to change" road map.

BTW, that's the OCW list I already told you was debunked. I knew you were basing on that list like I said, and so like I said your whole post is full or errors and regurgitated mistakes. Essentially that covers the two things I pointed out to you, and was correct in point out. And the credability of even your theories falls into question since you didn't know anything about those two.

Quote:
I'm sorry that your English literature teachers failed so miserably...

The facts, as we know them (They are subject to change):


You need to learn the difference between FACT and RUMOUR, perhaps that's something your class missed, but tohelp you the words are hot-link to definitions so you can understand what they mean.
That info didn't come from nVidia, so it's not 'FACT', the true fact of the matter is that those 2 lists from OCW are full of errrors.

Quote:
The difference is in the shaders, but I'm tired, I would've posted that information, if I didn't have to defend myself from a forum nazi.


Yeah it's my fault you can't get the information correct.
Just a little fact checking and research on your part would help you alot, but you aren't interested in getting it right obviously. And of course that's my fault too. :roll:
March 15, 2007 4:10:39 PM

Is it just me, or does that old black woman look a bit like Gollum?
March 15, 2007 4:58:13 PM

Just let me know when the silent versions come out and i'm there! 8)
March 15, 2007 5:05:15 PM

...What's a pixel...
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2007 5:49:41 PM

Quote:
...What's a pixel...


I dunno, a male Pixie? :twisted:

Quote:
Just let me know when the silent versions come out and i'm there! 8)


Look at the bottom one, passive heat pipe for your GF8600;

http://www.fx57.net/?p=495

8)
March 15, 2007 6:30:52 PM

I agree with jeff 2087 above. The point is to show the comparison of scores of like systems with the GPU only being different in the setup. And relieving possible CPU bottlenecks.

Also by the time, or soon after, these GPUs come out there will be a superior chip to the x6800 to the tune of $266. Yep thats right, the 6850. So it surely won't be unreasonable in the very near future to pair the two together regardless. I can see where from your point of view the argument seemed sound tho. A+ for effort :) 
March 15, 2007 6:36:18 PM

..Just messin with ya, have a nice cold can of Windows.. :p 
March 15, 2007 6:38:11 PM

Dang jeff, you are full of wisdom on this day. I couldn't agree more. Doritos Nacho Cheese flavor rock! The odd-ball flavors they keep experimenting with, eh, not so much.

On a side note; want to know the real travesty in the chip world in recent years? The discontinuation of the Lays Barbecue chip. Not that crappy "sweet" flavored kids chip the K.C. Masterpiece Mesquite. Blech!
The Original Lays BBQ was the ultimate cookout chip for hotdogs/hamburgers on the grill. Man the new generations taste for sugar-coated everything is ruining major staples of my diet, rofl.

Lets all take a moment to remember the Lays BBQ chip and reflect on Cookouts of the past. Bow your heads and give a moment of silence. . ..... /cry



LOL :D 
March 15, 2007 6:43:05 PM

Quote:
Im personally not a big fan of Doritos.


Cheetos FTW :trophy:
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2007 8:02:12 PM

nacho cheese doritos, crunchy cheetos (not the puffed stuff), and pop secret Homestyle microwave popcorn.
March 15, 2007 8:13:02 PM

Quote:
Just let me know when the silent versions come out and i'm there! 8)


Look at the bottom one, passive heat pipe for your GF8600;

http://www.fx57.net/?p=495

8)

Thats awesome! :o  I can't help but notice it just doesn't look as cool as my Gigabyte 7600gt though. :lol:  I know it would blow it away in performance, but it looks understated, i don't think its a GT. :? I wonder if i could get an 8600gt or gts and put the silent pipe hardware from my card on it? :wink: Maybe break my card in the process? I'm sure something will come along.
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2007 8:21:47 PM

Quote:
..Just messin with ya, have a nice cold can of Windows.. :p 


Yeah I know, I thought your comment was in reference to GW's pixelshader thread, made me laugh actually.

Thanks for the frosty one, actually just got back from Biz Lunch.
March 15, 2007 8:44:35 PM

Quote:
Are you retarded? I wasn't talking about the 8900GS anywhere in my post.
Did you just call TheGreatGrapeApe retarded? He's probably the most knowledgeable member on this forum when it comes to graphics hardware.

Word.

That guy just commited forum suicide.

Everything he posts from now on is totally invalid. :D 
March 15, 2007 8:49:41 PM

and I counter this post with this:








R610, R630 and R630XT


info: SOURCE HERE
March 15, 2007 9:02:35 PM

It was from that thread, my eyeballs( 8O ) hurt from tring to find it.
March 15, 2007 9:48:21 PM

Quote:
so, NamelessMC is all like

"hey gyus check my sweetinfoz"

and TheGreatGrapeApe is all like

"your infoz lame! maybe if you are not teh stoopidest ever all your typos"

and then NamelessMC comes backs with

"you a 12yr aol retraded aol person who s never read b4"

TheGreatGrapeApe counters with

"uh..." (giant wall of text! now with 15% content!!)

and then theprod is all like

"this is lame, peace."


Priceless. This is hands down the post of the year thus far.
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2007 9:54:43 PM

Quote:

Thats awesome! :o  I can't help but notice it just doesn't look as cool as my Gigabyte 7600gt though. :lol:  I know it would blow it away in performance, but it looks understated, i don't think its a GT. :? I wonder if i could get an 8600gt or gts and put the silent pipe hardware from my card on it? :wink: Maybe break my card in the process? I'm sure something will come along.


Well from the Wattage being bandied about for the GF8600 series we can extrapolate the heat dissipation required for the chip (likely smaller surface area though than the previous GF7 series though, so efficiency will be needed [like copper]). The GF8600 maxes out about 30W higher than the GF7600, but since they are able to make a GF7900GS passive, likely you'd be fine with the GF8600GTS.

Of course the best thing to do is wait and see when people actually test retail parts. I think passive is doable on the GTS, just likely not with the same heatsink assembly of the GF7600GT. It'll also depend on memory arrangement and coverage too of course.
!