8600m gt screenshot thread

I was looking for alot of screens for the 8600gt before i got my laptop, so I'd thought I'd start a thread.

Test Drive Unlimited







The FPS is kind of low but it actually plays pretty smoothly.

Half Life 2 demo

 

To make those pictures simply right click on the photo and click on "properties." Copy the address (URL) of it and write in a after the html. So for the first one type in [IMG?]http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa115/zeppelin908/TestDriveUnlimited2007-07-2208-38-4.jpg[/IMG?](without the ?'s) to get




I personally kind of like actual photos in the threads, but these are large and it might become more of a hassle than a help. The URL links might be best...

EDIT: Whoops! I didn't see that someone had already answered his question... I must be going blind as I could have seriously sworn I read every reply... must have missed that one because it was so short!

 

I just got my Inspiron 1520 a few days ago and I was really anxious to see how the 8600M GT performed. It pretty much exceeded my expectations, and I haven't even updated the drivers yet....(becuase I don't know how) I saw a bunch of threads for gfx card screenshots, but not the 8600M series. I thought it would be good if I posted settings and in-game screenshots for people who want to see how it plays games. I will update frequently.

The system's specifications are in my signature.

I will be updating the screenshots again with FPS as soon as I update my drivers.

---

Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory
N/A

Splinter Cell: Double Agent
N/A

Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars
N/A

F.E.A.R
N/A

Hitman: Blood Money
N/A

 

I know this is kind of silly, but the guy's left foot in this picture made me laugh:




"Ooooops!"

 

Tomb Raider Legends. All settings FULL except Next Gen Content.

With Next Gen Content. Makes the frame rate drop a tad, but still playable. Expect slowdowns. Notice the water is now clear instead of blue, and lighting is very accurate.

When next gen content is on, you can't tell she is wet when exiting the water, unlike when next gen is turned off
Next Gen (Turned Off)

Next Gen (Turned On)


Her eyes really cut into you...


You can't get enough of Lara . Hope the sequel to Legends comes out soon. Image quality is top notch, and the performance hit keeps the game playable, with some slow downs when turning direction, or entering/exiting water.
ps. Is Mr Octagon happy now? Obviously it takes more rendering power to ya know...

 

I ran Tomb raider (anniversary i think), last night and it didn't break a sweat at max everything fixed to 60 fps. oh and it looked great. The water effects (Lara's visibly wet when she gets out of the water) looked great. Very smooth

(1280*800)

 

some FSX

 

One more thing! Ppl who are posting to the screenshot thread should be asked to put the FRAP fame counter on top as then only a screenshot makes sense.. Enabling Ultra high detail for C&C 3 on a Nvidia 6200 is possible and you may get a great screenshot for that but it maying be running @ 2fps for all you know.. So Please make it a mandatory condition to post resolution and include fps counter in all screenshots..

Now, saying it runs smooth at this settings etc etc isnt the best way here too as each and every person has a different idea on smooth graphics are!!

Just my 2 cents...

 

Please DO!

 

1280x720 (same res as the xbox, in all fairness) - all options set to "on" and "high"

no tweaking, slightly underclocked gddr3 8600m gt, 2x quality anti aliasing, 2x aniso filtering

specific rainbow six vegas engine tweaking can drastically improve performance without sacrificing image quality.

putting the clocks back up to stock (or overclocking) will also improve performance without sacrificing image quality .

removing anti aliasing and texture filtering can improve performance with some cost to image quality.

 

4 more: keep in mind these are jpegs and its close, but the quality of the original image is obviously higher than this

also notice in the last picture, the shadow is being rendered twice: you can see the head once on the wall and once on the ground. there is only 1 light source. that is a error in the game engine design itself, i don't think its the result of a rendering error on the gpu.

either way, there is definitely only one light source in that scene. attention to detail, ubisoft! tsk tsk tsk.

 

first off, you i agree with you sort of. i say as long as the minimum framerate is 30+ its fine. usually that means averaging about 45. it really depends on the game. basically you need to perceive smooth motion.

second, i didn't want to go through the tweaking process. its a pain.

now i have to just to silence you and that upsets me.

third, its a console shooter, its meant to be played with *analog sticks*, and the intense blur effect hides the low framerate. 25 fps in this game makes your eyes perceive an image that looks more like 35 fps on a normal shooter. not joking either.

my video card was underclocked when i did that.

i did NO tweaking. rainbow six vegas is a nightmare of a port job from the xbox to the pc. its performance isn't spectacular on any setup. massive gains can be had with moderate tweaking that don't compromise the image quality of the game. therefore, the performance of that game doesn't really represent the power of the card.

so now, i am going to tweak it, raise the resolution, increase the framerate, just to prove you wrong.

people with 8800 series cards complain about the performance of this game, and you have the audacity to challenge this. grr.

i actually already posted several shots of rainbow six on this forum.

assuming your 8600m gt is clocked normally (mine is underclocked) you can run rainbow six vegas with all options ON and quality settings on HIGH, with 2x quality anti aliasing and 2x anisotropic filtering, at 30 frames per second (which is acceptable for this game - read prior post on this forum) at 1280x720, assuming you have the latest patches (1.05) and drivers (162.18+).

apparently the las vegas missions look better and run faster as well. i haven't made it that far yet

30 normally is on the low end of acceptable, but the only thing that really matters is whether or not you perceive smooth motion. it varies from game, but the blur affect masks the low frame rate in this particular game. the same will be true of crysis from what i gather.

we can get into a long spell about it, but TV looks smooth at low frame rates (24 fps? varies from region to region) and it looks perfectly smooth because motion is blurry in each frame and the edges are all soft and naturally unaliased when they are picked up on the camera. if you capture one frame with a lot of motion, it will look blurry. computer games are drawn as individual, perfect frames. if you capture one frame, it will be perfectly sharp, regardless of the amount of motion. the lines are naturally aliased so we have to use anti aliasing to mask that. now games are starting to add artificial blurring when you move the camera quickly. it helps to make the game seem smoother.

higher frames per second are still better, but 30 is definitely in the acceptable range with the new quality blurring affect. 25 is acceptable with this game in my opinion. i would still feel way more comfortable at a significantly higher frame rate (35-40) but this is manageable until better drivers / patches come out. i would absolutely not be surprised to see the performance increase that much with patches/drivers.

as far as the vegas vs mexico thing, its hard to speculate. i know the answer- that vegas runs smoother, but i don't know exactly why. there is certainly more lighting going on. im just thinking that vegas is more indoor whereas mexico is outside. draw distance is probably a factor. also the light bloom might be more prevalent in mexico and that saps the frames per second pretty strongly.

edit: performance before the 1.05 patch (just released) was HORRIBLE. it still has a long way to go. it will get there soon enough. they basically released an unfinished port of the xbox game. its getting "done" pretty quickly though.

a lot of it depends on the person, but a LOT of it depends on the game.

in counter strike, i think of 45 fps as a bare minimum. 30 would be ridiculous.
ut2004? 45 is also a good starting point. 30 would not even be acceptable here either.

games that employ tactics to make them more TV like (anti aliasing and blurring) are generally more acceptable at lower fps.

the pacing also matters. rvs happens to be really slow. you are static behind cover a lot and you don't run very fast. the animations are also really good. that helps.

there are a lot of factors going on. basically, you just want to perceive smooth motion. it varies somewhat from person to person and a LOT from game to game. both you and I can certainly tell the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps side by side. its really easy to see. the real question is, if you are just looking at the 30 fps picture, will it seem smooth, or not? it certainly can, depending on a bunch of factors (many listed above)

 

Here are some of my shots! I did Eve Online, HalfLife 2: Lost Coast, and Supreme Commander.

I'm using a MBP 2.4 with the 162.18 drivers from laptopvideo2go.com

Here's Eve Online!










Now I'm moving on to HL2:LC


















This is Supreme Commander. I ran this at 1440x900 resolution. I set the general image quality setting to high (the one that alters all the other settings based on the choice). I then turned off AA and Shadows.







I'd like to request that a moderator remove all of the non screenshot posts. No offence to everyone else, but this is a screenshot thread!

Also, anyone else get a strange error in Vista Ultimate when the SupCom /pref benchmark ends? It works for me in XP, but crashes in Vista.

 

Good thread!

Here's the latest version of Need For Speed: Carbon - at highest resolution and MAX settings:



See my specs in sig

 

one of the big reasons is that fast motion on the TV is shown in blurry frames - each frame is a blending of multiple frames. it makes you perceive smoother motion than there really is. also, the lines are naturally smooth because an analog camera catches them (even if the picture is stored in digital format, there is an analog process going on to capture the image)

smoothness and blended (blurry) motion help to give the illusion of motion.

in pc games, each frame is rendered sharp. if you could capture one frame of really fast motion, you would see everything in perfect detail. also, the lines are all sharp and aliased. both of those reduce the illusion of motion. you can make up for that by increasing the frames per second (which increases the illusion of motion)

take a screenshot of your TV and take a screenshot of a video game on your PC. you will understand.

edit: show your FPS! (above)

sorry to double post but i have some more rainbow six vegas screens to share from vegas instead of mexico - and my card is still underclocked, all details set to high, 1280x720, 2x QAA (quality), 2x aniso filtering - despite being ut3 engine

expect ut3 to perform better and expect better performance with stock clocks or some OC'ing (my gpu is underclocked to 470 / 635 down from 475 / 700)

the ambiance and feeling of this game is spot on. it just needs a few patches more to increase performance a notch or two. thats it. it will make this game great. the hug-the-wall feature is well implemented and it feels really cool firefighting from under cover (as you would were you truly in a firefight)

it encourages a slower pace than most other fps games. its great. 5 stars for gameplay.

 

I'll add to this the fact that televisions and movies have a completely constant frame rate. Our eyes are incredibly apt at detecting change, like the difference from 30 to 20 fps.

Also, StormEffect, nVidia doesn't officially support 6x aa, so when you have HL2 to use it, it'll default to no aa.

 

I cleaned up the majority of the non-screenshot posts and merged several other posts. I ask anyone with questions to post in the 8600M discussion thread, which there is a link to in the General Index Sticky.

 

Why did you delete my post that added to the smooth fps discussion? -_-

Whatever. Oh, here's a screenshot so I'm on topic:

 

I agree with Chaz, I came in here to see screenshots, not a discussion.

 

I restored your post since you wanted it.

At the end of the day I'll clean out the rest of the posts so we can keep the majority of this thread as pictures.

 

not for nothing, but these photo uploader websites really cripple these screenshots.

 

bagh double post sorry. The frames are here, explanation in next post.

 

Battlefield 2142 version 1.4 Beta 1152x864, 2x aniso filtering, everything else is listed in the picture

For what its worth, I played version 1.25 before and held consistently high framerates at 1440x900 and still maxed out the settings. I just got sick of the FOV issue so im running the highest 4:3 res that i can on my 1440x900 screen.

In the fourth screen, you can see me and a few others frantically trying to make it off of the Titan while getting shot.

We all made it off, don't worry. (I can't speak for those who might have been behind me though...)

Enjoy.

 

Grand Theft Auto San Andreas ran on highest settings (highest resolution 1200x900 and highest anti aliasing) on my Vostro (with 1GB RAM). GPU is under normal condition, no undervolting or overclocking. I'm also running iTunes, IE, and Kaspersky at the same time (takes away RAM) I get a constant 25FPS due to frame limiter in game, and during car crashes involving over 5 cars, it drops to about 22 or so. But it's pretty stable at 25. 25 is very very smooth, I can't see a difference between 25 and 50. I'll post more exciting screenshots when I get further in the game, and I'll also post screenshots with frame limiter turned off.

 

Continued from my post above, these are screenshots of GTA: SA with max setting and frame limiter turned OFF. Max frame goes up to 80's and 90's. During explosions and crashes, FPS drops to the 30's, sometimes higher, but not lower. I don't see the difference between 80FPS and 25FPS....

 

Ok, now, Medieval 2 Total War. Creative Assembly had the guts to make the system requirement say that it requires "512MB RAM..." I'm playing this on highest setting except anti-aliasing is turned to 2. As we can see, the frame rates are in the tens. But as soon as I turn off anti-aliasing, everything bounces right back up; the lag goes away, no more stopping, no more low frames, and everything seems very smooth. (I can't see the difference between no and two anti-aliasing)

Just a side note: my current Vostro (w/ 1GB RAM) does not run this game as well as my old IBM (Duo Core 1.8GHz, 2GB RAM, X1400 Hypermemory). In other words, RAM is just as if not more important than GPU.

The screenshots have been converted from BMP to JPG, because the BMP files are 3MB and JPG files are 150KB.

Here're the screenshots with anti-aliasing set to 2:

Attacking the castle:




Here're the screenshots with anti-aliasing set to 0:

Rivals on the plain:


Conquering America:

 

Come on, my old laptop on GeForce 5 runs GTA on high settings

 

but can it run it at........ 24FPS????

 

Need for Speed Carbon maxed out, hmm I would like to see your fps on that one

 

Currently RAM is the limiting factor because I only have 1GB, which is why I can't play games like Splinter Cell Double Agent on max, but I'm upgrading my RAM very very soon.

 

BUMP for new pictures!

 

Tons of people out there have the 8600M and barely any screen shots

BuMP for requesting more pictures so people like me who are stuck on what to get can make a quick painless choice


Zeppelin68

Not sure if you are still around but I was looking at your FSX Screen Shots and they look really good.
I got a Core 2 Duo at 3.2Ghz, 7900GTX and can't even get the detail on the plane that high.

Do you have any add-ons? or is the FSX finally DX10?

 

Screenshots won't tell you anything unless they give you an FPS number or some kind of data in there.

Here is a CS:S video stress test with settings and everything shown, screenshot:


T7300
2GB
8600M GT
WinXP Pro SP2
Forceware 163.44's from LaptopVideo2Go

 

Nice pics guys. All my posts in the Official Video Game Screenshot are on the 8600M GT / Inspiron 1520

 

How many Frames Per Second did you get while running Flight Simulator X with this graphics?

 

It says the frames per second on the top right corner of the picture in yellow writing

 

The fps are on the top right hand corner of each screenshots...

EDIT: oops, a bit late...lol

 

OOOPS!!! Sorry people, I didn't see it!!!
(damn, how stupid can I be?)

 

Just admit your computer has a very low resolution and you forgot to scroll right

 

Fable: The Lost Chapters. I could run this game on lowest setting on my Intel GMA 945, but wanted to try it on the Vostro. The game's always smooth, nothing to worry. Playing Fable on 8600MGT is like hunting chickens with AK47's.

 

yaaaay these screens look VERY promising....i hated my 64mb GeForce4 Mx420...that thing was 4 years old lol. i cant wait for my 1520 to get here

 

Here are some more...

 

what fps did you get with those settings?
thats badass

 

Here are some more... 1440 x 900 Mostly everything on High. Carbon is 1024 x 768 ?

 

All settings on high after installing oblivion on my notebook. I'll have some more for you after I transfer my saves... (44 FPS in this low density area)

 

Here's WoW... all settings on high, for what that's worth. (52 FPS)

 

F.E.A.R 1440 X 900 Mostly high performance everthing else min. Carbon 1024 x 768

F.E.A.R. plays really well, the screen shot only shows 25 but plays much better. High is 60 FPS









I also took some videos of gameplay too about 30 seconds. If you would like me to post them they are about 30-80 megs. Just recomend a free site that I could upload them to and I'll post them.

 

^Larry, does your email let you attach files that big?

What's the FPS when you're not just standing around?

 

It dipped down to 20 when running in the Imperial City, but in regular play, it maintains around 30-35 FPS. EXTREMELY playable.

 

No, Sorry. I'm open to ideas though.