Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

7600gt to 8600gt Upgrade questions. Quick Response?

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Performance
  • AMD
  • Memory
  • Graphics
  • Product
Last response: in Graphics Cards
November 26, 2007 4:44:13 PM

I currently have a 760gt with a AMD X2 3800+ at 2.2GHz and 2 Gb of Memory.

What percentage performance gain could I expect for an upgrade to 8600? 50% Increase,
Is there a better upgrade for $175 or less?

Would a 512MB version give a noticeable performance gain over the average 256MB?

Thanks for the answers, the 8800gt and 3870 are not option due to availability issues.

More about : 7600gt 8600gt upgrade questions quick response

November 26, 2007 6:08:31 PM

Then wait.
Imo don't bother with an inferior card just because you can't wait.
a b U Graphics card
November 26, 2007 6:37:06 PM

The two cards are very close in performance in DX9 mode, so the only reason to get the 8600 would be DX10 mode. Unfortunately it is a very poor performer in that area.

In short, any upgrade less than an 8800gt, ATI 3 series would be a waste of money.
Related resources
November 26, 2007 7:15:49 PM

Will the 3850 be a noticeable jump in performance? The cost of the 3870 and the 8800gt are also to high for me, if the 3870 was still 220 though. oh well the 3850 then?
a c 224 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
a b } Memory
November 26, 2007 7:32:33 PM

The 3850 performs about as fast as the x1950XT, which was a much faster card then the 7600/8600GT. If you can afford the 3850, it would provide the boost you are looking for.

I'm not sure the 7900GS would provide enough "ummph" that you could feel. Like the x1950pro, its is faster then your 7600GT, but not jaw dropping so. If you already have a 7600GT, I'd look for something with lots of power that would make you happy. 8800GT, 3870/3850, x1950XT, 7950GT, etc.
November 26, 2007 8:16:47 PM

ill say wait. dont waste ur money on **** graphics card. just wait.
November 26, 2007 9:30:02 PM

The 3850 would be a lot faster than your 7600gt, and if you can find one with 512MB that would be even better. The RV670 is powerful enough to warrant the extra VRAM.
a b U Graphics card
November 27, 2007 12:36:18 AM

If you have a 19" monitor, a 256mb is fine. For 22" or larger, 512 is better. More video ram has more to do with higher resolutions than performance. In other words, you would notice little difference at 1280x1024(19").
November 27, 2007 5:25:38 AM

do any knows what are the new cards..and when they are comming n prices too...thanks man
November 27, 2007 12:30:47 PM

tlmck said:
If you have a 19" monitor, a 256mb is fine. For 22" or larger, 512 is better. More video ram has more to do with higher resolutions than performance. In other words, you would notice little difference at 1280x1024(19").

Textures use VRAM too, and some games require quite a lot (512MB) to function properly with high settings. Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter 2 and that Lord of the Rings MMO are a couple of examples. Of course, different games will utilize the extra VRAM better than others, but the trend seems to be towards 512MB as a minimum for high settings.
a b U Graphics card
November 27, 2007 3:10:53 PM

homerdog said:
Textures use VRAM too, and some games require quite a lot (512MB) to function properly with high settings. Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter 2 and that Lord of the Rings MMO are a couple of examples. Of course, different games will utilize the extra VRAM better than others, but the trend seems to be towards 512MB as a minimum for high settings.

In theory you are correct. I am just waiting for the game that makes it fact. Heck, I'm still waiting for that magical 512mb card they told us we needed to run Doom3/Quake4 in "ultra mode".

Personally, I think the mystical high end is just a marketing invention to keep people forever upgrading.
November 27, 2007 3:46:45 PM

tlmck said:
In theory you are correct. I am just waiting for the game that makes it fact. Heck, I'm still waiting for that magical 512mb card they told us we needed to run Doom3/Quake4 in "ultra mode".

Personally, I think the mystical high end is just a marketing invention to keep people forever upgrading.

As I stated, Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter 2 requires a "magical" 512MB card to enable high texture settings unless you hack the .cfg file, which can cause strange things to happen. World in Conflict will let you choose high, but performance takes a significant hit. The point is that 256MB is not enough for a powerful GPU like the RV670 to stretch its legs.

If a 512MB card is out of the price range 256 will do, but sometimes textures will have to be lowered
a c 116 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
a b } Memory
November 27, 2007 4:53:07 PM

if you got a fatty for the 8600 get the gts version should...will see big gains
a c 116 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
a b } Memory
November 27, 2007 4:58:16 PM

but not 50%
a c 224 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
a b } Memory
November 27, 2007 5:38:39 PM

Get the 8600GTS? Unless it is priced around $100, I wouldn't bother with it.