nVidia 8600gt bashings

B

BLG

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 21, 2004
Messages
308
Okay so I've been browsing the forum looking for an upgrade to my x800pro. I didn't want to spend a ton of money on the upgrade mainly because I don't game that much any more but i could not avoid my temptation to BioShock which my x800 won't run.

So setting my budget around $100, less = better, I found the xfx 8600gt for $60 AFR, but everyone seems to be bashing it, apparently it is just not the gamers card. But for $60 would it be worth it, from the reviews i've read people have been able to play almost any game on decent settings. So basically I'm asking for someone to tell me why i shouldn't invest the 60bucks for this card, or pose a replacement.

I know this is a stupid yet ridiculously common type of question ie "what card should i get" but I am getting the urge to play that game more and more and I thats the only reason i want to upgrade, though Crysis would be nice too... *if you think this is a terrible post feel free to let me know :)*
 
BLG said:
but I am getting the urge to play that game more and more and I thats the only reason i want to upgrade, though Crysis would be nice too... *if you think this is a terrible post feel free to let me know :)*
Click to expand...

you need an 8800gt.
you likely wont be happy with less. The 8500/8600 are really non-gaming cards. I have an 8500gt and it's great...but I don't play games.
 
First and most important: What resolution?

Second, the 8500GT is like half the performance of the 8600GT, so don't group them together. The 8600GT is capable, but only at medium settings @ lower resolutions. So we need to know what resolution to be able to recommend a card :)
 
retrorocketz said:
you need an 8800gt.
you likely wont be happy with less. The 8500/8600 are really non-gaming cards. I have an 8500gt and it's great...but I don't play games.
Click to expand...

I understand what your saying, however $200 compared to $60 when im not just not sure how much gaming is left in me (pc gaming I'll be rocking SB:Brawl for quite awhile)

As for the resolution, I'm capped at 1280x1024
 
I have a 8600gt ssc in my wifes computer just for kicking on the net, but i installed call of duty 2 on there i got around 50fps @1280by1024 so not the best but better than i thought. I had a 6800 ultra back in the day and they seem alot alike to me anyway.

If you play games at all yeah i would go with the 8800gt its great have one my self.
If you just play older games 8600gt should do, but if you want to keep up with current games 8600 wont cut it really.
 
I was feeling the same way while I was in the middle of an RMA process. Wasnt sure what eVGA was going to send back to me for my 7900gt, so I was hunting around for something cheap that IS USABLE till I earned enough for the 8800 line of cards.

The 8600gt was the card I was looking at to be THE card I get...just in case.

I did some research and made my own 8600 Budget thread.

I do not game in any higher resolution than 1280x1024. Even if I had an 8800gtx, I still would only game at 1280x1024 res. And I do not overclock anything nor do I mess with game settings, usually using only the default settings.

Let me tell ya. If your on a budget (which you are) and not worried about "eye candy" and seeing the most detail or grain of sand, but just want to play the game, YES, you totally CAN play Bioshock. Use the default settings in the game and your good to go.

This is how I view "graphical detail" compared to the capabilities of a v.card.......

Sure, eye candy is totally cool to visualize, but, after youve been playing said game for a bit, all that eye candy becomes ignored and playing the game becomes the point. The 8600gt WILL play Bioshock. I repeat.....WILL PLAY BIOSHOCK!!!!

Since you do not game that often, there really is no need for you to spend hundreds of dollars on a card you will not use to its maximum. I say, go for it dude. Down the road, you can get something with more umph as the prices come down.

Right now, you can get an 8800gts 320/320 for $219 (eVGA)(NewEgg). Give it another month or 2, maybe a bit more and Im certain those prices will fall down to $150 or so, not to mention, once they start dropping the price, they (NewEgg) start adding MIR to them, just like the 8600gt, so, I wouldnt be surprised to see a $30 rebate added to the price of the 8800gts's in a few months, esp with the 9600's and 9800's coming out soon.
 
SAW said:
Right now, you can get an 8800gts 320/320 for $219 (eVGA)(NewEgg). Give it another month or 2, maybe a bit more and Im certain those prices will fall down to $150 or so, not to mention, once they start dropping the price, they (NewEgg) start adding MIR to them, just like the 8600gt, so, I wouldnt be surprised to see a $30 rebate added to the price of the 8800gts's in a few months, esp with the 9600's and 9800's coming out soon.
Click to expand...

doh, stay away from that 320 gts, really.
and fyi, bioshock is a wonderful game that scales very well, sure it'll play with 8600gt.
 
SAW said:
This is how I view "graphical detail" compared to the capabilities of a v.card.......

Sure, eye candy is totally cool to visualize, but, after youve been playing said game for a bit, all that eye candy becomes ignored and playing the game becomes the point. The 8600gt WILL play Bioshock. I repeat.....WILL PLAY BIOSHOCK!!!!
Click to expand...

I'm going to have to disagree. With some games, eye candy sort of fades into the background, but not with Bioshock. Bioshock is an absolutely gorgeous game with immense detail. The atmosphere really makes this game great.

But since the OP is looking for cheap, whats wrong with the $130 8800GS recommendation? It seems people jump straight from $60 8600GT to the $200 8800GT :rolleyes:

And avoid the 320mb 8800GTS! 9600GT is faster and cheaper.

The ATI 2600 XT will play Bioshock just fine at 1280x1024 all high. I just built a Pc for my buddy with parts laying around and tried out a few games. COD2, Bioshock, etc all ran great.
Click to expand...

2600XT is slower than the 8600GT from what I've seen, so if it can play Bioshock, the 8600GT should then too... I'd still go for the 8800GS though - cheap and significantly faster. AA + AF are within reason @ 1280x1024 in Bioshock
 
8600 GTS = bare minimum for gaming [I have one...and trust me...it's the bare minimum]
 
nösferatu;1032151706 said:
doh, stay away from that 320 gts, really.
and fyi, bioshock is a wonderful game that scales very well, sure it'll play with 8600gt.
Click to expand...

kllrnohj said:
I'm going to have to disagree. With some games, eye candy sort of fades into the background, but not with Bioshock. Bioshock is an absolutely gorgeous game with immense detail. The atmosphere really makes this game great.

But since the OP is looking for cheap, whats wrong with the $130 8800GS recommendation? It seems people jump straight from $60 8600GT to the $200 8800GT :rolleyes:

And avoid the 320mb 8800GTS! 9600GT is faster and cheaper.



2600XT is slower than the 8600GT from what I've seen, so if it can play Bioshock, the 8600GT should then too... I'd still go for the 8800GS though - cheap and significantly faster. AA + AF are within reason @ 1280x1024 in Bioshock
Click to expand...

Just for the record. The eVGA 8800gts I got was what I got in return on my RMA when I sent in my 7900gt. Was playing some TF2 and I have zero complaints. Damn nice card and runs the game super fine.
 
SAW said:
Just for the record. The eVGA 8800gts I got was what I got in return on my RMA when I sent in my 7900gt. Was playing some TF2 and I have zero complaints. Damn nice card and runs the game super fine.
Click to expand...

do you mean 320 gts?
i'm not complaining its performance, but from price/performance ratio, 320mb gts just plain sucks now.
 
nösferatu;1032152349 said:
do you mean 320 gts?
i'm not complaining its performance, but from price/performance ratio, 320mb gts just plain sucks now.
Click to expand...

Yeah, its a 320 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130082

"sucks" would be a relative word in this situation. To "you" it sucks. To me, its damn fine. Since I do not overclock and use 1280x1024 res, the games I play are also damn fine.

Compared to the gt's and gtx's, im sure, stat wise, its below par with the "todays" standard, but really, you only need the latest and greatest cards if you are into the finest of fine resolutions and a tweakster.

Ran Bioshock on my 7900gt, again, DAMN fine. Havent tried it yet with this new card, but im sure its even better. But far from "sucks".
 
BLG said:
Okay so I've been browsing the forum looking for an upgrade to my x800pro. I didn't want to spend a ton of money on the upgrade mainly because I don't game that much any more but i could not avoid my temptation to BioShock which my x800 won't run.

So setting my budget around $100, less = better, I found the xfx 8600gt for $60 AFR, but everyone seems to be bashing it, apparently it is just not the gamers card. But for $60 would it be worth it, from the reviews i've read people have been able to play almost any game on decent settings. So basically I'm asking for someone to tell me why i shouldn't invest the 60bucks for this card, or pose a replacement.

I know this is a stupid yet ridiculously common type of question ie "what card should i get" but I am getting the urge to play that game more and more and I thats the only reason i want to upgrade, though Crysis would be nice too... *if you think this is a terrible post feel free to let me know :)*
Click to expand...

When the 8600 series first came out people bashed it because of it's original price...it's performance was lacking for what it was going for back in 4/07. Now it's a different story IMO, better performing drivers and they have dropped dramatically in price. I have a 8600GTS and it plays UT3@ 1280x1024(my monitors native res) at max world detail and I get 35-62 fps. Some maps it stays pinned @ 62fps, UT3 is capped at 62fps but you can change that in the .ini. I used to have a 7600gt, the 8600gts is a good deal faster in everything, especially in newer shader intensive games which my 7600gt had a hard time with...i.e...ut3 @ 1024x768 World detail @ 2 ....20-40fps.

Depends on the resolution you're playing at...if you want to play at very high resolutions with max detail a 8800gt would be the choice. If you're stuck at 1280x1024 a 8600gt or preferably a 8600gts will be fine. Above that resolution with high details forget it.

Also helps to have a good CPU behind it.
 
People bashed it because the 8800 seris was a big fat jump from the 7900 series while the 8600GT was just a step above the 7600GT. The prices werent scaled accordingly though :/ Now they really arent that bad bang for buck wise. The 3850 stomps it but also costs more than twice as much as that price you quoted (were the same). 9600GT will probably come down to around 100 when it gets some competition but I dont imagine the 8600 will ever go much lower than that AR price.
 
SAW said:
Yeah, its a 320 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130082

"sucks" would be a relative word in this situation. To "you" it sucks. To me, its damn fine. Since I do not overclock and use 1280x1024 res, the games I play are also damn fine.

Compared to the gt's and gtx's, im sure, stat wise, its below par with the "todays" standard, but really, you only need the latest and greatest cards if you are into the finest of fine resolutions and a tweakster.

Ran Bioshock on my 7900gt, again, DAMN fine. Havent tried it yet with this new card, but im sure its even better. But far from "sucks".
Click to expand...

See, here is the thing. The 8800GTS 320 sucks in price/performance because there are noticeably faster cards for less money. There is literally zero reason to buy an 8800GTS 320mb at the moment. They are still around $180-200, and get smoked at that price point by the 9600GT and 8800GT. Your case is completely different because you got yours as an RMA - you would have been an idiot to buy one, though.
 
If you can spare another $30, the 8800GS is $129.99 after MIR @ Newegg. XFX model, I believe.
 
I think you'd be fine with a cheap $60 8600gt, considering bioshock is the only reason you're getting it for. No need to spend ~$200 for one game.

In other news, I've played bioshock with the system in my sig, and although it was at 800x600 with mostly everything on low, it didn't look bad at all.
 
BanDeodorant said:
I think you'd be fine with a cheap $60 8600gt, considering bioshock is the only reason you're getting it for. No need to spend ~$200 for one game.

In other news, I've played bioshock with the system in my sig, and although it was at 800x600 with mostly everything on low, it didn't look bad at all.
Click to expand...

Again, the jump from $60 to $200. The $130 8800GS is *perfect* for this
 
kllrnohj said:
Again, the jump from $60 to $200. The $130 8800GS is *perfect* for this
Click to expand...

Hmm your recommendation sort of got lost as I was reading the thread, but you have a very good point, so a $130 8800GS just may be perfect for the op. It all depends on how much he wants to spent though I guess.
 
Hey, can't someone with Bioshock and a 8600GT help the OP? What is the max playable setting?

I wonder if [H] does not have a review of the 8600GT already with Bioshock.

If not then I'll run a quick benchie of Bioshock with my 7600GT and see where it takes me.
 
SpeedyVV said:
Hey, can't someone with Bioshock and a 8600GT help the OP? What is the max playable setting?

I wonder if [H] does not have a review of the 8600GT already with Bioshock.

If not then I'll run a quick benchie of Bioshock with my 7600GT and see where it takes me.
Click to expand...

It ran pretty darn good for me when I was on a 7600GT. 1280x1024 medium - high settings. Though I am the kind of guy that cranks things till I hit chopiness, then backs off a little. Prettiness > perfect smoothness to me. Just like women, a pretty face with a tiny tiny bit of hestation in the body is better than a brown bag special.
 
Ok, after a quick search, it seems that the 8600GT can run Bioshock just fine.

Here is what looks like a decent review of Bioshock performance including on the 8600GT: http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/Bioshock_performance/index.php

1280x1024, DX9 High Details 23\49\31 fps (min\max\avg)
1280x1024, DX9 Low Details 38\76\54 fps 9min\max\avg)

So between the brown bagger and the Angelina Jolie of prettiness, you should be able to play fairly smooth @ 1280x1024

Good luck.
 
Jakalwarrior said:
People bashed it because the 8800 seris was a big fat jump from the 7900 series while the 8600GT was just a step above the 7600GT. The prices werent scaled accordingly though :/ Now they really arent that bad bang for buck wise. The 3850 stomps it but also costs more than twice as much as that price you quoted (were the same). 9600GT will probably come down to around 100 when it gets some competition but I dont imagine the 8600 will ever go much lower than that AR price.
Click to expand...

In my experiences since I had a 7600gt and now a 8600gts, it's a large step(although the guy is asking about a gt in this case), at least with the games I fired up on both...especially newer ones. When the 8600gts first came out the gap wasn't that large but it's been optimized since.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top