The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    128MB 8600GT (GDDR3) vs. 256MB 8600GS (GDDR3)

    Discussion in 'Gaming (Software and Graphics Cards)' started by Bona Fide, Aug 10, 2007.

  1. Bona Fide

    Bona Fide Notebook Deity NBR Reviewer

    Reputations:
    94
    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    The laptops in question are the Macbook Pro and Asus V2S. I've looked at benchmarks for the MBP (8600GT) and F3SV (8600GS) and the MBP wins out in 3dMark comparisons. Of course, this is a synthetic benchmark, and admittedly not texture-intensive.

    Can anyone tell me if at 1280x800 or 1440x900 the extra VRAM of the 8600GS will actually outperform the extra stream processors of the 8600GT?
     
    Bona Fide, Aug 10, 2007
    #1
  2. derelict1987

    derelict1987 Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    8
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    No, the 8600gs probably cant even use all that VRAM. The GT is the better card hands down. Mabye in 2500*1600 you need a lot of VRAM but definately not at those low resolutions.
     
    derelict1987, Aug 10, 2007
    #2
  3. Bona Fide

    Bona Fide Notebook Deity NBR Reviewer

    Reputations:
    94
    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    What do you mean it can't use all of it? Does that mean that textures in games aren't even that big yet?
     
    Bona Fide, Aug 10, 2007
    #3
  4. adinu

    adinu I pwn teh n00bs.

    Reputations:
    489
    Messages:
    2,842
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    It means that the gpu doesn't have enough power to put all that ram to use.

    It's like a maid having 20 brooms. But she only has 2 arms, so she can only use 2 brooms. The very same way the gs has 256mb of ram, but it's internal power is not powerful enough to use all of it.
     
    adinu, Aug 10, 2007
    #4
  5. link1313

    link1313 Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    596
    Messages:
    3,470
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    It can use all of it...but if your only playing at 1280x800 or 1440x900 id go with the MBP.
     
    link1313, Aug 10, 2007
    #5
  6. Bona Fide

    Bona Fide Notebook Deity NBR Reviewer

    Reputations:
    94
    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I see. It does have 16 stream processors so I have a feeling that in an older texture-intensive DX9 game the 256MB would show up, but in a newer game it won't.

    Yeah, 1440x900 is native res on both of those, so I won't be going any higher than that.
     
    Bona Fide, Aug 10, 2007
    #6
  7. JCMS

    JCMS Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    455
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    If you are on vista, 128MB will do the job because all DX10 cards are Turbo Cache (766MB with 2GB system RAM)

    The GS will take res/AA better but it has half the shaders of the GT so...
     
    JCMS, Aug 13, 2007
    #7