Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

256-bit 8600gts coming soon?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 30, 2007 6:36:56 PM

I've used ATi all my life, with exceptions of course going back to the 3dFX days. If nVidia throw a 256 mem bus on these things I'll be one of the first to get one. I'm currently building a system for a client with the 8600GTS and I do like it, though I feel that my x1950pro performs better noticably in games. Benchmarking now a days really can't be trusted. Companies who make the products obviously know of benchmarking and the current trend is to build thier products to get better benchmarks and not to optimize performance for real-time applications. The Core2duo is a prime example of this. (yes it's still faster than AMD with apps.)
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 30, 2007 8:42:29 PM

Quote:

Is it possible? Is nvidia hearing our cries? :lol: 


Yeah but only after the fact. We've been crying for this since the R9600 days.

If it's true, it's about frickin' time, and let's hope AMD isn't missing any of this either.
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
April 30, 2007 9:09:47 PM

If it's true it's gonna step on the 320MB 8800's toes.
April 30, 2007 9:13:40 PM

It would be a great move, and if the R630 / 2600 delay rumours are true, would allow Nvidia to dominate the lucrative mid-range area.
April 30, 2007 9:30:42 PM

Quote:
If it's true it's gonna step on the 320MB 8800's toes.


Well, the 8800gts 320 were suppose to be at 300$ a piece, and maybe the new 8600gts 256-bit settles at 200$, pushing the rest of the 8600s down the price line of course, then everything would be in order.
April 30, 2007 9:54:50 PM

Could be the 8600Ultra everybody creamed their pants over...*including me*...
April 30, 2007 9:55:14 PM

i really hope that this is true.
April 30, 2007 9:59:32 PM

if it's true I may be buying one...but first I need to see some benchies
April 30, 2007 10:15:23 PM

I would probably buy one for my second computer.
April 30, 2007 10:36:05 PM

lucky me that i know spanish i'm rezident in spain :wink:
after reading the posts on chile hardware i'm still not buying it
IF nvidia will release a 256 bit 8600 gts card well...first i want to see one in my rig .period
second i promise to post pictures and some screenshots :D 
but until then i will stick with my good ol' 6600gt
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 30, 2007 11:12:11 PM

Quote:
If it's true it's gonna step on the 320MB 8800's toes.


Well I don't know about that, I think the GTS would still out perform it with a shader advantage, TMU and ROP and memory advantage.

I doubt the GTS-256bit would challenge a GTS-320 too much, and you have to wonder the market pricing too. Right now the GTS-320 seems to be soiling the target launch price right now. Only as a BB/CircuitCity card would you be able to charge more than what they charge for the eVGA GTS-320 on NewEgg.

so kinda cramped marketplace wih even just nV's offering the only ones in it.

That card currently needs to launch in the $250 and less range, with street price close the $200 on NewEgg to compete with the GTS-320.

Of course if DX10 proves a major memory limitation in 320MB versus 512MB then it's got a chance of being a solid $225 on NewEgg and about $275everywhere else tops.
April 30, 2007 11:36:27 PM

:D  That card would suit me just fine, a perfect replacement card. ATI/AMD had better start paying attention here, or they will lose some of their remaining fans.
a b U Graphics card
May 1, 2007 12:11:28 AM

If this is true, it will a smart move by Nvidia!
May 1, 2007 12:22:45 AM

Quote:

Well I don't know about that, I think the GTS would still out perform it with a shader advantage, TMU and ROP and memory advantage.

The TMU advantage may be smaller than you think. The 8600s have a way better TMU unit. Overall the 8800 will be faster though, i think. Well, unless Nvidia does some more tweaks aside from the bus system (which is, plain and simple, insufficient with 128 bit).

Quote:

I doubt the GTS-256bit would challenge a GTS-320 too much, and you have to wonder the market pricing too. Right now the GTS-320 seems to be soiling the target launch price right now. Only as a BB/CircuitCity card would you be able to charge more than what they charge for the eVGA GTS-320 on NewEgg.

I am not too sure about that. Just take a look at the clockspeed. The 8600 is clocked a lot faster than the 8800GTS (i´m talking about the reference models!). The comparison between 7800 GT and 7600 GT comes to mind, but that´s 256 to 128 bit again, even though the core of the 7600GT was more efficient thanks to some improvments by Nvidia. The raw shader power of the 8800 will show in future titles where the 8600 might run out of steam.
Another aspect might be the amount of memory. You probably remember the 7600 GS with 512 MB and lousy offering that only tried to lure customers with big numbers. In case of a 256 bit card that might change a little though. But, unless there is more information, this is all speculation.
I just hope Nvidia makes the 256bit GTS a nice card and not some graphically challenged Frankenstein like the 6800XT - which is still a possibility and a very possible one if NV wants to position the 256 GTS between 8800 GTS and the regular 8600GTS.
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 1, 2007 1:00:54 AM

Quote:

Well I don't know about that, I think the GTS would still out perform it with a shader advantage, TMU and ROP and memory advantage.

The TMU advantage may be smaller than you think. The 8600s have a way better TMU unit.

I know they re-worked it to make the address:filter ration 1:1, but it's still dissadvantaged to the GF8800 without some X1650XT-like redesign.

Quote:
I am not too sure about that. Just take a look at the clockspeed. The 8600 is clocked a lot faster than the 8800GTS (i´m talking about the reference models!).


Yeah but the clock speed just can't keep up with the 3:1 shader difference IMO. A move to 65nm would likely give more speed, but I doubt it'd be enough t make up the difference except as low resolution/settings.

Quote:
I just hope Nvidia makes the 256bit GTS a nice card and not some graphically challenged Frankenstein like the 6800XT - which is still a possibility and a very possible one if NV wants to position the 256 GTS between 8800 GTS and the regular 8600GTS.


Yeah I wonder if they wouldn't want to add a few things while the're at it. but the main thing is that the 256bit alone would improve the sitationm, but you still have the problem of alot of cheap GTS-320s out there, and it's unlikely that a 256bit interface alone will help overcome the cheap GTS, which would need to be pulled from the market IMO in order to recapture the $250 price-point with a different card (like happened with the R9500P), and IMO the same ting will happen, the dedicated answer won't quite be fast enough, and I suspect the GF8600-'Ultra' will wind up like an X1800GTO, better than the weak X1600XT, but still not a great improvement.

The main thing I think in nV's favour is that I doubt there will be a surprise 256bit card from ATi any time sooner, but of course they always could cut down an X2900XL to fill the void, but like the GTS-320, that and expensive move to capture that market segment. Depends on the cast-off cripples yields IMO. So near term I don't think that they have to worry about a GF7600GT type card stealing that price-range, like they were able to do last generation.
May 1, 2007 1:28:46 AM

Quote:

Yeah but the clock speed just can't keep up with the 3:1 shader difference IMO. A move to 65nm would likely give more speed, but I doubt it'd be enough t make up the difference except as low resolution/settings.


Agreed. The 256 bit GTS doesn´t have to be on par with the 8800GTS though. It would make pricing difficult if it just gets close to it and at "lower resolutions" i.e. 1024x and 1280x that could happen.

Quote:

Yeah I wonder if they wouldn't want to add a few things while the're at it. but the main thing is that the 256bit alone would improve the sitationm, but you still have the problem of alot of cheap GTS-320s out there, and it's unlikely that a 256bit interface alone will help overcome the cheap GTS, which would need to be pulled from the market IMO in order to recapture the $250 price-point with a different card (like happened with the R9500P), and IMO the same ting will happen, the dedicated answer won't quite be fast enough, and I suspect the GF8600-'Ultra' will wind up like an X1800GTO, better than the weak X1600XT, but still not a great improvement.

I think that the 256 bit rumor is a sign that nvidia knows that the 8600s that are on the market just can´t compete at the price they are at. And if the price of a 8600GTS goes down to compete with the 1950 Pro and 7900GS then there is a little room for another card between 8600 GTS and 8800 GTS. Let´s call it the upper mid-range. :lol: 

Quote:

The main thing I think in nV's favour is that I doubt there will be a surprise 256bit card from ATi any time sooner, but of course they always could cut down an X2900XL to fill the void, but like the GTS-320, that and expensive move to capture that market segment. Depends on the cast-off cripples yields IMO. So near term I don't think that they have to worry about a GF7600GT type card stealing that price-range, like they were able to do last generation.


You are probably right. It reminds me of the 1800GTO you mentioned. ATI failed at hitting the right spots. In the end they flood the market with cards like the 1950 Pro. At launch the 16** series was a total disaster. Either the performance was too bad, the price too high or the price was too close to the next best thing like ATIs very own 1950 (in case of the 1650XT).
I still hope that the 2600XT will be a cheap wonderweapon. Nvidia deserves a little wake up call for that nasty 128-bit thing they released.

PS: A 8800 GS could fill that void also. Even though the rumor was killed by nvidia, i still believe it is a possibility that such a card makes it to market.
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 1, 2007 1:56:15 AM

There's definitely a needs for the cards like the GF8800GS, we'll just have to see what happens, and likely the GF8600Ultra is going to be their idea of that card, whether it succeeds or not is another question.

The thing is with the X1600s it was very similar to the GF8600 if you ask me, ATi launched with no competitor in the market and didn't look at the past performance expectation, and so while it was kind of the 'midrange' when launched, it was going up against X800GTOs and GF6800GSs which were then starting to dip into their price range, then nV launched the GF7600 into the market and what was before just a mediocre weak dissapointment for the price, suddenly was in serious trouble for sales.

I don't think we're there again, but if ATi were to manage a similar coup it'd be the perfect time for it, but of course, that's alot to expect from a 128bit card that doesn't look too impressive on paper (especially since we don't know what a single shader, texture unit or ROP can do, although we have alotof ideas).
May 1, 2007 2:18:49 AM

oh i sure hope its true, it would close the needed gap between the 8600 and 8800 lines
May 1, 2007 3:36:33 AM

Quote:
There's definitely a needs for the cards like the GF8800GS, we'll just have to see what happens, and likely the GF8600Ultra is going to be their idea of that card, whether it succeeds or not is another question.

The thing is with the X1600s it was very similar to the GF8600 if you ask me, ATi launched with no competitor in the market and didn't look at the past performance expectation, and so while it was kind of the 'midrange' when launched, it was going up against X800GTOs and GF6800GSs which were then starting to dip into their price range, then nV launched the GF7600 into the market and what was before just a mediocre weak dissapointment for the price, suddenly was in serious trouble for sales.

I don't think we're there again, but if ATi were to manage a similar coup it'd be the perfect time for it, but of course, that's alot to expect from a 128bit card that doesn't look too impressive on paper (especially since we don't know what a single shader, texture unit or ROP can do, although we have alotof ideas).

Quite a nice review and i can´t but agree.
As i said about the high end GPUs and AMD in general, i´m a little concerned that AMD may mess this up by too many delays and thus giving Nvidia the opportunity to correct their mistake. I´m happy if either AMD or Nvidia fills the spot - if both manage to go at it, even better. :twisted:
May 1, 2007 4:16:05 AM

Why nvidia do not launch a 256bit GF8800GTS? i think it is better than a 256bit 8600gts
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 1, 2007 5:16:19 AM

Quote:
I´m happy if either AMD or Nvidia fills the spot - if both manage to go at it, even better. :twisted:


Yep doesn't really matter. I just wish I could expect it in the mobile segment, but my hopes are even tempered, because my expectations there are very VERY low considering how much trouble both companies have had getting the mid range to market and what looks to bee poor planning from both IMO, and now both are likely planning their X1900GTs, and one is boung to launch an X1800GTO instead an dissapoint again.

Anywhoo, I hope I'm wrong and the laptops rock. Heck even plain MRX1800/GFGO7900GS performance in X1700/GF7700 power consumption would be 'good'.
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 1, 2007 5:19:59 AM

Quote:
Why nvidia do not launch a 256bit GF8800GTS? i think it is better than a 256bit 8600gts


So how and why would they do that?
A 680million transistor part to function as a such a low cripple would be expensive compared to an 80nm / 65nm dedicated part of about 400million transistors. The later would offer alot of benefits (cheaper, less power, another lineup of potential cripples [like X1950Pro -> X1950GT])
May 1, 2007 5:47:45 AM

Some of you guys have to remember... a majority of the money that the companies get from vid cards is on the corporate, and proffessional series cards such as the FireGL series, quattro etc. Nvidia's newest quattros have been out for a while and are pretty freaking awesome but as far as I know don't really beat out the old gen fireGL's by all that much. The new AMD, and yes I think they will be labeled AMD cards such as the stream proccessing cards and workstation platform stuff are going to be off the charts! It's a shame it doesn't transfer to gaming all that well considering Nvidias sharders are clocked almost double of what ATi/AMD's cards are. I think that ATi's upcoming mid-range cards will probably outdo any of nvidias offerings anyway. It's going to be a while before ATi has a real beast to take top spot.
May 1, 2007 6:33:31 AM

Is it possible for Nvidia to upgrade the 8600gt to 256bit as well. Bcoz most of us dont really like to draw extra power from the psu. I like a GC that relies on the pci power alone.Untill then I'll stick with my old 6600gt.
a b U Graphics card
May 1, 2007 6:41:43 AM

Unfortunately, I think with wanting that youll pretty much be stuck low-middle as far as gfx goes
May 1, 2007 6:46:16 AM

It'll be intresting what the 2600 of ATI's is equiped with,wonder if they caught the drift as well.IMO the midrange cards of ATI packed a good wallop,but with the bringing on of this news the 8600 ultra will find a way into my htpc....Unless of course,by some freak of nature,ATI releases the goods soon :D .
May 1, 2007 7:14:55 AM

For 8600GTS, current 128 bit bus and 256 mb memory is ideal- GPU performance low, so price of anything in the card must be cheap. An improvement in bus and memory size will only bring it to characteristics and speed of x1950pro, speed of last generation middlerange cards, all this looks very similar to me like GF 4MX->FX5200 transition, only FX series were crippled by design, while 8600- by castration.
!