Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

9600GT Predictions

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 8, 2008 7:06:55 PM

How do you guys think it will perform compared to the 8800 series of graphics cards?

How much heat output to you expect?

How much power do you think it will consume?

Do you expect it to be popular?

More about : 9600gt predictions

a b U Graphics card
February 8, 2008 7:16:19 PM

It will perform below most GF8800s and above the GF8600GTS, close to the level currently occupied by the GF880GS of the GF8800GT-256 , and the HD3850 on the AMD side.

It will likely consume close to the same power as a GF8600GTS with about + 10W IMO. It should require less power than the GF8800GT-256.

If priced right it should be very popular, but it will relly on pricing since that segment is getting a little occupied with competition including old GTS-320 stock and of course it's current direct competition the HD3850. I would also expect the HD3650 price to change with it's launch too if the price is low enough.
February 8, 2008 7:22:20 PM

It would give 3870 good competition and is bit faster than 3850. Power requirements should be very similar to 3870 as well.

9600gt is nothing more than g92 8800gts with 64SP shaved off.
Related resources
February 8, 2008 7:35:25 PM

what are the facts out there?

I know it's supposed to be between the 8800GS and the 8800GT, but that's kind of where the HD3870 is.
a b U Graphics card
February 8, 2008 7:37:26 PM

Actually, the HD3870 is well above that since you don't seem to take into account GT-256 is nowhere near GT-512.

What you're describing is where the HD3850 is, it beats the GF8800GT-256 more often than not.

The GF9600 has half the shader power of the GF8800 and twice that of the GF8600, and is not ridiculously clocked on either the core or the memory.
February 8, 2008 8:17:50 PM

Nice double post.

So I'm guessing it's about the same as the 8800GTS 320MB?
February 8, 2008 8:18:51 PM

It should be very close to 8800gts 640MB
February 8, 2008 8:21:09 PM

Im expecting it to rake a lot of money with the 9 series name lmao


For a midrange card aslong as its priced good say around the 8600GT/GTS level when they were first released then I can see it being a real winner.
February 8, 2008 8:31:45 PM

Nvidia is too worried about AMD. Nvidia releasing these cards just to compete with AMD price segments. :na: 

3870 or 3850 512mb is still a better card with full 320sp shaders. But I guess if you are an Nvidian. :lol: 

These 9600gt seems to be good but I think as time progress it will be slower than HD3000 series on shader intensive games.
a b U Graphics card
February 8, 2008 8:58:35 PM

I think really it's probably best user would be the potential GF9600GS user who is looking for something around/under the $150 price range, to compete close the the HD2900Pro.
February 8, 2008 9:30:13 PM

Exactly... If you have the power supply you can't beat 2900pro performance. It can hang with the the best of them.

These 9600gt are supposed to be in 3850 prices but these 64sp is weaker than AMD full 320sp.

You need at least 96SP to compete with AMD's 320SP.
February 8, 2008 10:45:52 PM

Makes me very curious because sometimes the specs don't mean all the performance they should, such as the 2900XT was better than most in the #'s but not when it came to real world performance it was just "ok". I think it's gonna be another one of those cases for the 9600GT, but this time it might not seem to be splendertastic and in the end might be pretty good. I remember when the 7600GT came out we weren't too sure of it's performance but for the price and segment it was pretty spectacular. Then again we hoped that the 8600GTS was gonna be great and it pretty much sucked for the price paid. I just can't find anything that really hints at performance levels or anything that says it's gonna suck or be great. Who know's, only time will tell.

How do you guys think it'll place compared just to the 8800 series?
February 8, 2008 11:07:42 PM

T8RR8R said:
Makes me very curious because sometimes the specs don't mean all the performance they should, such as the 2900XT was better than most in the #'s but not when it came to real world performance it was just "ok". I think it's gonna be another one of those cases for the 9600GT, but this time it might not seem to be splednertastic and in the end might be pretty good. I remember when the 7600GT came out we weren't too sure of it's performance but for the price and segment it was pretty spectacular. Then again we hoped that the 8600GTS was gonna be great and it pretty much sucked for the price paid. I just can't find anything that really hints at performance levels or anything that says it's gonna suck or be great. Who know's, only time will tell.

How do you guys think it'll place compared just to the 8800 series?


Specs do matter but X company has certain way of doing things.
February 9, 2008 12:34:59 AM

Just like I was saying about the 2900XT, it was great for 3DMark06 but not so great when it came to games. Where as the 8800GTX was good on 3DMark06 but totally ruled compared even to the 2900XT on games. Which shows that each company has it's own ways of doing things and that specs only mean so much. This all makes me wonder how these specs for the 9600GT will actually end up performance wise.

If anybody finds anything new keep us all posted, hopefully the 9600GT will really put the buttons on the HD3870 even more than the 8800GT. Not that I want ATI to die, but I'd like to see ATI push themselves to at least give us a better price/performance ratio on the better end of their cards.
a b U Graphics card
February 9, 2008 12:53:25 AM

Any one have any real benches for the 9600s?
a b U Graphics card
February 9, 2008 1:01:29 AM

You know....I was thinking that when the 9600GT came out that ATI would HAVE TO drop their prices on the HD3850 cards.

But I am not so sure that will happen. AMAZINGLY you can get several 8800GTs for CHEAPER than a good number of HD3870 cards on newegg rgiht now and the 8800GT hands down is a better performer.

I think ATI is trying to get all of the money out of the market that they can. Either them or Newegg. I guess Newegg because the MSRP of the HD3870 is suppose to be $219. And a lot of them are selling for $249 and up.

However the MSRP on the 8800GT is suppose to be $250 and newegg have several cards right now that are coming in at $229 to @ $239 price range.

As long as ATI is moving cards the market might not respond as fast as some of us would like.
February 9, 2008 1:06:19 AM

I want to see the 9800GT! F this low end crap. I expect it to beat the HD3850 though...slightly.
a b U Graphics card
February 9, 2008 1:11:33 AM

The 9600GT in one benchmark beat the HD3850 by 400 points in the 3DMark 06.

ATI use to be known for underselling Nvidia but I think Nvidia has become the value leader right now.

I just got off of Newegg and found that there were FOUR 8800GTS that were priced under Sapphire's HD3870.

And these are good companies too. XFX, MSI, and others. They were selling for $229 where as the HD3870 was selling for $234.

I think Nvidia is going to be Ultra Agressive pricing wise with the launch of the 9600GT. It would not surprised me if they undersold ATIs 3850 series across the board.
February 9, 2008 1:39:05 AM

T8RR8R said:
Just like I was saying about the 2900XT, it was great for 3DMark06 but not so great when it came to games. Where as the 8800GTX was good on 3DMark06 but totally ruled compared even to the 2900XT on games. Which shows that each company has it's own ways of doing things and that specs only mean so much. This all makes me wonder how these specs for the 9600GT will actually end up performance wise.

If anybody finds anything new keep us all posted, hopefully the 9600GT will really put the buttons on the HD3870 even more than the 8800GT. Not that I want ATI to die, but I'd like to see ATI push themselves to at least give us a better price/performance ratio on the better end of their cards.


3dmark sway more with shader performance. It's a synthetic benchmark. Not a real game.

Anyone who knows about GPU would tell you GTX would totally outperform a 2900xt even if you saw 2900xt get really close to GTX in 3dmark.

As for 9600gt. It has only 64SP which can be crippling in future games compared to 3870.
February 9, 2008 2:28:13 AM

Well, at least I know my GTS 320 wont be outdone by midrange in this next generation; GO 96 SP and 320-bit bus!
a b U Graphics card
February 9, 2008 6:25:47 AM

rwayne said:

I just got off of Newegg and found that there were FOUR 8800GTS that were priced under Sapphire's HD3870.

And these are good companies too. XFX, MSI, and others. They were selling for $229 where as the HD3870 was selling for $234.


Guess you missed the two HD3870 for $209 and $229, eh? :heink: 

Of course there is no GTS cards selling for less than the HD3870, only the GT cards.
a b U Graphics card
February 9, 2008 6:41:29 AM

T8RR8R said:
Makes me very curious because sometimes the specs don't mean all the performance they should, such as the 2900XT was better than most in the #'s but not when it came to real world performance it was just "ok".


That would be the case if the architecture were vastly different, but the GF9600 is just a variation on the G92 design with different ratios. So it's definitely going to underperform the GF8800GT-512, but because the GF8800GS is crippled in a different way (including less ROPs) it's more of an issue. Just like in the review above it would've been better to have a 512MB competitor when possible (GS needs to be 384) to avoid limiting the card outside of the core differences.

Anywhoo, different architectures are hard to predict on specs, but the same architecture is much easier to predict.
February 9, 2008 9:13:23 AM

Definitely going to out perform 8800GTX SLI. ;) 
February 9, 2008 9:33:01 AM

marvelous211 said:
3dmark sway more with shader performance. It's a synthetic benchmark. Not a real game.

Anyone who knows about GPU would tell you GTX would totally outperform a 2900xt even if you saw 2900xt get really close to GTX in 3dmark.

As for 9600gt. It has only 64SP which can be crippling in future games compared to 3870.


That depends on the driver support. Without decent drivers the simple shaders on the 38xx series won't work much and reduce the card to it's 64 complex shaders. And there we have a familiar number.
On the other hand, the 3850 can improve a lot more with drivers than the competition. Let's hope amd is comitted to their products.
February 9, 2008 10:56:28 AM

I guess somewhere around 3870-ish.
It will definitely be placed very close to G92, like G92 was placed very close to GTX/Ultra. This leaves no room for ATi to place any cards in that segment.
a b U Graphics card
February 9, 2008 11:06:37 AM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
Guess you missed the two HD3870 for $209 and $229, eh? :heink:  Of course there is no GTS cards selling for less than the HD3870, only the GT cards.
The Gigabyte HD3870 for $209 runs off of DDR3 Ram though.

Most of the HD3870s run off of DDR4 ram. The cheapest DDR4 one I could find was by Diamond for $229 which is the same price at Zotac's, MSI's, & XFX's 8800GTs. (not GTS, GT(s) plural)

I don't see why anyone would buy a HD3870 when seeing the pricing of the 8800GTs. In some cases you could actally pay more $$$ for less performance with several of the 3870s.

Why aren't ATI's prices more competitive? Especially when there are plenty of 8800GT(s) available now.
February 9, 2008 2:26:26 PM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
That would be the case if the architecture were vastly different, but the GF9600 is just a variation on the G92 design with different ratios. So it's definitely going to underperform the GF8800GT-512, but because the GF8800GS is crippled in a different way (including less ROPs) it's more of an issue. Just like in the review above it would've been better to have a 512MB competitor when possible (GS needs to be 384) to avoid limiting the card outside of the core differences.

Anywhoo, different architectures are hard to predict on specs, but the same architecture is much easier to predict.


Excellent post. That's what I was trying to say above but you seem to be better with words.
February 9, 2008 9:14:50 PM

Am I the only one amused at graphics card naming nowadays? A 9600 from Nvidia and a 9800gx2. Makes me think the R770 should be designated the HD 4200.

The 9600 looks good and I still might get a one later on this year. I moved the X2 4600+ off of an Nvidia 405 chipset board to an ATI 690V board for a 3870x2 upgrade and might move it back when a reliable B3 triple core Phenom arrives.

!