8800GT or 9600GT

[hodgenutts]

Hello I'm currently using a 8600GT XXX edtioin from XFX. I am looking ot upgrade. I have a 22" monitor. I was comparing the 8800GS to the 9600GT, but now the XFX alpha dog edition is on sale. I can get it after rebate for under the $100 mark from the egg. The 8800GT I'm referring to is the 256MB model. So which card would be better the 256MB 8800GT, or for about 50 bucks more the 512MB 9600GT? Any advice would be helpful.



Update: (May 16, 2008)


ok, well not to throw another curve ball but I have another question. I have not kept up with ATI, but the local store has the over clocked ATI Visiontek HD 3870 for around 179. Would I be better with one of those? Didn't know they had them down to that low. It has 512MB GDDR4 memory. Core is set to around 800 mhz and I think member is ruuning aroudn 2225 mhz. Just trying to decide if it would be more cost effective to spend about 40 bucks more and get one of those versus the 9600GT, or get one 9600GT now and get another and run in SLI down the road. I've had alot of people tell me SLI isn't really worth the money for the small gain in performance you get. Any advice would be helpful. Thanks!

 

[IndieSnob]

At your resolution, the 9600GT would be a better buy, seeing as the 256MB model of the 8800GT is going to limit you.

 

[BlueAcolyte]

You can get 9600GTs from the egg for about $120-130 shipped AR.

There's also an Asus/XFX 8800GT for $150 AR. I got mine for $270... Lucky bastards.

EDIT: All the cards I talked about are 512mb VRAM.

 

[Aznmask]

the 86xx series not for gaming,, so get the 8800. If you get the 9600GT you won't gain much performance as your 8600gt.

the 8800GT have Stream Processors: 112
the 9600GT have Stream Processors: 64.

in the long run 8800GT is better than 9600GT.

 

[error8]

For your monitor 8800 GT with 256 mb is a very bad choice. The 9600 GT will be way better then that and if you can spend more on a 512 mb 8800 GT ( preferably with a custom cooling on it), you'll be even more happy. Just look hard trough new egg's offers.

 

[j0j081]

Originally posted by: Aznmask
the 86xx series not for gaming,, so get the 8800. If you get the 9600GT you won't gain much performance as your 8600gt.

the 8800GT have Stream Processors: 112
the 9600GT have Stream Processors: 64.

in the long run 8800GT is better than 9600GT.

the 9600gt is double the speed of the 8600gt and only about 10% slower than the 8800gt. sometimes it even breaks even or beats it slightly. the stream processors don't exactly tell the whole story. do some research before posting information that could misinform people.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: j0j081

Originally posted by: Aznmask
the 86xx series not for gaming,, so get the 8800. If you get the 9600GT you won't gain much performance as your 8600gt.

the 8800GT have Stream Processors: 112
the 9600GT have Stream Processors: 64.

in the long run 8800GT is better than 9600GT.

the 9600gt is double the speed of the 8600gt and only about 10% slower than the 8800gt. sometimes it even breaks even or beats it slightly. the stream processors don't exactly tell the whole story. do some research before posting information that could misinform people.

That's not accurate either. Read reviews that tested both cards with the same driver. The difference is about 20% on average, and even more in Crysis. And there's no way a 9600gt beats a 8800gt, except maybe when the 9600gt is heavily OC'd and the 8800gt is limited by memory bandwidth.

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: munky
That's not accurate either. Read reviews that tested both cards with the same driver. The difference is about 20% on average, and even more in Crysis. And there's no way a 9600gt beats a 8800gt, except maybe when the 9600gt is heavily OC'd and the 8800gt is limited by memory bandwidth.

Um...

8600GT vs 9600GT vs 8800GT 256MB

The 256MB 8800GT is a neutered card. In some games it's not even as quick as the 8600GT (look at the STALKER performance chart) because of the limited frame buffer.

But you can also see that the 9600GT is FAR superior to the 8600GT.

Basically you have four options at various price points (all prices after MIR). Any of these will be quite an upgrade from your 8600GT, especially on a 22" LCD (1680x1050, correct?).

8800GS $110 (OC EVGA model)
9600GT $130-140
8800GT $160-170
8800GTS 512MB $200

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Denithor

Originally posted by: munky
That's not accurate either. Read reviews that tested both cards with the same driver. The difference is about 20% on average, and even more in Crysis. And there's no way a 9600gt beats a 8800gt, except maybe when the 9600gt is heavily OC'd and the 8800gt is limited by memory bandwidth.

Um...

8600GT vs 9600GT vs 8800GT 256MB

The 256MB 8800GT is a neutered card. In some games it's not even as quick as the 8600GT (look at the STALKER performance chart) because of the limited frame buffer.

But you can also see that the 9600GT is FAR superior to the 8600GT.

Basically you have four options at various price points (all prices after MIR). Any of these will be quite an upgrade from your 8600GT, especially on a 22" LCD (1680x1050, correct?).

8800GS $110 (OC EVGA model)
9600GT $130-140
8800GT $160-170
8800GTS 512MB $200

Of course I meant the 512MB 8800gt. Getting a 256MB 8800gt makes about as much sense as getting a 512MB low end card. The 9600gt offers great performance for the money, but it's still slower than a 8800gt not crippled by low memory.

 

[Lithan]

Actually no, 8800gt is not even close to 20% faster than 9600gt. 10% sounds about right. Of course it depends heavily on your reso. I saw almost zero difference (5% at most) @ 1680x1024. Guys running 2560 would probably see 20% or more.

8800gt to 8800gts was more of an upgrade than 9600gt to 8800gt, so at least at my reso and games, clockspeed is MUCH more important than shader quantity.

This may change as games become more demanding of the shader capabilities of these cards, as the 8800gt (unlike the 8800gs) actually has the memory capacity and bandwidth to run these potential future games... but that's a gamble, so you know as well as anyone else.

 

[Munky]

In which games, and at what settings? According to some of the more reliable sites I know, the 8800gt is about 20% faster.

 

[Lithan]

Max everything in every game I play
HL2 and a number of derivatives
HGL
COH
and
Crysis @ high no AA


http://www.tomshardware.com/re...e-9600-gt,1780-20.html 12%
http://www.neoseeker.com/Artic...iews/palit9600gtsonic/
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/666/16/

Also of note: that's the first review I've seen that has the 3870 beating 9600gt on avg or the 3850 anywhere CLOSE to that near a 9600gt in performance.

3850 5% faster than a 9600gt @ 1600x1200 with AA? In their dreams maybe. They fucked something up bad.

 

[evolucion8]

Well, consider that the R6XX architecture is erratic and it's performance is more suitable to heavy and optimized shader code, I wouldn't be that surprised, in some game scenarios like Call of Juarez, a Radeon HD 3870 even rivals the 8800GTX, so even though the 9600GT outperforms the HD 3850 most of the time, there are times that the HD 3850 is faster, even with Anti Aliasing on. 9600GT is a nice card, and is slighly slower than the 8800GT, but I would recommend the latter since it packs more power for the future as it will experience less performance drop in heavy shader/texture scenarios in newer games. 9600GT is performance for todays games, 8800GT is performance for todays and tomorrow games.

 

[Lithan]

Yeah, but that 5% victory for the 3850 appears to be an average across all games, so unless I'm reading that aspect of it wrong (quite possible since I dont spraken ze Deutsche), there's no way it's right. 3850 gets STOMPED by 9600gt, especially with AA on. There are two or three benches that favor ATI cards where it's competitive, but nothing should give it such a huge lead that it skews the avg in it's favor, since most reviews have it losing by 15%+ with AA on.

But yeah, no denying 8800gt is the better card, but from the reviews Im seeing it's closer to 10% avg faster than 20%.

Edit: LOL, they've got the 3850 Beating a GX2 @ those settings.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: Lithan
Yeah, but that 5% victory for the 3850 appears to be an average across all games, so unless I'm reading that aspect of it wrong (quite possible since I dont spraken ze Deutsche), there's no way it's right. 3850 gets OUTPERFORMED by 9600gt, especially with AA on. There are two or three benches that favor ATI cards where it's competitive, but nothing should give it such a huge lead that it skews the avg in it's favor, since most reviews have it losing by 15%+ with AA on.

But yeah, no denying 8800gt is the better card, but from the reviews Im seeing it's closer to 10% avg faster than 20%.

Fixed, it doesn't stomp the HD 3850, specially when overclocked, but it outperforms it.

 

[Lithan]

Yeah, stomped is a bit harsh a term, but since the cards until a couple weeks ago were @ the same price point, the % difference between them is actually quite significant, especially compared to the 8800gt that is about as much separated from the 9600gt (performance-wise) as the 3850 if not a little less, and costs $30-50 more. I guess now that the 3850 rings up @ ~$20 less than the 9600gt it's a little less of a stomping, and more of a performance difference.

 

[Lithan]

http://www.fudzilla.com/index....0&limit=1&limitstart=1

Here's a look @ the cards 1600x1200 is where the 3850 supposedly won.
According to fud, @ that exact reso: not only does the 9600gt win every test, but it wins by 100%+ in crysis, 30%+ in HL2 and 15-25% in the rest. It's very much ahead. Only test the 3850 comes close in is COH. Everything else is a spread of 14% or more.

edit: The only thing I can think is that maybe only 1 or 2 games support 8x AA and those games lean ridiculously in favor of ATI.

 

[AzN]

Point is 9600gt sucks worse than 8800gt. Who the hell in their right mind reads fudzilla benchmarks? I can't tell if their benchmark is real or fud. :laugh:

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: munky
In which games, and at what settings? According to some of the more reliable sites I know, the 8800gt is about 20% faster.

Most definitely. I give those guys a notch from the rest.

 

[Lithan]

They also call the 9600gt 3% faster than the 8800gt in the same test.

 

[Lithan]

Oh, what a joke, 9600gt wins at that res in everything but ut3 and jericho. Jericho clearly has driver issues with the g92/4's and has the 3850 beating the gx2. They use a let's say "creative" weighting system to calculate their performance rating, so even though the 3850 loses 4/5 of the tests by a sizable amounts and its only significant win is clearly caused by a bug... it wins the benches @ that reso.

 

[AzN]

What is this guy's deal with 9600gt?

 

[evolucion8]

Don't know, probably nVidia hired him to promote it so he can receive it for free. Is a nice card, but once the newer games starts to crank more shader power, it will fall behind.

 

[OmegaShadow]

but by then wouldn't there be better cards than 8800gt and the 9600gt at price for performance?

 

[j0j081]

Originally posted by: Azn
What is this guy's deal with 9600gt?

he is just stating the facts and supporting what I said earlier in the thread about the 8800gt being only about 10% faster than the 9600gt, opposed to 20% or more as someone else claimed.

THE POINT IS, when games are unplayable on a 9600gt, they are going to be unplayable on the 8800gt as well. Therefore if someone is on a budget and can't afford the 8800gt, the 9600gt is just about as good for a decent amount less. the 9600gt also requires less power and is great in SLI scaling.