Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Affordable DX10 - GeForce 8600 GTS and 8600 GT

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the only-a-bit-more-than-nine dept.

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."

3 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. Re:DX10? What? by Aladrin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Jeez, that's a silly question.

    Because that's where the money is.

    If developers, even a few, thought they could make more money on Linux than Windows, or even turn a hefty enough profit by supporting both, they'd do it.

    Thanks for companies like Introversion, Transgaming, and Codeweavers, and of course all the developers of Wine, Linux gaming is more popular than ever. Thanks to people like the folks behind Ogre3D, Newton, ODE, OpenAL, etc Cross-OS gaming is easier than ever.

    I think this puts us right on the cusp of seeing a big change in Linux gaming. (And Mac OSX gaming, too.) But until then, Windows is -the- PC gaming OS and that's where hardware and software creators will be making their investments.

    Now, I know the usual argument is that OpenGL is already cross-platform and should be supported. And I agree to a point... But ATI's OpenGL support has apparently always sucked, and you don't create a game that will suck for half the market if there's an easy alternative. (DirectX.) (Disclaimer: I have no first-hand experience with ATI cards. I've stuck with nVidia since Voodoo died.)

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
  2. In Short: Bandwidth-Starved and Overpriced by SQL+Error · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The 8600GTS delivers 40% of the performance of the 320MB 8800GTS for 70% of the price.

    The 8600GT outperforms a 7600GT - but is priced like a 7900GT.

  3. Re:So how much did NVidia pay them for this? by Holmwood · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The Radeon X1950 beats the NVidia cards in every single test save for the "synthetic" crapmark test that has nothing to do with reality.
    Interesting, that's not what I've been seeing in tests. In fact, in most tests it seems the 8800 GTX beats the X1950 XTX

    In context, it's clear the GP was referring to the NVidia cards that were reviewed by the article. And he's mostly right. In only one (of many) actual gaming benchmark did any of the Nvidia cards reviewed outperform the X1950.

    Where I believe the GP is mistaken is in his conclusions about the article. The article itself says, in conclusion:

    The 256MB version of the Radeon X1950 Pro is faster in most games, and by a pretty good margin, too.

    The article notes, correctly I think, that the X1650XT is not a good card for gamers to buy. It notes that the 1950 won't do DirectX10, and the budget NVidia cards may not be fast enough to do it well either.

    However, it's also instructive to have a look at this review at Hard OCP. There, in two demanding games (Oblivion and STALKER), the 8600 GTS appears to win handily over the 1950XT. If those benchmarks are accurate, it suggests the ExtremeTech article may draw conclusions that are too favorable to the X1950.

    Ah well, interesting times for all gfx card consumers!

    Holmwood