Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New build but 7600GT or 8600GT

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 14, 2007 4:49:06 PM

Ok i'm building a new PC as a second/third PC. PC won't be my main games one. Pc will be passed about and or upgraded for a few years to nieces and family. The price is pretty much at a maxium now so realy not looking for "buy this it's only another £10" comments. Parts i'm buying are:
Motherboard: MSI K9N4 Ultra-F
Processor: AMD Athlon 64x2 4600+
RAM: 2 GIG of PC2-6400 value ram

All the other parts i have kicking about except a half decent video card.
Been thinking of either
Point of view 7600GT 256mb GDDR3 @ £65
or
Inno3D 8600GT 256mb GDDR3 @ £77

PC won't realy be overclocked and looking for a solid card for use now and for a few years to come. Will be using a 17 or 19 inch LCD monitor so not realy going to be using high resolutions or anything. Might be expecting to be able to run a few current or year old games at medium settings and games for like 7 -10 year old kids in a year odd.
AS i've mentioned don't realy want to be adding to the price as it's already more than i was planning on spending as is:
Anythoughts on the video card would be helpfull.

More about : build 7600gt 8600gt

May 14, 2007 5:19:54 PM

Given the prices for those two cards, I'd personally go with the 8600 GT. Yes, we all know that the card was hammered in gaming benchmarks... but that's not really a fair assessment. Not counting benchmarks such as 3DMark 06 (where the 8600 easily beats the 7600), the 7600 GT and the 8600 GT are very similar in terms of performance... people were just expecting more for the 8000 series of cards... thus the negative reviews. Oh well! Tough shit. I think the newer features of the 8000 series warrants the slight price premium.
May 16, 2007 4:04:20 AM

Quote:
Given the prices for those two cards, I'd personally go with the 8600 GT. Yes, we all know that the card was hammered in gaming benchmarks... but that's not really a fair assessment. Not counting benchmarks such as 3DMark 06 (where the 8600 easily beats the 7600), the 7600 GT and the 8600 GT are very similar in terms of performance... people were just expecting more for the 8000 series of cards... thus the negative reviews. Oh well! Tough ****. I think the newer features of the 8000 series warrants the slight price premium.

Thanks for the reply. Was rather expecting a few more replies but hey it was another build post and hardly a cutting edge build. I decided to take a chance on the 8600, maily because of longevity of use rather than current proformance. I'm thinking a few years down the line it's better to have a card that has direct x 10 support and will install and run a kids basic game is better than one that won't due to it being direct x and shader 3. Oddly enough from a few bench marks i did find the card is 30% better than the 7600 running supreme commander, so hopefully it's better at the latest games and those about to come out.
Related resources
May 16, 2007 4:30:25 AM

While those choices are good, I would also look for an X1650XT. You should be able to find one in your price range. It's a stronger performer than the 7600GT.

Also keep in mind that DX10 isn't going to be mainstream for some time. Games will support DX9 for quite some time before becoming strictly DX10. I think there's less than 5 games that are strictly DX9 right now and DX9 has been around for a long time.

Honestly, the DX10 cards in your price range aren't worth buying over their DX9 cousins. You said it will be passed on and upgraded for a few years. Get a more powerful card a year or so down the road if you need one. By then the DX10 hardware in your price range should be a bit more refined and a better value.

@rodney_ws, I'm not sure where you're info comes from but the 8600GTS is a better comparison to the 7600GT, not the 8600GT. Just check out Legion Hardware's rather scorching comparison. Unfortunately when price is considered the, 8600GTS becomes less of a good value when compared to the 7600GT or X1650XT
May 16, 2007 5:21:02 AM

If this computer is only for kids and family, I see no reason to get a 8600GT. The card itself is more expensive and the features wouldn't even be properly appreciated.
a b U Graphics card
May 16, 2007 5:25:46 AM

It's worth it for long-term gaming.

There's other benefits to enjoy from it too, and at this point since it's bought, hey it's good and don't look back.
May 16, 2007 4:59:14 PM

monkey dude nice code you have for ILLEGAL hacking on HD DVDs. 8600 gt only for the fact of dx 10 only about a 10-20% performance increase over the 7600gt about 20 on most pcs.i have the 7600 gt t is good but dx 10 will prove better in the long run
May 16, 2007 5:30:13 PM

Quote:
monkey dude nice code you have for ILLEGAL hacking on HD DVDs.


Give it a rest.
a b U Graphics card
May 16, 2007 6:04:36 PM

Quote:
monkey dude nice code you have for ILLEGAL hacking on HD DVDs.


What are you the .net police?

First it's not illegal in my country, we're not so stupid to give up all our rights to the corporations and the commons. Second you can't copyright a number, and it's published as a matter of public record in the US even thanks to the demand requests.

And I use it, like DVD shrink and most of my burning tools for Fair Use means. Ever heard of backing things up (I don't lend out my originals cause scratches aren't worth the hassle, and Studios won't give me fresh copies at replacement cost they want me to pay full price again, I've asked for current in circulation CDs), also fair use transfer to other formats, like my PSP, Laptop, and media hub, etc. :roll:

I probably own more store bought and online bought content than you will ever own in your entire lifetime, and far more than most people who don't even know what DRM/DCE is let alone AACS, and definitely more than the pirates! Heck do you even think this code leak has affected sales considering the size of an output file, and the cost of blank media?!? GET REAL! :roll:

What that code proves is that the DRM only affects those who want to buy the content in the first place, those who were gonna be pirates cracked this and strip it right off long before the consumer is given the tools to do what is granted to them under the terms of fair use.

Seriously don't lecture me until you know WTF you're talking about you RIAA RAT !!
May 16, 2007 6:24:54 PM

It's posts like the previous one that remind (not that I'd ever forget) why the Ape is so respected here. I'm not the biggest fan of Canada (hey, just being honest) but any country that doesn't have to deal with the RIAA/MPAA can't be all bad.
May 16, 2007 7:16:42 PM

DRM is nothing but a scam to profit from honest people.
May 16, 2007 7:24:32 PM

Thanks again for the input.
I saved the extra i paid on a graphics card by not paying the £10 for next day delivery and went for 5 working days.
To clear up a point about future compatibility. It wasn't so much a Direct X 9 to 10 that i was trying to imply, more the different in shader model the later card uses. I've had it before that a game will require shader model 2 but at the time only had cards with shader model 1. So the game was a no go, even though the pc would have happily run the game otherwise. This was a case of a mid range card that was a couple of years old..i think. Well you get the point anyway. kids are more bothered that the game runs and at a playable speed rather than at high resolutions and all the detail up max.They don't know about the ability to change res and detail till they get older.
I'll soon find out if it's the right card for now and may be a couple of years till i find out if it was the best choice.
As for the comments about the copying of discs and fair use, all i have to say on this is you try having a few sisters also with kids and see how many times you would have to buy the same disc when it's being passed about chewed and driblled on by kids and dogs, left laying about stood on etc etc. Without being able to make a copy i'd still be using commodore vic 20 with the cost of replacing discs.
a b U Graphics card
May 16, 2007 8:17:20 PM

I understand on both counts.

I think considering the light load (kids' gaming) but greater longevity for your build, it is a consideration. I started pulling my recommendation for the strong X800XTs as it was becoming clear that within 6-12 months more games would start appearing with SM3.0 as a base, and for you the same is likely to happen (with SM4.0 and DX10 being synonymous for the change/break), as a long term kid's gamer rig, it will outlast the GF7600, which is a great card, no doubt, but I assume you're not keen on rolling over the system by this time next year. And while many would argue and likely correctly that SM3.0/DX9 will be around for a long time, the other thing to consider is the driver support, while mediocre now, I don't doubt that for the long term you will have better support from the newer marchitecture.

And really I think the price/performance difference for your options are alot closer than some of the ones we've discussed on the US site NewEgg, so I'd say yours was a good choice, but like my mantra on buying electronics is, buy what you think is the best, and once you've tested it to make sure it fits your needs, never look back regardless of what else comes out, cause you made a rational well informed decision.

As for the copying disks and such, yeah exactly. I don't have kids, although I told my cousin to do that instead of buying replacements every 3 monts, but I'd also hate to be stuck carrying my original CDs around to work or in the car, without worrying about them getting tossed around by 'the navigator'.
I would love to have had more ability to copy in the past since I went through 4 copies of Ferri Bueller on VHS before I got it on Laser Disk and then to VCD, and then DVD. Just call it my 'I'm bored before the age of good cable TV and the internet' film.
May 28, 2007 5:32:18 AM

Just thought i'd post to say how things went. I did get ther 8600 card but ended up paying a few extra pounds and got the athlonX2 5600. I never paid the extra soo that was ok.
Wasn't any problems with putting the thing together and it's running stable at 25 degrees C on the processors and like 35 for the system when idle. Not too bad i thought seeing as it's in an old case with no case fans. Oh yea using some cheapish £25ish PSU thats 450 watts. Looking like it will be ok with this system as i've only got the one harddrive and the one dvd drive in it. Card wise it's got a tv tuner card and an old 24bit live soundcaard. I've not tried any usb stuff with it yet, maybe i should.
The graphics card has turned out to be better than i expected, it's fan is totaly silent. I can actualy see a difference in playback of video, which i've never noticed before with previous new pc's and graphics cards.
I should maybe do a benchmark for it which is the free one most use 3D Mark05???
So at this point i don't think the 8600 was a bad buy at all.
a b U Graphics card
May 28, 2007 7:20:09 AM

Coolio, glad it worked out.

Best benchmarks to get a feel for where your system fits in are the 3D mark series, I suggest 03, 05 and 06.

But here's a link to a bunch of test benchies and demos for fun;
http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?id=6

If you want to see a very nice looking demo, see if you can run the ATi Toyshop demo (I'm not sute if it'll work on a GF8 series card), it's really impressive as a demo. There's also alot of GF8 demos like Froggy, Cascades, and even the Human head (likely slow/laggy on a GF8600).


PS, be sure to click my HEX link, it's been updated. :twisted:
.
a b U Graphics card
May 28, 2007 8:55:22 AM

LOL PS, be sure to click my HEX link, it's been updated.
:lol:  :lol: 
a b U Graphics card
May 28, 2007 9:36:50 AM

Quote:

PS, be sure to click my HEX link, it's been updated. :twisted:
.


NICE! Someone has spent ALOT of time putting that together!!
May 28, 2007 9:48:06 AM

Well results:
3Dmark 03 = 15259
3Dmark 06 = 4642

Not sure if these scores are good, bad or indifferent.
From the top scores it seems to be the 8800 cards so i'm assuming it's my graphics card holding my scores low. Have to wait a year or something then get something thats as powerful as those.
a b U Graphics card
May 28, 2007 11:32:18 PM

Quote:

NICE! Someone has spent ALOT of time putting that together!!


Yeah it's actually a professor of media studies' work, he probably got some of his students to cobble it together for him. :mrgreen:
a b U Graphics card
May 28, 2007 11:33:22 PM

Those are solid results, and within the realm of what I'd expect of a GF8600GT.

Hope the kids enjoy it. 8)
May 29, 2007 4:29:29 AM

Depends what the PC will mainly be used for.

I like to play the occasional game (bargain bin) but the primary use is audio recording and Hi Def TV.

My old video card was good in it's day, but after aquiring an ASTC USB2.0 TV tuner, it couldn't seem to dish out Hi Def TV, so it was time to go shopping.

With Vista (DX-10) already on the computer and my mobo (775 Dual-VSTA) having a PCI-E slot (as well as AGP) I thought the 8600 GTS was suitable for what I'll need for a while to come.
It came with a rebate as well, so shop around. :D 
a b U Graphics card
May 29, 2007 4:54:58 AM

Good advice.... but she probably won't be doing any more shopping around, as she's already got it, installed it, benched it, and probably given it a nickname.

But kudos non the less. :twisted:
May 29, 2007 11:02:43 AM

Get the 8600GT only if you can have it to a 7600GT price or very close, because honestly the 8600GT doesn't perform any good in dx10, all the dx10 demo i have tested up to now, its not playable (20fps) average. Maybe fully dx10 game engine will boost this up but its not worth it to buy a 8600GT for dx10 features unless new game prove it. But the good thing about the GT is the overclocking, you can expect some overclock and be able to perform good as the 8600GTS withou any big heat difference.
May 29, 2007 4:54:11 PM

Quote:
Ok i'm building a new PC as a second/third PC. PC won't be my main games one. Pc will be passed about and or upgraded for a few years to nieces and family. The price is pretty much at a maxium now so realy not looking for "buy this it's only another £10" comments. Parts i'm buying are:
Motherboard: MSI K9N4 Ultra-F
Processor: AMD Athlon 64x2 4600+
RAM: 2 GIG of PC2-6400 value ram

All the other parts i have kicking about except a half decent video card.
Been thinking of either
Point of view 7600GT 256mb GDDR3 @ £65
or
Inno3D 8600GT 256mb GDDR3 @ £77

PC won't realy be overclocked and looking for a solid card for use now and for a few years to come. Will be using a 17 or 19 inch LCD monitor so not realy going to be using high resolutions or anything. Might be expecting to be able to run a few current or year old games at medium settings and games for like 7 -10 year old kids in a year odd.
AS i've mentioned don't realy want to be adding to the price as it's already more than i was planning on spending as is:
Anythoughts on the video card would be helpfull.



Hmmmm,What it comes down to is this,,if you are planning to upgrade to Vista then you "should" consider the 8600,if not then the 7600gt is all you need,,,simple,,,,,,,no??:) )
a b U Graphics card
May 29, 2007 11:54:20 PM

Quote:
Get the 8600GT only if you can have it to a 7600GT price or very close, because honestly the 8600GT doesn't perform any good in dx10, all the dx10 demo i have tested up to now, its not playable (20fps) average.


Rememebr the rest of her thread though, it's a LONG term build to be passed on, and max settings isn't as important as being able to play with even all the sliders on low on what's already low res LCD (17-19) for a longer period of time. And no overclocking.

For this I'd take the option of weak DX10 for a multi-year build. For anyone who's an enthusiast building every year or two that's fine. But this is for general use, not 1337 gaming from someone who's looking to PWN everyone.

I think she made the right choice for long term maximum features.
It's not a huge value play for those of us who get more benefit out of an X1950Pro, but for her, I think it's perfect. Sure there are better options if you a) wait, b) spend more money; but neither of those options seemed to be attractive in the original post.
May 30, 2007 2:10:09 AM

Yep i'm with the great ape.
I've tried a few of the new demos out for game, although not DX10 as i'm using XP and they all seem to run ok and medium settings. Since max resolution being used is 1280X1024 having the latest and greatest wouldn't have been cost effective i thought and anyway didn't want to spend that much. Although down the line at some point when the current prices and/or newer cards come out another midrange in about a year and a half with bring new life into the PC due to being limited by the video card at the moment.
I'm happy with the card for two reasons, one it's silent and i have noticed it plays videos with better quality than the 7600. I know the 7600 card i was thinking of getting wasn't exactly quiet. Two, i realy do think having the newer spec ie DX10 and err the video decoding will pay off at some point.
Oh yes on a side note, when the PC is booting it's shows as 8600 gt 256MB
but on all the benchmarking things and in system details etc it shows as 512MB. Anybody have any ideas as to why that is??
a b U Graphics card
May 30, 2007 3:27:26 AM

Quote:

Oh yes on a side note, when the PC is booting it's shows as 8600 gt 256MB
but on all the benchmarking things and in system details etc it shows as 512MB. Anybody have any ideas as to why that is??


When the driver feels the need or the application requests it (or makes it availabel) you card will offer the additional memory as 'TurboCache' (ATi/AMD's version is called HyperMemory). You can disable this feature, but it shouldn't negatively affect performance (other than offer you options not previously offered for a 256MB card, and those features usually kill the midrange). Like if now suddenly you have UberUltra Textures as an option, you may want to put the setting back to High or Medium (whatever the highest smooth playable at no IQ penalty is), since the Uber settings are really meant for the Uber card with both the core power and memory size and bandwidth.

Overall it's a good thing if it's good at dynamically controlling useage. I haven't seen any tests yet on whether it's as good as the previous generation or not, but I have no reason to believe it's worse, so think of it as a free bonus since it doesn't actually reserve the memory it just leaves it open for use if needed (similar to agp apperture). It can dynamically change the loading of card and system memory should your card or system need more of it.

I would never buy a card based on the TurboCache memory size, always tell people to buy based on memory size on the card itself, but it's a nice feature that helps sometimes, and is easily disabled if you really need to.
!