![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
How does 6600 compare?
- Thread starter perplex
- Start date
BlastRadius
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2004
- Messages
- 187
Somewhere between the two:
Linkage:
6600 Vs Geforce 4 : http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=191&card2=139
6600 Vs 9800 pro 128: http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=191&card2=31
Hope that helps.
Linkage:
6600 Vs Geforce 4 : http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=191&card2=139
6600 Vs 9800 pro 128: http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=191&card2=31
Hope that helps.
defaultluser
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2006
- Messages
- 14,398
To make it simple:
The 6600 will be much faster than the 4800 SE in modern games thanks to the much newer memory architecture (Nvidia improves their crossbar with every generation), Shader 3.0, and twice the shader units.
In older games, they will be closer, but the 6600 will still be faster.
The 6600 is slower than the 9800 Pro linked, due to much less memory bandwidth, but not by a huge margin.
If you have the opportunity, the 6600 GT is a much better card, and puts even a 9800 Pro to shame.
The 6600 will be much faster than the 4800 SE in modern games thanks to the much newer memory architecture (Nvidia improves their crossbar with every generation), Shader 3.0, and twice the shader units.
In older games, they will be closer, but the 6600 will still be faster.
The 6600 is slower than the 9800 Pro linked, due to much less memory bandwidth, but not by a huge margin.
If you have the opportunity, the 6600 GT is a much better card, and puts even a 9800 Pro to shame.
morningreis
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2005
- Messages
- 1,574
lol you don't need a Conroe for CS 1.6...
A single core will do fine for that and a 6600 will also do fine.
A single core will do fine for that and a 6600 will also do fine.
WOW, CS 1.6, CS:S, and Warcraft 3 all run great on my 6600 non-GT. I would have purchased the 6600GT, but I just couldn't pass up the $90 Asus 6600.
In my case, it didn't make a whole lot of sense to spend $300 on an AGP card that won't work with my next mobo anyway. I'm going to do a system rebuild after Conroe ships (not that I'll necessarily get Conroe, but AMD's pricing is going to get a lot more attractive after Conroe), so every last dollar that I spend now on a card is money that won't be going into my next system.
I play at 1680x1050 in the games that support it, the native resolution of my 2005fpw. The Asus card is pretty quiet, too. Works great under Vista, too.
In my case, it didn't make a whole lot of sense to spend $300 on an AGP card that won't work with my next mobo anyway. I'm going to do a system rebuild after Conroe ships (not that I'll necessarily get Conroe, but AMD's pricing is going to get a lot more attractive after Conroe), so every last dollar that I spend now on a card is money that won't be going into my next system.
I play at 1680x1050 in the games that support it, the native resolution of my 2005fpw. The Asus card is pretty quiet, too. Works great under Vista, too.
Shameless Liar said:lol you don't need a Conroe for CS 1.6...
A single core will do fine for that and a 6600 will also do fine.
Maybe not but I'm not getting it just for CS 1.6. I want to hopefully never need to upgrade again as I don't game at all except CS 1.6. I might buy something like X2 4400+ after the Conroe makes the prices drop. But Conroe seems like it will price very attractively anyway so I might just get that.