Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

8500 gt or 7600 gt

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 20, 2007 10:30:43 PM

Stuck on a 100 dollar budget for a video card, which card should it get? 8500 gt or 7600 gt?

GIGABYTE GV-NX85T256H GeForce 8500GT 256MB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Memory Clock 800MHz
Memory Size 256MB
Memory Interface 128-bit
Memory Type GDDR2

EVGA 256-P2-N615-TX GeForce 7600GT 256MB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Memory Clock 1400MHz
Memory Size 256MB
Memory Interface 128-bit
Memory Type GDDR3

I will be playing games and also will be doing some video editing. What do you guys think?

More about : 8500 7600

April 20, 2007 10:54:54 PM

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


That card will PANTS both those cards and laugh at them. Plus it's a STEAL of a price!

Come one X1650XT 256MB WITH A 256BIT Bus ON GDDR3 FOR 100$ WITH NO MAIL IN REBATES. i ALMOST BOUGHT ONE, i own a 8800GTX and i was so close to buying this just as a spare...

If you dont buy that card a kitten will die :cry:  .
April 20, 2007 11:02:47 PM

eh... the x1650xt does come close to the 7600 gt performance wise, it really depends on the game. What about the 8500 gt?
Related resources
April 20, 2007 11:09:24 PM

AH quite true my friend but you must remember that they tested a GDDR2 with 128bit bus sample, there is a significant performance increase when you add 256bit bus and GDDR3 to the package, heck why are you even doubting it? its just as much as BOTH the cards you listed.


heck even if you dont like the card, its NEWEGG man, just send it back and they'll give you, your money back and you can buy that 7600GT or 8500GT
April 20, 2007 11:11:44 PM

you know i want the best bang for the buck =D
April 20, 2007 11:12:17 PM

I agree about the x1650xt being the best card out of the three. If you must pick between a 7600gt and a 8500gt, then I would go with an 8500gt. At least you will have your foot in the door for DX10 with the 8500gt, even if it won't do much good for demanding games.
a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2007 1:09:38 AM

Quote:
AH quite true my friend but you must remember that they tested a GDDR2 with 128bit bus sample, there is a significant performance increase when you add 256bit bus and GDDR3 to the package, heck why are you even doubting it? its just as much as BOTH the cards you listed.


heck even if you dont like the card, its NEWEGG man, just send it back and they'll give you, your money back and you can buy that 7600GT or 8500GT

All X1650's are 128-bit memory interface cards. It's misleading the way Newegg wrote that, but the 256-bit refers to the internal ring bus. It would be like calling the X1900XT a 512-bit card.

Anyway, also the X1650XT is always GDDR3 or it's not a real XT. Even the X1650 pro is supposed to be GDDR3, but many are GDDR2 now instead.

I honestly don't know where the 8500GT fit's in. But the X1650XT and 7600GT are very close in performance. Depends on the game though as the Radeon has a good lead in some but loses in others. Personally I would rather have a X1650XT, but I'd like to see these three pitted against each other in an in-depth review. Considering how well the X1650XT did against the 8600GT in Anand's review, I'd almost have to assume the 8500GT would be the slowest of these three (X1650XT, 7600GT, 8500GT) in most games.
April 21, 2007 2:41:50 AM

I would check that link again either newegg or 3Dconnect is wrong.

Because i wrote in "X1650XT 256Bit GDDR3" and that is the only one that popped up and if you check the specs listed on newegg it says 256MB/256Bit
GDDR3
April 21, 2007 8:04:21 PM

aight then x1650xt seems to be the winner so far. Trying to find some 8500 gt benchmarks.
April 21, 2007 8:39:38 PM

Quote:
eh... the x1650xt does come close to the 7600 gt performance wise, it really depends on the game. What about the 8500 gt?


Actually, it's the other way around. The 7600GT comes close to the X1650XT in performance, with the X1650XT being slightly faster on average. Either way, I would definitely go with the X1650XT - best performance of the bunch.
April 21, 2007 9:23:40 PM

I'm going with nVidia's Geforce 8500 GT by Gigabyte. Why, because that heatsink looks so damn cool. Ordered it one day before Newegg posted it on their site, should have it Wednesday, which means plenty of time to play with it before work on Thursday.

From what I'm hearing, the 8500 GT is somewhat comparable to the 7600 GT. Since the Gigabyte card is slightly overclocked to begin with, it should be in the ballpark of both the 7600 GT, and the X1650XT. On a side note, the X1650XT has need for a 6-pin connector¹, while the 7600 GT and 8500 GT do not.

With what I'm reading I suspect that the 8500 GT will be about twice as powerful over the ATI X1300 I'm using right now. Shame that I'll lose my 666 score by 3DMark06. :lol: 

¹Correct me if I'm wrong, but does the X1650XT absolutely require the 6-pin connector to be used in order to operate?

Edit: Made correction, meant 7600 GT, not 7600 GS

Addendum: The article I was recalling compared the 8600 GT to the 7600 GT and X1650XT. The 8600 GT was comparable to the X1650XT and 7600 GT. This would lead me to conclude the same as SEALBoy, that the X1650XT would be the best deal at this time, assuming that it is usable by a person's system.
April 21, 2007 9:50:43 PM

Do you mean the 7600GT? Because the X1650XT is MUCH faster than the 7600GS and slightly faster than the 7600GT. If the 8500GT is as fast as the 7600GS, it's an even worse deal than I thought.

Go with the fastest card, which I think in this case is the X1650XT. DX10 support means zip at this level.
April 21, 2007 9:59:17 PM

Thank you for noticing that. Adjusted accordingly and added an important addendum.

So, the question on the 6-pin remains.
a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2007 10:07:33 PM

Quote:
I would check that link again either newegg or 3Dconnect is wrong.

Because i wrote in "X1650XT 256Bit GDDR3" and that is the only one that popped up and if you check the specs listed on newegg it says 256MB/256Bit
GDDR3

What I am trying to tell you is that the 256-bit refers to a 256-bit internal ring bus. It is not a 256-bit memory interface card as the X1650's are all 128-bit memory interface with a 256-bit internal ring bus. It's very misleading the way Newegg wrote that. They probably got it from Connect3D and don't know enough to correct it. Honestly, they should remove the 256-bit as it's not true. If there was a real 256-bit X1650XT, it would be an incredible card for the money and huge news. But it's impossible, so think of it as innacurate, a typo, or a sneaky/shady reference to the internal ring bus to try and sell cards.
April 21, 2007 10:12:06 PM

Some do, some don't.

This Sapphire one doesn't (well I can't see it anyways), but this connect3D one does.
April 21, 2007 10:12:40 PM

What games will u be playing and at what resolution?
April 21, 2007 11:09:38 PM

Get the 7600gt, better yet add 30 dollars and get the 7900gs, unless you are using vista dx 10 wont count for anything.
a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2007 11:52:46 PM

Agreed, the X1650XT are all 128bit at the memory, the internal ring bus is the only part of the equation that is 256bit.

The question of the GT and the XT's performance, isn't really a question when it comes down to performance the X1650XT wins more often and by a wider margin, than it loses.

The best recent test that also includes the important min fps was the Xbit summer round up, in the mainstream section it seemed pretty clear that the XT was the winner in graphics intensive games, and the only time the GT was ahead were in CPU intensive titles where the difference was minimal, although the XT did offer better min fps showing where it's bottleneck was;
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/7games-s...

Still need good GF8500 results though.
a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2007 11:53:47 PM

Quote:
Get the 7600gt, better yet add 30 dollars and get the 7900gs, unless you are using vista dx 10 wont count for anything.


If you're going to add that much, might as well buy the X1950Pro which contends with the GF8600GTS, and blows all the others above away.
April 22, 2007 3:47:29 AM

Quote:
Get the 7600gt, better yet add 30 dollars and get the 7900gs, unless you are using vista dx 10 wont count for anything.


If you're going to add that much, might as well buy the X1950Pro which contends with the GF8600GTS, and blows all the others above away.Agreed, unless he isnt a fan of ati
April 22, 2007 10:08:42 AM

How do you think the x1650 pro compares to the 7600gt?
In the uk, the best price for the x1650pro is about £50, abd the lowest price of a 7600gt is £57. The x1650xt is about £75 on average so I dont want that.

I dont want to buy a x1950pro or 7900gs. I'm going to get a cheap mid-range card for now, and then get a 8800gts or ATI equivilent when the prices drop a bit and crysis comes out.

When that does happen I'll sell the cheap card to a friend for about £30. I doubt he would spend any more money for one, so he wouldnt spend £70 for my potential X1950pro is I got that.

Its just that I'm getting the processor for my half-built computer tomorrow maybe, but I dont want to spend a large amount of money on the 8800gts when ATI may release a new card next month.
April 22, 2007 11:34:06 AM

Whoops I forgot about the VGA charts, they show the x1650 pro is the rough equivilent of the 7600gs, so the 7600gt is better.

So the difference in £7 is probably worth it then. Hmm I answered my own question :roll:
a b U Graphics card
April 22, 2007 11:45:21 AM

Quote:
Whoops I forgot about the VGA charts, they show the x1650 pro is the rough equivilent of the 7600gs, so the 7600gt is better.

So the difference in £7 is probably worth it then. Hmm I answered my own question :roll:

Yep you did and I agree with you.
April 22, 2007 3:27:53 PM

Quote:
What games will u be playing and at what resolution?

12x72 or lower

I am going to be playing Cal Leagues for bf 2142, CS:S and 1.6. Apparently the 7600 gt seems to win on vga charts but x1650xt is not even on the chart. So heres the situation, I am considering buying the x1650xt but the 128 bits of ram is worrying me. Should i wait till ati HD 2600xt comes out ?
April 23, 2007 3:22:05 AM

Quote:
What games will u be playing and at what resolution?

12x72 or lower

I am going to be playing Cal Leagues for bf 2142, CS:S and 1.6. Apparently the 7600 gt seems to win on vga charts but x1650xt is not even on the chart. So heres the situation, I am considering buying the x1650xt but the 128 bits of ram is worrying me. Should i wait till ati HD 2600xt comes out ?

I believe what he said was the X1650XT had a 128-bit memory interface
just as all the other 2 cards listed have. The X1650XT does have a memory size of 256mb.
April 23, 2007 10:29:57 AM

No it doesn't, only the x18xx and x19xx series has 256 megs of ram or more.
Rest are all 128 mb.
May 8, 2007 2:20:35 PM

You probably already solved this if you're like me and are impatient,, but I have the exact EVGA card 7600 gt you mentioned and it seems great in a dell E521 running vista experience at 5.4 i think. I read where someone had the 8500 GT running at 5.1. So i don't know which is better, but i know the EVGA 7600 GT has worked perfect for me for $99 bucks. I will say that i have a ATI 1300 in another machine and the 7600 Gt gets a much higher score on speed (ATI gets 4.2) , but i think the colors look better on the ATI, but that could be my lcd or settings.
!