Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

2600XT beats the 8600 GTS in Bioshock?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 8, 2007 4:50:01 PM

Hey!
I am having troubles finding sites that benchmarked the 2600XT and the 8600GTS, using the latest drivers.
I know of the gamespot benchmarks

http://uk.gamespot.com/features/6177688/p-6.html

And on these benchmarks the 2600XT beats the 8600 GTS in bioshock in the resolution I play in.
This is pretty surprising to me.
Are there more sites that did benchmarks with the latest drivers?

Also how much more power does the 8600 GTS use than the 2600XT?
September 8, 2007 6:07:07 PM

2600xt uses a lot less, but for the amount it is its not even worth taking it into the equation.
September 8, 2007 6:15:05 PM

2600xt is all over the place for gaming. I wouldn't get it unless for HTPC.
Related resources
September 8, 2007 6:22:12 PM

Well the thing is, I play in 1024 * 768.
Games I play are world of warcraft, bioshock, all half life II titles, and possibly stalker.


This is why the 2600XT would be a good one for me, with 2 2600XT's in Crossfire as a possible future upgrade.
I have a coolermaster 380 watt power supply and allready know I won't need a new PSU with the 2600XT.
Further more, the 2600XT is a bit cheaper than the 8600GT, let stand the 8600GTS.

The only problem that I find is that almost all hardware sites do not use the latest drivers for benchmarking with for example bioshock.
I mean, ATI made new drivers ESPECIALLY for bioshock, why not update reviews if you're serious about informing buyers about hardware performance?

Of course toms hardware is the best example of outdated benchmarks and reviews when it comes to this.
September 8, 2007 6:36:11 PM

Other sites were using the hot-fix patch. I didn't know ATI had more recent drivers other than the hot-fix patch. Before the hot-fix bioshock was not playable. I think 8600gts wins looking at many different sources but it does beat 8600gt in this game.

You got 1 thing right. Tom's Hardware does use old drivers to tell it's readers which card is better. :sarcastic: 

2600xt does fine in raw speed compared to 8600gt. But it does terrible once AA is applied. 8600gt is just more solid if you want to play other games too. Far as price though they're about same.
September 8, 2007 6:45:34 PM

Yeah Jakc, you're absolutely right. I have been going back and forth on getting an oc'ed 8600gt or a 2600xt for my wife's computer. I've found virtually nothing that compares these cards using ati's new drivers. Just forum gossip about how much better the 2600xt runs using them. I personally would consider an xfx 8600gt xxx edition before the 8600gts. Last I checked it's $120 after MIR. A pretty good price and free shipping. And the shader clock runs faster on the oc gt version than the stock gts. Plus no power cable needed. But if the 2600xt is really that improved with new drivers; who the hell knows which to buy. Especially without any fresh benchies. Here is an older review of the xfx oc'ed cards, just to show the difference in the shader clocks.
http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1086&pageID=3330
I'm sure any of those 3 will really fly at that resolution though.
September 8, 2007 6:52:58 PM

Latest drivers are 7.8 and there's a hot-fix patch. it does perform better when they were first released but 8600gt/gts has too.
September 8, 2007 7:21:54 PM

But looking at the gamespot benchmarks, the 2600XT beats the 8600GTS in the resolution 1024*768 on the highest settings.
Does anyone know whether this benchmark is trustable?
September 9, 2007 11:20:43 AM

I bought a HD2600XT in the end.
Almost done with Bioshock ;+)
September 9, 2007 11:25:43 AM

congrats. You will regret it later... Maybe... :lol: 
September 9, 2007 12:03:49 PM

Jakc said:
I bought a HD2600XT in the end.
Almost done with Bioshock ;+)

would you kindly give me all that you own.... (:lol: , finish the game before reading)
!