Problems? See this thread at archive.org.)
just out of interest, desktop vs mobile.
both are 256mb GDDR3 stock speeds no overclocking.
As far as i can tell reading a lot of posts, both get around 4500 in 3dmark06 demo.
I thought the desktop 8600GT should would be more powerful.
What do you think?????
thanks
John.
-
-
Desktop cards will always be more powerful, atleast more overclockable, simply since they're larger!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Here is a small compilation of screenshots comparing the Geforce's 8600/8700 specs:
![[IMG]](images/storyImages/geforcesmxdtz4.jpg)
The results are these:
Geforce 8600m GT
Core Clock: 475 MHz
Shader Clock: 950 MHz
Memory Clock: 700 MHz (GDRR3 version)
Geforce 8600 GT
Core Clock: 540 MHz
Shader Clock: 1180 MHz
Memory Clock: 700 MHz (GDRR3 version)
Geforce 8700m GT
Core Clock: 625 MHz
Shader Clock: 1250 MHz
Memory Clock: 800 MHz
Geforce 8600 GTS
Core Clock: 675 MHz
Shader Clock: 1450 MHz
Memory Clock: 1000 MHz
* All of them have 32 Stream processors and memory bus of 128-bits.
-
Wow, so the 8700M GT is actually more powerful than the 8600 GT?
And if you OC enough, an 8600M GT can actually match or even surpass the power of 8600 GT? -
-
Though eleron that 7950GTX eats the 8600m GT and 8700m GT as breakfast. They might be equal at lower res such as 1280x800 but the higher you go in res the more that 128-bit bus struggles, the more AA/AF you run width the more severely hard it hits the 128-bit cards due to much lower bandwidth. Of course it hits the 256-bit cards as well but not as heavy as the 128-bit cards.
I noticed this when I had dual 8700m GT´s in my M1730, at high res these cards are really bad. They struggled bad at 1680x1050 and especially 1920x1200. Not all games of course but these were two 8700m GT´s in SLI and heavily overclocked too.
Even if the shader power is better than a go 7950GTX that does not compensate for the inferior bandwidth these GPU´s output. Now the 7950GTX is a high end card however Nvidia stated the 8700m GT as a high end too which is not true at all in real life usage
-
You mean me ryane0840? I don´t want to diss any 8600m nor any 2600 that´s not my intention. They are really good mid range cards and as can be seen by benchmarks run games really well. I just think realistically that´s all. Imagine if the 8600 and 2600 had a 256-bit bus
Yes though at least one thing the 8600 and 2600 is better at compared to any go 7800GTX, go 7900GTX and go 7950GTX i.e the older high end cards. Is that these newer midrange cards with at least 32´SP´s has in fact better shader power This because they use a unified shader architecture compared to the "older" high end cards.
So at 1280x800 a 8600m GT might beat a 7950GTX in gaming performance. Well actually when I have my XPS M170 with a go 7800GTX up and running again we could benchmark against each other with both the 8600m GT and HD2600 at 1280x800. I definitely think you will beat my older high end card and the only difference between a go 7800GTX and any go 7900GTX, 7950GTX is that these are only higher clocked.
Only culprit with my older XPS is as said a single core CPU at 2.13GHz so that might effect some benchmarks of course since most CPU´s today is a Core2Duo and higher clocked. But anyway I will make a thread when I get that GPU up and running.
So in the end the 8600m GT and 2600 and up should perform better in newer shader intensive games than the older high end cards. Games today becomes more and more shader intensive, where the unified shader architecture of the 8600, 2600 performs better than the older shader architecture.
Someone can correct me if I am wrong on some points.
Desktop 8600GT Vs 8600mGT both GDDR3
Discussion in 'Gaming (Software and Graphics Cards)' started by Tinderbox (UK), Mar 18, 2008.
