How Future Proof is the 8600m gt ddr3 Card?

Alot of people on this forum has this card and im wondering about its future readiness.

So far, I think this card has handled most games well, of course provided that you overclock this card a bit. But the fact that its able to run current gen titles near max settings using 1200x800 - 1440x900 is pretty amazing.

Games such as Mass Effect, C&C3, Call of Duty 4, Gears of War, and even Assassins Creed runs very well.

Seeing the amount of work game developers put into new game engines, unreal and havoc physics, just on jump in the efficient utilization of shader and memory, I really think we can squeeze a few more miles out of this card.

But then there are games like crysis that basically kicks every hardwares upside its core. Games will always eat hardware performance, future games will require faster cards.

Of course we could also think about how long the xbox 360/ps3 will be around. As long as games are developed on those platforms and continue to port onto PC, we might expect a stead stream of good games to come.

The question is, how long do you think the 8600m gt will continue to be viable in the gaming industry.

If this card will provide me 2 more years of gaming fun, I'll be more than grateful to Nvidia.

 

IMO this card is only semi future proof. When you think about it in terms that it is a MID range card in the 8000 series you soon should be able to see that it will only really be able to do what it does now with games for the next year or so as games only become more demanding...

Also a great place to look at GPU performance is located here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Comparison-of-Grafic-Cards.130.0.html

 

that is not a great place at all, what they say should be taken lightly as the resolutions, etc are not stated at what they were set at.

 

Hm... seeing as you don't know that they weren't all used under the same conditions I don't know what you're trying to get at here...

I mean, I understand your concern, but for me it seems like an accurate representation of GPU performance at least rank-wise...

But to each their own I guess.

 

The only thing that is slightly useful is the rank system, but I still dont trust it, they just throw up numbers and dont say what res say a 3dmark test was taken at. Resolution can make a HUGE difference there. And seeing as you dont know that they were taken at the same settings either It is more then safe to assume they were not all equal.

To the OP, that card will be fine for atleats another year, but then it iwll start to become less powerful.

 

Well, it's a year old mid-range card.

Should be adequate for this fall's big games.

Expect to run most of next year's titles at med to low settings.

Kind of like a 7600 performs on today's games.

 

I actually think that it'll fare well next year.
A Overclocked 8600m gt ddr3 665/880 is as fast as a 8700m gt (625/800) and performs slightly under the desktop 8600 gts due to slower memory speed. Its core/memory speed is very fast when overclocked but it still doesnt solve the low bandwidth problem. So playing games using higher resolution 1440x900, 1600x1200, will be very hard. however, this card will actually fare very well when using lower resolutions: 1200x800.

Usually, the recommended settings for the game will allow medium-high setting play. Far Cry 2's recommended setup requires a 8600m gts, we're talking about a game that's known for its graphical demand and so if the 8600m gts will handle farcry 2 on medium high settings i think an OCed 8600m gt will as well.

Remember when the original far cry came out and over the next couple of years, few titles came out that was as hardware intensive.

I guess what im saying is that this story is resonated againt today with crysis. Most games that come out next year will not surpass its hardware demand. So when we can change ini files to play crysis using high settings, we can expect the same for future next gen titles.

In the end, the 8600m gt cant compare to high end cards, but I think people who own this card might luck out more than they think if they're willing to take a little overclocking adventure.

 

Hmm not impossible it will last two more years. I mean my old go 7800GTX still plays today´s games really nicely and this on even higher res than 1280x800. Gears can be played on 1920x1200 without any major slowdowns for example and this on a single core too

 

IMO, any mid-range card is not future proof. especially a 8600 gt.

Why? a 7600 gt has 50% the shaders of a 7900 (12 vs 24), a 8600 only has a 25% of a 8800(32 vs 128). we are not even talking about gtx200s or hd4800s, we are talking about LAST gen cards.

Serious gamers, please look to 8800s/9800s or mobility hd 4850 or a desktop.

@wiley, you're lucky you got a really overclockable card, 90% of the 8600m gt owners won't get that kind of clocks

 

the 7600 gt can still play current games @ medium setting and that card was made 3 years ago. I think there line between average gamers and hardcore gamers now a days. I don't need to play all the games on max settings, to do that you'll even need to change out of 8800 gtx in a year.

 

I really want to compare 3dmark scores with a 8700m gt user or a 7900 gs user, Im wondering if my scores are in their ball park.

 

I would be surprised if that 8600M was still running next year given the graphic card defects. Since you overclocked it, that'll probably release nvidia from being forced to give you a replacement as well. Besides, if you've overclocked the card, it shows that you believe that, at least at stock speeds, you don't feel that the 8600M is still adequate, and there's no doubt in my mind that the games of November 2009 will have higher (even "Crysis-like") system requirements.

This doesn't mean that the 8600M is really outdated. It does mean that it'll be time to lower the resolution and put the game details on low. Doing this never really bothered me, but I think a lot of the people that come to these kind of forms will have e-peen issues with doing so.

 

Nope the 8800GTX desktop I have one still maxed out every single game out there. Yes even Crysis Very High, how come? I run at 1440x900 my max res of my monitor And I have owned the 8800GTX for over a year now, it´s still a killer card.

Actually comparing a 7900gs to a 8600m GT is not fair. The 7900gs is faster and has higher bandwidth 256-bit which really counts in except if you run really low res like 1280x800. Overclocking a 8600m GT to 8700m GT speeds I think is not good at all to run in the long run.

 

Uh unrelated to the 8600M GT but just a quick question is the 8800M GTX future proof?

 

Yes definitely more future proof than a 8600m GT.No card is actually future proof that is just a wrong statement. But some cards last longer than others

 

IMO, consoles are the key to this question. As games cost more and more money to create, it makes less and less sense to release a game for only a single platform because it costs far less to port a game than it does to make one from scratch. The consoles aren't getting any newer -- developers can optimize all they want, but they're ultimately limited by the hardware of the 360 and/or PS3. Also, ironically, if you're going to make a PC-only game, your best bet is to make it able to run on 5 year old cards (like Blizzard is doing with Starcraft 2).

Thus, I believe that despite the fact that the 8600M GT is a mid-range card from a year ago, it will still be able to handle games well for quite some time (i.e. at least 1.5-2 years), at least at the resolution I'm using (1280x800). Whether it will actually live that long is a different question...

 

I was reading throught the thread when i just noticed wileys 3dmark score. WOW. 6000 3dmarks is amazing, how come you didnt post it here
http://service.futuremark.com/searc...ingsystem_displayed_=All&operatingsystem=-100

And how did you manage to get your card performing at roughly the same as a 8800m gts in the p6860 fx laptop, i'm sure countless people would like to know your secrets.

 

Well, i don't think that my card compares to a 8800m gts even when its over clocked. 3dmark scores only says so much and when you actually compare in game performance, the 8800m gts outperforms by a wide margin. Remember that the ~6000 3dmark scores was achieved using the fastest drivers and very high overclocks. Whereas a stock 8800m gts will get ~8000 3dmark scores. It isnt even comparable.

Yes the 7900 gs is a high end card, it has higher bandwidth, but at lower resolutions, this bandwidth doesnt account for as much for a performance difference. I think on lower resoltions: 1200x800, 1280x1024, the 8600m gt can match up.

Most games nowadays have very flexible settings. Whereas settings on max will tax hardware, the next step down settings does not tax nearly as much. For example, with assassin's creed settings of 3/4 max will net you ~10 fps while the image quality is nearly the same. Game developers will utilize flexible game engines even more to reach across wider consumer margins. Starcraft 2 will test even the Nvidia 200s on max settings, but on medium settings, it'll run fluently on a 7600.

I guess by future proof, we really have to consider the gaming industry and its direction. If developers persistently utilize last gen technology to its full potential, future proof can last quite a long time. PS2 is a great example of this trend. Since developers were able to tap a mere 300mhz processor and a subdstandard gpu to produce close to high quality graphics in its late days. The xbox 360 have not been out for 3 years, and developers are only starting to utilize its potential. Which means, future games ported on to the pc will run very very well on performance cards. The 8600m gt is even a step above 360 gpu. Future proof really starts to look good under this consideration.

btw i dont think my 3dmark score is as astonishing as what others have pushed out. Ive seen people with 6.2-6.6 3dmark06 scores on this forum. How they got that score is beyond me though.

 

'Well, i don't think that my card compares to a 8800m gts even when its over clocked. 3dmark scores only says so much and when you actually compare in game performance, the 8800m gts outperforms by a wide margin. Remember that the ~6000 3dmark scores was achieved using the fastest drivers and very high overclocks. Whereas a stock 8800m gts will get ~8000 3dmark scores. It isnt even comparable'

that's very interesting.

I was reading this
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-8800M-GTS.6934.0.html

and the 8000 points was achieved at 1280x800 rez on the p-6831-fx. stock at default 1280x1024 rez is just under 7000. I mentioned the p-6860fx lol not the card itself.

I was searching through futuremark and I cannot find 8600m gt results past 4200? I wonder if the high results is from using 640x480 rez on 3dmark06 ?

Can you help me find the site on futuremark that posts the 8600m gt scores?

thanks alot and hopefully the games of the future will be optimized for the lowly consoles.

 

A stock 8700m GT, paired with a stock 2.5ghz T9300 will score ~5500 marks.

 

interesting, i guess this means that the 8700m gt is really just a stably overclocked 8600m gt in essence. Ive heard about the card having 'better quality memory' and other heat reducing components, but i guess with a laptop cooler, overheating on the 8600m gt wont be as much of a problem and can be equated with 8700m gt's performance.

still want to hear about 7900 gs scores though.

 

We should also compose a list of current games that the 8600m gt can run @ max settings (30+ fps). So far I have:

Gears of War
Assassin's Creed DX9.
C&C3

I wonder if other games like UT3, Mass Effect will make it onto the list.

 

4200 is what stock 8600m ddr3 using stock driver gets. With better drivers, the card is capable of 4600. Overclocked scores will vary based on how high you overclock.

You shouldnt just rely on scores from other websites as indication of performance. Because as far as benchmarking goes, notebookcheck posted 3300 as the 8600m gt's score, this is far from its actual performance on 3dmark 06.

The best thing to do is to ask other forum members about their card performance or maybe start a thread for you topic.

As far as this thread goes, its to compare the 8600m gt with other performance cards and hopefully get a collective opinion on its actual capabilities in current games. Is it future proof? OR can it not even run current games well.

Based on the games ive played, my opinion is that its at least current gen proof. But ofcourse my list of game test is slim and i cant really speak for all 8600m gt owners. And the problem that most 8600m gt owners face is that without overclocking it'll only give you mediocre performance in most games. Its a big problem for people who cant overclock their cards or doesnt want to risk hardware failure.

I'll probably to off to test more games in the coming moth. Next on my list: jedi knights force unleashed, far cry 2, and fall out 3! stay posted for those reviews!

 

Really 4200? I think i got like 3800 something last time I ran 3dmark06. Maybe it was other factors holding me back. Have you tried 175.19?

 

yep, its a good driver, i still think 174.74 and 177.35 are faster.

 

Do they have the shader optimization that the 175.19 supposedly have?

 

What resolutions are okay? My Vostro's DDR2 8600 could do Mass Effect max, no shadows at ~30fps, but I was playing @ 1024x640. This was also made possible by a very heavy 625/530 overclock. If I ran Medium/High settings at my native 1280x800, I averaged 25fps unless I was on the Presidium. My new 9800mGT absolutely slaughter the game though.

As an aside, at what resolution are you running your 3dMarks?

The bottom line is, your overclocked ddr3 GT will be okay in 2009, but you'll have to keep the resolution at 1280x800 or lower.

 

plattnnum, 3800 sounds bang on, I have the same laptop as you and at 1280x 800 with 177.35 drivers from laptop2go i get 3769, If I had the same card as wiley(9600m gt cough 9600m gt cough) I might be able to get 4200 at 1280x1024 stock. I tried overclocking it as high as wiley but the screen locks up and computer restarts even with 50 mhz less.. not sure how he gets those results. I undervolted my cpu and had it in the deep freezer but still no luck. with a 100mhz overclock i got 4393 3dmark06 points at 1280x800, and as far as performance gains per mhz goes id need to over**** the core 350 mhz past my default core of 475mhz so thats 825mhz core, and thats at 1280x800 nvm 1280x1024, I'd need about 450mhz past default to reach 5994 default 3dmark06 points..

lol maybe he doesnt have the 8600m gt gddr3 like us, I think he might have a diff gpu thats similar, or maybe the laptop has a 8700m gt but its device id says 8600m gt...either way im going to have to call it .... ....

Id really like to get my 3dmark06 score and game performance as high as yours, what exactly did you do to get it that high, currently with my 8600m gt gddr3 card in my asus that score is impossible to get close to at default rez, and impossible to get that high at 1280x800m in fact ill try running it at 800x600 to see if i can get it to 6000, but i highly doubt it.. brb

 

how do you know wether you have the DDR2 or DDR3 version of this card? I just ordered an XPS 1530 which has not yet arrived and I am not sure which one I am getting.

 

gpu z from techpower up will let you know.. yours should be gddr3 but stock even with the best drivers on the planet you will get about 3800 at 1280x800 and it runs kinda hot so overclocking to the point where it reaches 5000 is pretty dangerous.

 

1280x800, its not standard but thats the highest it'll go on my display.
I think theres a big difference between ddr2 and ddr3 cards.
Easy-e got ~3800 on 3dmark and he has a ddr2 card because the ddr3 version will be faster than stock 8600m gt ddr3.
Your running mass effect @ max in 1024x640, im running mass effect max @ 1200x800. It sucks that they're the same card and the difference is this big. i blame Nvidia for their marketing gimick.

As for my 3dmark score, its really b/c of my huge overclock that this score exist. 475/700 ---> 665/880: ~ 40%core increase/25% memory clock increase. Compare this increase to 3dmark score: ~4200 --->5900: 40% increase.

p.s. this overclock wasnt stable in games until I got a laptop cooler. Now temps are 72-82 during gaming sessions.

 

I'm running Mass Effect max (well, almost -- I don't use shadows, but that's because they don't look right on faces rather than performance) at 1280x800 and there is exactly one area where I notice a slowdown (when you get trapped between those shimmering energy barriers on Ilos). This is with the stock DDR2 8600M GT and factory drivers (167.59). Maybe I just have a higher tolerance for lower frame rates?

 

My memory might be off on the DDR2's ME performance. I'm going to boot the Vostro up later to check it out.

 

yeah I get 9200 at 1440x900 with my CPU at 2.8, so I dont think they are really close at all. Got just over 7000 at stock at 1440x900.

 

this topic is getting off topic.

however I think yes the 8600m gt is future proof as long as your happy about playing games that look like bioshock for the next couple years, you may not get the best framerates but it will still be playable and enjoyable as well as looking fantastic, just be glad you didnt buy what i first bought. A integrated 7150m card, now that is useless if you want anything better than halflife 2.

Also I have the GDDR3 version wiley, I checked out. read bleow

http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t16952.html

And there are many many Gddr3 owners that dont get even close to what your getting with similar overclocks.

a quote by val in that thread

3DMark06 1024x768: 5994
DDR3 OCed to: 650/920.
On XPS M1530, T7500, 3GB Ram

and the response

QUOTE (Valkirie @ Jan 16 2008, 04:31 PM)
3DMark06 1024x768: 5994
DDR3 OCed to: 650/920.
On XPS M1530, T7500, 3GB Ram



Can you post some pic's i like to see some proof, like mine....(see post acubens) and you will see. this is a very high index for the machine you have...!
But if it is true you have a hell of a machine.
grz


I looked at the other topics and 90 percent of the benchmarks matching 6k results were done at 1024x768 and very few prove it, the ones that have proof coincidentaly get lower scores.

I think you accidentally ran the test at a lower resolution, and your results shouldnt go up 40 percent with a 40 percent overclock at the higher resolutions, btw its not like your adding 40 percent more rops and 40 percent more bandwidth, or even 40 percent more fill rate, your just improving the speed at which it calculates the geometry and commands to draw the objects. At a higher resolution your bandwidth and 128bit bus is whats holding you back, not the core speed.

I'm sure i could post many other results about how the 8600m gt gddr3 overclocked even past your overclock, will only score 4600 at that res..and gets 5000-8000 at 1024x768.

I am not interested in calling you a liar, im more interested in getting the performance that you claim, however with some research it's appears you have a differant card perhaps a gddr5 vr. lucky guy

 

The 8600m GT is a year and a half old technology. I'm not saying its a slouch by any means. I have one in my Vostro 1500. But if you were to buy a laptop today, you'd be better off getting an nVidia 9x series IMHO.

I have no doubt it will tackle games released in the next several months without much issue at medium settings @ 1280x800. But beyond middle of next year it will probably struggle to keep up with most new released games.

 

My overclocked DDR2 will get between 4500/4675 @ 1280x800 with a 177 driver. That tells me that an overclocked DDR3 is easily into the 5000s. I doon't see why those 1024x768 scores are so low.

I'll provide any proof you deem necessary

Edit: I'll have my Vostro in an hour, I'll just go ahead and runn the 3Dmark, then post a screenshot.

 

quote

'My overclocked DDR2 will get between 4500/4675 @ 1280x800 with a 177 driver. That tells me that an overclocked DDR3 is easily into the 5000s. I doon't see why those 1024x768 scores are so low.

I'll provide any proof you deem necessary

Edit: I'll have my Vostro in an hour, I'll just go ahead and runn the 3Dmark, then post a screenshot'

Well, perhaps the users in laptopvideo2go are above the age of 12 and are posting truthfull results. I think it is pretty immature to lie about benchmark results and creates more confusion with new laptop gamers than thought possible.

If you run 3dmark05 I know you can post the results on futuremark
If you run 3dmark06 I know you cant post the results on 3dmark without a external monitor

Overclock your card to the max then run 3dmark05 and post the results, and past the link in the forum here.

Run the 3dmark06 overclock as high as you can go, and post the results from the site.

Don't bother using the posted jpg method as its harder to create and is less valid than a score posted on the site.

a highly overclocked 8600mgt gddr3 get 6000 at 1024x768, not at 1280x800 ever..

I will over clock my card and run it through my external monitor at 1280x1024, if i get artifacts i will still use the clocks, i want to see how far off these made up scores really are.. give me 10 min, and post yours if you have a futuremark link . cheers buddy

 

Woah, I suggest you back the heck down with that type of speech mate. There's no e-peen flexing going on here; what would it profit me to lie, especially when I now have a machine that easily scores over 9,000 @ 1280x1024? I'm not known for spreading false information around these boards. I'm also much older than you.

I'd actually forgotten to do pull out my old lappy, but I'll go get the laptop and run the tests now. Leave the insults elsewhere.

 

Just got unreal tournament 3, will test its performance later this afternoon! and yes i will post up my 3dmark scores with a screenshot to prove it as soon as i have time.

Okay back on topic, i think a whole line up of next gen titles are coming out this winter. We've already tested this card against current gen titles, and i'll gather up more evidence that it can handle them without problem.

i think how futureproof this card will be should be seen in its performance in fallout 3, farcry 2, left 4 dead, etc.

 

how about we wait till there out? we cant tell you how it will run, the games arnt even released yet.

 

thats my point. You really cant know if its future proof until future game gets here.

 

okay here is my 3dmark scores up
link to my score

images:





btw for those of you who dont know, 3dmark06 misread the 8600m gt as the 8600 gs dont pay attention to it.
Why so much fascination with 3dmarks though, for all you know, your in game performance is probably greater than mine with the 9600m gt!

 

Of those three, I see Left 4 Dead as the biggest challenge for the 8600.

Here's my screenshot, from my desktop, of a 3DMark06 run. 8600 ddr2, 650/530 overclock, driver version 177.70; check the time and date it was run, if you have doubts. I can pull a could hundred more with a better driver, but I'm not about to go through that hassle.

 

wholy crap dude, that is incred. OMG

I seriousl put mine in the fride to keep it cool when it started artifacting like crazy but i will not go past 4600, I spent all day yea it gddr3 i checked again.. but man i spent 5 hours trying to get your results and it just wont happen..I don't have a clue why everything is set correct im pretty smart with computers infact im using tinyxpbase and still cant break the 4600 mark at 1280x800. I know im not alone but I wonder why some 8600m gt gddr3 perform so much faster it is just driving me crazy. i have the minimun apps running 3dmark explorer and taskmgr.exe.. I have the highest overclock without it rebootingor freezing up. I put it in the **** fridge. Im using the best drivers according to laptovideo2go.com I also have my memory timings half stable at 3-3-3-12 crashes after 40 min or so. I also have used every reg tweak and guide setting too maximize performance, but no luck. I wonder if your gpu is simply defective and not rendering the correct procedures or maybe 'well **** i don't know' mahybe a moderator or someone with alot of brains could help me out, i just dont get it. I get what 99 percent of other owners get, but their is a couple people that seem to get 1300 extra points somehow. HOw do you do it, what drivers what operating system and what exactly did u do to get such high results with the same card.

ps. you posted a jpg the cut out the address bar and crucial nfo isnt their like rez..also your link does not lead me to the 3dmark. im thinking U EDITED THE RESULTS ILL CHECK INTO IT AND REPLY BACK. if you didnt then WOW dude you got a super card..kinda like your cards iq being in the 99.9 percentile..and im jeolous ill put it that way.

maybe you could write a guide or something on improving laptop gpu performance ...hell id pay money dude..

 

Left 4Dead? Runs on the source engine right? Why would it be hard to run then? Id say Far Cry 2 would be the biggest threat to the 8600GT out of those 3

 

I think it might come down to far cry 2 vs fallout 3. I heard left 4 dead is uses the source engine but with flairs kicked up, and that baby runs like a dream. I think the 8600m gt may have the least problem on this one. But thats a prediction using good track records like performance on half life 2 series and counter strike source.

The recommended require for far cry 2 is a 8600 gts, pretty hefty. And Fallout 3 is suppose to be another oblivion in terms of hardware demand. oblivion wasnt the most pleasant game on your system i dont think.

But then this is just talk, wont know for sure until they come out.

nice scores btw, you're scores are higher than a stock ddr3 8600m gt

 

uhhh, dude why would i spend an hour trying to fake a 3dmark06 score like some loser whos got nothing better to do. If you dont believe me that i shouldn't waste time helping you then huh.

If you really really want to know how your card performance measure up to mine, why dont you post up some gaming performance scores and we can compare.

So far ive tried

ME2
Assassin's Creed
Call of Duty 4
Gears of War
World in Conflict
Team Fotress 2
UT 3
C&C3

if youve played any of those i'll be able to tell you if your card is performing up to its overclocking standard.

 

Oops, I forgot is Left4Dead is running on the Source engine. My bad.