Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Future-proof 8800GS(9600GSO) or 9600GT

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 10, 2008 2:12:01 AM

Which of these cards is the more future-proof card?
8800GS(9600GSO)?
(96SP,192-bitBW,768VRam,48texture units,12ROP...)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geforce8#Technical_summary
Or the 9600GT?
(64SP,256-bitBW,512VRam,32texture units,16ROP...)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geforce_9#Technical_Specif...
Okay, 64Stream processors, enough for 2 years ahead?
192-bit bandwidth. enough for 2 years ahead?
What about others? Which is more FUTURE-PROOF.
Technology-wise they have the same stuffs. Don't they?
May 10, 2008 3:05:56 AM

Never heard of a 768MB 9600GT.

The 768MB 9600GSO is a rebranded 8800GS. I would say if anything, the 768MB 8800GS would possible outlast a 512MB 9600GT. But more likely, I expect about the same life out of the two.
May 10, 2008 3:08:12 AM

Sorry, typo mistake, it's 512mb.
I corrected it already.
What's the thing in these card that'll give the upper hand?
SPs? Bandwidth? Vram?ROPs, TMU,....dadada.....
Related resources
May 10, 2008 3:49:30 AM

romulus47plus1 said:
Sorry, typo mistake, it's 512mb.
I corrected it already.
What's the thing in these card that'll give the upper hand?
SPs? Bandwidth? Vram?ROPs, TMU,....dadada.....

They're about the same, with 9600gt slightly faster. They are both barely okay for serious gaming right now, but there is no way they'll last 2 years. Those are mid level budget gaming cards, not high end cards. High end cards are at least 800s (8800/9800) and up, not 600s(8600/9600) of each generation.
May 10, 2008 4:13:39 AM

At lower resolutions my vote goes to 8800gs.

9600gt is better if you want AA at higher resolutions but it will get slower than 8800gs as games use more complex shader.
May 10, 2008 4:38:34 AM

romulus47plus1 said:
K, I think the 768Vram of the 8800GS helped here


The only game that eats up more than 384 megs of vram are.....

Crysis @ 1920x1200 high settings and WIC @ 1600x1200 and above especially with AA.

You won't notice whole lot of difference between 768mb model and the 384mb model in most of the games today except for those 2 games, not that 8800gs has enough umph to play crysis @ 1920x1200. 768mb model is faster because it's clocked higher in those tests.
May 10, 2008 6:32:32 AM

There's 2 versions of 8800gs. One is 550/1375/1600. The other is 650/1625/1800. Seems like Galaxy is the higher clocked version with bigger memory module. Couldn't tell you if it's better than the previous one because 768mb models do not exist in the market. At least not in USA.
May 10, 2008 1:30:47 PM

romulus47plus1 said:
K, I think the 768Vram of the 8800GS helped here


http://en.expreview.com/2008/04/02/g80-vs-g92-hi-end-ge...

That huge data sum up chart will show you 384MB vs 768MB. BUT, the clock speeds are totally different, which hurts comparisons. The (cheap in the USA) evga 8800GS 384MB superclock at 680/1900 is higher clocked than both and I'd wager would have beat the 768MB version in the majority of their tests. In this review, Crysis and WIC look like the only games with AA that the 768MB pulled ahead by more than it's clock speed advantage. I know from my own testing, the 384MB 8800GS hit's a wall at 1600x1200 4xaa/16xaf in Crysis and to some extent Test Drive Unlimited and Oblivion.
May 10, 2008 1:40:14 PM

marvelous211 said:
There's 2 versions of 8800gs. One is 550/1375/1600. The other is 650/1625/1800. Seems like Galaxy is the higher clocked version with bigger memory module. Couldn't tell you if it's better than the previous one because 768mb models do not exist in the market. At least not in USA.

There are more than two variations of the 384MB anyway. Newegg alone, all 4 cards differed in clocks listed below. Reference (if there is one) seems to be 550/1600 as more than one brand uses those exact clocks.

XFX 580/1400
XFX 680/1600
evga 550/1600
evga 650/1900

edit: Not sure about 768MB versions.
May 10, 2008 2:03:48 PM

pauldh said:
There are more than two variations of the 384MB anyway. Newegg alone, all 4 cards differed in clocks listed below. Reference (if there is one) seems to be 550/1600 as more than one brand uses those exact clocks.

XFX 580/1400
XFX 680/1600
evga 550/1600
evga 650/1900

edit: Not sure about 768MB versions.

Just buy the cheapest stock card. Factory oc is the same as do-it-yourself oc. :p 
May 10, 2008 2:04:04 PM

None of them are enough to future-proof a gaming PC, they are lower midrange gaming cards right now as is.
A 8800GTS G92 would be my bottom end pick.
May 10, 2008 2:22:17 PM

dagger said:
Just buy the cheapest stock card. Factory oc is the same as do-it-yourself oc. :p 

True, if priced apart I agree with that. Except in the USA, the evga supeclock is $5-12 more than the slowest XFX, comes with a better cooler, and I believe faster ram chips. I can't see buying any other GS right now here in the states. If evga's 550/1600 card was $99 AR shipped, then it would be fine as they seem to be identical to the SC that is $111 shipped AR.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=E...
May 10, 2008 4:04:46 PM

If you payed attention to the recent video card industry shader performance dictates longevity.

pixel and texel performance with a combination of memory bandwidth gives you the performance in games now long as it's not shader limited.

edit: Updated the OP wiki pages. :) 
May 10, 2008 4:08:28 PM

pauldh said:
There are more than two variations of the 384MB anyway. Newegg alone, all 4 cards differed in clocks listed below. Reference (if there is one) seems to be 550/1600 as more than one brand uses those exact clocks.

XFX 580/1400
XFX 680/1600
evga 550/1600
evga 650/1900

edit: Not sure about 768MB versions.


Yeah there are many versions depending on the supplier. It seems Nvidia manufacturer specs are what I mentioned above which EVGA seemed to follow directions.
May 10, 2008 7:23:11 PM

There is no such thing as future proofing n the computer world in my own humble opinion. I believe the 9600GT is a little bit faster, but then it depends on the game. I would grab a 9600GT, but if you can get a great price on the 8800GS then that works too.
May 10, 2008 7:32:32 PM

doomsdaydave11 said:
There is no such thing as future proofing n the computer world in my own humble opinion. I believe the 9600GT is a little bit faster, but then it depends on the game. I would grab a 9600GT, but if you can get a great price on the 8800GS then that works too.


Of course there is such thing as future proofing.

I bought a P965 board when it was first released. After 2 years I can stick the fastest CPU available and don't need to change motherboards.

GPU is same way. If you study up on it. Some video cards last longer than others at the same price point.

May 10, 2008 7:42:59 PM

marvelous211 said:
Of course there is such thing as future proofing.

I bought a P965 board when it was first released. After 2 years I can stick the fastest CPU available and don't need to change motherboards.

GPU is same way. If you study up on it. Some video cards last longer than others at the same price point.
Yes, that is the case in some aspects, but it depends on what you mean by "futureproofing". In 6 months, something that you bought brand new is already outdated, and something new and better is out. Sure you can get a brand new socket/chipset mobo, but this thread is not about motherboards.

I partially agree with the last part of your post. Some vid cards do last longer then others I supposed, but "at the same price point" doesnt make sense, unless one outperforms the other. It's not like games won't support a 8xxx card, but will support a 9xxx card. Especially when the 9xxx series isn't really anything special. It's finding the sweet spot for price/performance that will get you a "futureproof" card. And both the 8800GS and the 9600GT are good options for both.
May 10, 2008 9:50:05 PM

Let's look at 7900gs vs 1950pro for instance. At the time they both had similar frame rates at similar cost. Usually 7900gs had better performance in more games than 1950pro did at the time of release. As games got more complex 1950pro became equal footing with 7950gt and 7900gtx depending on the game because it had 3 fragmented pipes and 7900gs didn't and lacked shader operations. I see the same situation coming when developers use more complex shader in future titles. 8800gs will be a bit better than 9600gt at lower resolutions where all cards end up anyway.

Not to mention CUDA physics is dependent on SP which 8800gs has 33% more than 9600gt.

All of this come into play when we are talking about future proofing between these 2 cards.
May 11, 2008 1:02:49 AM

The GF79 vs X19 scenario is a great example. And one we predicted would make the X19's be better down the road. We got early glimpses of it coming true in Oblivion and Need for Speed Carbon.

But I always put X1950 pro and X1800XT above a 7900GS. The 7900GT was more like a peer to them IMO. Without fsaa pretty close, with FSAA the radeons typically won even against the GT. But back then it truely was trading blows. Now, it's often a blowout.
May 11, 2008 4:39:10 AM

Over here, the 8800GS 768MB version is still cheaper than 9600GT.

I think the SP and the Vram will help the 8800GS outlast the 9600GT
September 1, 2008 5:54:57 PM

The 9600GSO have 96 Streaming Processors except XFX's. On the other hand 9600GT has only 64 processors. This makes a difference when AA and AF are enabled. Games like Crysis, Jericho, WIC n CoD makes this difference more recognizable at higher resolutions. The clocks are differnt for both the cards but the texture fill rate of GSO's(96 SP) are better than GT's. 9600GSO has a 192 bit interface as compared to the 256 bit of 9600GT but is still better than the 128 bit interface. However, this difference does'nt effect the in-game performance of the GSO much. 9600GSO from vendors like MSI, Gainward n Leadtek among others have the cards a bit overclocked and these overclocked GSOs can touch and even surpass the peformance of the GTs which means that you can have the same performance for cheaper. Although a 9600GSO may score less in the benchmarking, it can out perform the 9600GT in games.
September 1, 2008 8:31:50 PM

*points to last date posted before user22 reply and walks away*
!