8600GT v X3100, Worth It?

What is the game playabilty of the Nvidia 8600M GT? Is it still relevant running today's games potentially on my machine? I currently have the Intel X3100 integrated graphics with shared memory up up to 384mb. I believe the GT is 256mb dedicated. Is it worth it to buy a WP044 motherboard (around $60 and the graphics card (around $20)? The rig runs games like Burnout Paradise City and Half-Life 2 fine with medium settings (usually 1024x768 but can go slightly higher) but most games are hit or miss with this card. Any game made after around 2010 is usually out of the question.
Dell Inspiron 1520
Core 2 Duo T7700 2.4ghz - 4mbL2 cache, overclocked to 2.6ghz, 1.37vid
4 MB DDR2 RAM
Vista 64
Western Digital 7200 RPM 320gb HD
Intel Graphics with Direct X10, OpenGL 2.0, Shader Model 4.0, 1680x1050 native resolution

Thanks, Andrew

 

A number of GeForce 8x00 cards are known to have a short life span, particularly 8400 and 8600. I would not necessarily recommend going that route.

 

I don't think either of those option are going to even have the option of playing any of today's games, you're looking at mid-range tech that's over 5 years old.

 

The 9600m GT DDR3 version still plays numerous (but not all) modern games at high settings in 1280x800p mostly fine.

Having said that, the 8600m GT is slower than 9600m GT... by roughly 30% (comparing DDR3 models).
Intel's X3100 is even slower than 8600m GT if I'm not mistaken.

On top of that, as it was already mentioned, the 8600m GT is ridden with problems due to the possibility it can fail at any given time (solder problem).

I think investing into 8600m GT is NOT recommended.
You might get a much better deal if that motherboard has an MXM II slot... in which case, you could put 9600m GT or 240m inside (provided both are GDDR3 - the 240m is faster of course).
But those gpu's usually cost over $100 (the 240m for example is in the range of about $175 or well over $200).

I would sooner recommend you save your money and get yourself a new system. One that preferably has a dedicated gpu.
However, for most of your needs and various new games, you might look into AMD A10 APU's. The Richland version is due to come out this month.
Those IGP's are quite decent and have mostly surpassed the 240m in terms of speed by a good margin (if I'm not mistaken) at 800p. So you should be able to drive new games at high settings in native resolution (for the most part).
Pairing AMD APU's in crossfire with a dedicated gpu seems to have some problems (not working as it should) due to drivers (which I'm hoping AMD is addressing) - you cannot go wrong either way.

But, if you go with an Intel system, then make sure to get a dedicated gpu... such as 640m or 650M

 

x3100 is VERY slow. It struggles to play 10 year old games at 30fps.

8600m GT is a reasonable card and can be overclocked in many instances if you find the right vBIOS. I ran mine for a couple years and managed Bioshock, Crysis, Crysis Warhead, Mass Effect, Fallout 3, DiRT, Modern Warfare, Half-Life 2 Episodes, Portal, Oblivion, World in Conflict, and STALKER games at medium to high settings some at 1280x800 others at 1680x1050. It's a Dell Vostro 1500 and still going strong, I sold it to a friend in 2009 and he still uses it extensively.

However when it comes to newer games, you can forget it. It's much weaker than the newer integrated graphics like the Intel HD 4000 or AMD's 7600G series, even those IGP's are more powerful than the 9800GT.

 

In general, I wouldn't recommend it at that price point.

The 8600M GT would be a big step up from an X3100 - it has many times as much horsepower. It will play Half-Life 2 at medium to high settings at 1280x800 at least... been a few years since I played it so I don't remember the detailed settings. I tend to play more strategy games than glitzy high-graphics-demanding games, but HTWingNut's list sounds about like what I'd expect. The newest games I've played on my 1520 with 8600M GT are Nitronic Rush (late 2011; played great with high settings) and Chivalry: Medieval Warfare (late 2012; FPS was 20-30-ish, but it appeared to be CPU limited rather than GPU limited at 1440x900-ish resolutions and below). It won't play everything from the last couple years, but you'd have a much better chance of a game being playable than with the X3100.

Still, you'd get essentially the same boost from the most recent Intel integrated cards in a new laptop, and the most recent AMD integrated cards would be better for sure. So it's probably better to wait and save up for a new laptop - and if you do get integrated graphics again, strongly consider going with AMD.

In my experience, however, Burnout Paradise does not play well with this card. Setting-wise, you can set it to High and 1280x800 (my max res), and things appear to be going well. But then it hangs, anywhere from 5-30 minutes in. On Vista, this results in a pause of about a minute while the graphics card recovers, which obviously is disruptive in the gameplay. It could simply be a hardware issue with my card, but this is the only game I've had anything like that happen in. By comparison, it runs flawlessly on my desktop with an ATI graphics card. So if this is one of the primary games you play, I'd definitely stick with what you have.

And as has been mentioned, the GeForce 8 series has an abnormally high failure rate due to a soldering issue. Going with one is kind of like crossing a frozen lake when it's above freezing outside. It might look like you'll be okay, but you can never be too sure that it won't fail on you.