8600 series

[Pants]

Hi,

Has anything been said about the 8600 from Nvidia?

I'm hoping that they will be alot smaller and more reasonable on the power consumption front!

Any rumours / speculation on a release date?

Cheers!

Ant.

[Uberpwnage]

I think the 8600 (g84) is set for release in March 2007. Smaller, less pipelines then g80, price of $249. I'm guessing 512MB, or maybe 384MB continuing the trend of odd memory sizes.

I would also say that performance in DX9 should be on par with the 7900GTX, as the 7600GT >/= 6800 Ultra.

[RejZoR]

March 2007 would be fine. Core 2 prices are also going down at that time so that would be a good period for system upgrading :) At least for me :)

[Uberpwnage]

$530 for a Q6600 :D, but Q2 doesnt start until April :(

[RussianHAXOR]

Qx6600?

[hordaktheman]

I'm guessing 512MB, or maybe 384MB continuing the trend of odd memory sizes.
I wouldn't bet on any changes over the previous gen. The only real benefit of the odd memory sizes we see on the high-end cards is for the higher resolutions w/ AA, which require huge amounts of memory to hold the frame buffer at the same detail settings that a 512meg card would manage at lower resolutions. The 8600 series, like previous mid-range cards, will no doubt max out around 1280x1024 resolutions, making such an odd memory size unnecessary.

[Uberpwnage]

Qx6600?

Its not an extreme edition, just a Core 2 Quad @ 2.4GHz.

[rhink]

The 8800 GTX has 6x 64 bit buses, the 8800 GTS has 1 of of them disabled, that's how you get the odd bus widths and memory sizes. No way will an 8600 have 5 or 6x of those 64 bit buses, not and stay at the normal x600 series price point. I'd guess 512 meg of ram, 256 bit bus, 64 shaders (1/2 of the GTX), roughly half the die area, and much lower power consumption.... speculation, of course, but I think it's reasonable.

[mathew952]

No one is really too concerned with power in terms of proccessing, as we know that most games could run at near max on a 7600GT, with average FPS, so and 8600 will be that, and maybe like 30% faster. the real issue is getting a power friendly, price friendly chip on the market so that everyone, not just enthusiats,can move up to DX 10. the real power of these new chips is in the new API that will come in vista, and I can't wait to finnaly expirience some DX10 magic.

[RejZoR]

8600GT will be as fast as 7900GTX in today's games. Thats a trend thats been the same for ages. And doesn't seem to stop. Only right thing imo.

[Pants]

I have been happy with the 6600 GT, im on a 7600 GT now, if the trend continues then this is the card for me I think!

Heres my guess... lets see how close I get:

Same core design and feature as 8800 series.

- GeForce 6600 GT core running at 575MHz
- Shader Clock Speed of 1350MHz
- 512MB GDDR3 Memory running at 1800MHz
- 256-Bit Memory Interface
- 64 Stream Processors
- Texture Fill Rate: 12 billion/sec
- Memory Bandwidth: 57.6GB/s

[shabby]

In some cases the 8800 gts is anywhere from a 1/3rd to half as slow as a gtx, i dont even wanna know how much slower the neutered 8600 cards will be.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/nvidia%20geforce%208800%20launch_11070691155/13532.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/nvidia%20geforce%208800%20launch_11070691155/13534.png

[lightman]

In some cases the 8800 gts is anywhere from a 1/3rd to half as slow as a gtx,

As two gtx in SLI, you mean... Either that, or you can't read the graphs you posted...

[hectorsm]

In some cases the 8800 gts is anywhere from a 1/3rd to half as slow as a gtx, i dont even wanna know how much slower the neutered 8600 cards will be.




If the 8600 ends up having 64 steam processors and 256 bit memory than the performance should be close to 1/2 of the 8800GTX.

That would be pretty good for a mainstream card.

[shabby]

As two gtx in SLI, you mean... Either that, or you can't read the graphs you posted...

Look at the fear benchmark, 32fps for the gtx and 17 for the gts.

If the 8600 ends up having 64 steam processors and 256 bit memory than the performance should be close to 1/2 of the 8800GTX.

That would be pretty good for a mainstream card.

If the price is right though, i wouldnt pay more then 200 bucks for a card with the specs you mentioned. It looks like the 8800 takes a huge performance hit when those stream processors are disabled.

[jAkUp]

Look at the fear benchmark, 32fps for the gtx and 17 for the gts.



If the price is right though, i wouldnt pay more then 200 bucks for a card with the specs you mentioned. It looks like the 8800 takes a huge performance hit when those stream processors are disabled.

Not only that but lower memory bandwidth, lower core, and shader clocks as well.

Oh yea, and less memory :)

[mathew952]

[ Deleted at User Request]

[Dazz]

Well i gone for the 8800GTX due to the price diffrence of £70 in cost is nothing to being 35% slower

[lightman]

Look at the fear benchmark, 32fps for the gtx and 17 for the gts.

Oooops. Sorry. You said GTX and I automatically read 7900GTX. /me feels stupid :D

My fault for browsing at 12:30am when I'm tired :D

[shabby]

Ok, Mr. 1/3 as powerful, let me give you a quick lesson in fractions. 17*2= 34.
17*3=41. is the GTX at 41? no. It's not even at 34. its at 32. 1/3 of 32 is 10 and 2/3. The GTS is running at 53 % of the GTX power.

The gts gets 32fps and the gtx gets 46fps, isnt the gts a 1/3rd slower then the gtx? I bet you thought i meant 1/3rd as fast as the gtx, no, its just 33% to 50% slower then the gtx in these cases.



Sounds to me like some one is pissed they can't afford the new cards, so there acting as if the cards suck to make them feel better about them selves.


Ya i guess i cant afford a new card... i mean i did just plunk down $37k in cash for a new car. So ya my bank account is a bit dry...

[mathew952]

:( :( I can't afford it either, and I don't need to until vista comes round. Sorry bout that, I was looking at the fear specs, not company of heroes.
Sorry about the whole flaming thing. I'll take the post down.

[coldpower27]

In some cases the 8800 gts is anywhere from a 1/3rd to half as slow as a gtx, i dont even wanna know how much slower the neutered 8600 cards will be.



Keep in mind the 8800 GTS wasn't really designed with 25x16 game play in mind. That is very demanding resolution. Only the 8800 GTX, is capable at running that resolution semi decently in modern games.

Once you step down to non stratospheric resolutions of 19x12, 19x14, and 16x12. Things start to become more normal with the 8800 GTS at about 70% of the performance of the 8800 GTX

I would believe the difference at 16x12 between the 8800 GTX and 8600 GT should be around 1/2 to 3/5 of the flagships performance.

If you want performance at demanding resolutions of the caliber shown your going to need a 8800 Series card.

You also got to keep in mind that a 8800 GTS also only has 2/3 of the shader power of 8800 GTX. So there is massive difference between them.

[johnkeel105]

From what I have seen I will be looking foward to the 9600 refresh. I am sure there will be something like that. It will be the equilavent of the 7600 to the 6600. I think once they shrink down the die size the chips will probably run alot cooler and things will calm back down again. I have already seen it happen once.

[weeds]

8600 Ultra and 8600 GT

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/6499/dsc09094tg8.jpg

http://www.beareyes.com.cn/2/lib/200701/02/20070102054_2.htm
http://www.systranbox.com/systran/box?systran_lp=zh_en&systran_id=SystranSoft-en&systran_url=http://www.beareyes.com.cn/2/lib/200701/02/20070102054_2.htm&systran_f=1168667117


.

[Uberpwnage]

8600 Ultra, is that for real? Seems strange that they would bring Ultra back for a mid range product.