Slashdot Mirror
Affordable DX10 - GeForce 8600 GTS and 8600 GT
mikemuch writes "While ATI still hasn't released a DX-10-capable graphics card, Nvidia today already released its affordable SKUs, in descending price and performance order the GeForce 8600 GTS and GeForce 8600 GT, and 8500 GT. The GTS costs $200-230, the GT from $150-170, and the 8500 reaching down to the $90 range. The architecture for the new GPUs is the same as for the 8800 line, but with lower clocks and fewer stream processors."
I wish there was an easier way to judge the speed of one Nvidia card against another just by looking at the name. I can never tell.
Are these faster than my 7800GS? Would they be faster than a 7800GT? Who can fucking tell?
And....no drivers for the only OS that supports it. Everybody wins!
As long as there is no stable, useful and fast system supporting DX10, there's no point buying a card supporting it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The Benchmarks say one thing but the actual games (which is why most not all but most people buy these cards) show that the X1950 Pro wins most of the time. What do they actually talk about though at every possible point? How badly the X1650 XT performs.
Please. This is all bull.
WTF is with people calling a product a Stock Keeping Unithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_Keeping_Uni t? It's a physical item, not a freaking number.
The Radeon X1950 beats the NVidia cards in every single test save for the "synthetic" crapmark test that has nothing to do with reality.
Yet their final page says you should buy the NVidia rather than the X1950?
Somebody's been paid off. This wasn't an article, it's a fucking stealth ad. They have no integrity.
DirectX 10 only works under Vista.
The biggest reason to get these cards over other existing ones is for DirectX 10.
The drivers for these cards don't work under Vista.
Huh.
So in short, you pay more and get less performance in hopes that someday, you will need DX10.
It seems nice of Nvidia to leave ATI/AMD a chance to beat them squarely in the $200 bracket by showing up with more memory bandwidth.
8600 is ok but hardly anything to get excited about. More about features than performance or bang/buck.
I stand corrected
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
And while Nvidia still hasn't released working Vista drivers...
I would Mod the article submitter Troll -1 over the wording in this article.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Which in most cases for gamers, doesn't usually matter-in most cases, the more powerful hardware is better than weaker hardware with new tech. However, with the way M$ is pushing Vista upgrading, how long will it be before there are less impressive games that require DX10 to run, and potentially DX10 hardware? Or what about DX10 games like Crysis? Maybe that will push performance past non DX10 cards. It's hard to say untill we can test things like that.
As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable Slashdot 2.0.
I must say, I will *allways* buy nVidia until ATI shape up their Linux drivers. Twinview makes dual monitors as easy in Linux as anywhere else, and that is something valuable to me. But still, ATI cards *are* important - hopefully they mean nVidia will drop the price. But until then I am happy with my passive 7600GS.
-- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
Well, I've been letting them go, but this one is too obviously done by some Microsoft fanboy. This is not a troll. I never troll. If I said something, it was either sarcastic and said for effect (and I generally provide plenty of context) or I fucking meant it. Clearly no one is motivated to go to Vista unless Microsoft has made some kind of sleazy deal with them.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"