One take on the DDR2 vs GDDR3 8600m gt

hey guys although i think that my question is out of topic but i was wondering if a geforce 8600m gt with ddr2 is a close performer in current strategy games to the geforce 7900gs and both being 256 ram cards ..
as im planning to get a new laptop and im having a hard time choosing between the Acer Aspire 5920g & Toshiba Satellite p105-9722 ..
while they both have similar components differing only in screen size an Hdisk capacity and the GFX card and thats whats driving me crazy ...is the 8600m gt ddr2 worse than 7900gs in current games or not, especially in strategies like Supreme Commander ??

 

The 8600M-GT would not perform as well as the Go7900GS, especially at higher resolutions.

 

I plan to play those strategy games at a reasonable rez like 1024x768 or the native for the Toshiba with a 1440x900 i think with a 7900gs but i also wonder if a 8600m-gt (ddr2) would play like the 7900gs in games like supreme commander or starcraft 2 when it comes ofcourse at 1024x768 with max settings without AF & AA cuz ive always hated using them in the past ..
what do u think guys ?

 

it should be performing just a little ways under the 7900 gs. not
too far behind. also consider that you can get a smaller laptop with the 8600.

 

i dont mind a large laptop as long as i can play the games i want at max settings with a 1200x800 rez without AF&AA ...
and do u guys think that the 8600gt is that much future proof as ive been seeing that most powerful 8800 cards performing sadly in dx10 titles so isnt it better to get a powerful dx9 card now than having a dead slow dx10 one ?

 

The 8800 cards are performing slowly because they're being tested on extremely high resolutions with ultra-high settings, in games and demos that haven't even been properly optimized for DX10. There's no doubt that a high end DX10 card will crush a high end DX9 card.

However, in your situation you're looking at a mid-level (relatively speaking) DX10 card, and a fairly high level DX9 card. As long as you don't mind the larger laptop, the Go7900GS will perform better than the 8600M-GT, and they should both last equally long in terms of becoming obsolete.

 

i would say the 7900GS go is about 20% faster than a DDR2 8600m GT

but remember with the 8600m GT you can have a much longer battery life not to mention a more portable laptop

 

I do like the 8600gt but its the ddr2 version that is giving me headaches and im a bit more familiar with the 7xxx family and me being in egypt right now makes all things worse as i cant get any other machine with a good gfx card except those 2 the acer and toshiba and i agree that the toshiba is heavier and less portable but i would sacrifice that for a decent gaming laptop if the toshiba is one of those ....i cant find a website that can ship an asus g1s to egypt also ..

 

Try MilestonePC.com. I believe... as long as you have a major accepted credit card you can purchase through their US center and have it shipped via global USPS (the G1S that is). Now don't burn me if I am wrong. I just know that they have a global USPS option, which I believe is a flat rate of $120.00 ( and I don't see the need for it unless of course you need shipping to places around the globe ) Well good luck and I hope your options can be increased.

 

the 8600 gt (even the ddr2 version) is way faster than the go 7600 (which is the card it replaces)

if you would have been getting a go 7600, the choice is clear.

if you wanted a go 7900 gs and you don't care about how big your laptop is, you should probably stick with that.

if you wanted an 8600m gt (gddr3) that would be the best option overall (even with infant drivers it gives comparable performance to a go 7900 gs, plus you get dx 10, more battery life, more portability), but it only exists in a few select notebooks.

so now you have to weigh the options with the ddr2 version of the 8600m gt. is battery life, portability, and dx10 a good reason to sacrifice some performance? if it is, get it, otherwise, go 7900 gs.

 

Honestly, this whole GDDR2 vs GDDR3 thing doesn't bother me much. If my card starts to stutter in later games, I'll overclock it a bit. On the other hand, if some game brings my card to its knees it will most likely be a result of insufficient shader power, in which case both these cards will be equally obselete. I honestly think that in terms of longevity these cards will basically be neck-and-neck, and having gamed on integrated graphics followed by PoS buisiness-graphics for a total of 6 years, longevity is my primary concern.

 

If you go with a lower screen resolution, then the ddr2 version isn't going to make much of a difference. I wouldn't let the ddr2 vs 3 get to you too badly. ddr2 8600GT is still a good card.

 

What drivers are you guys using for the 8600M GT and Vista 32-Bit?

 

http://secure.hypersonic-pc.com/scripts/custom_sys.aspx?sysid=Aviator_SR5

note the 512mb GDDR3 8600gt, didnt know there WAS a 512mb GDDR3 version, until now of course

 

There's no reason for there not to be one. I believe the new MSI gaming notebook is to have the 512mb GDDR3 version as well.

 

i just checked it out, doesnt really say, either way i dont think the 512 version is too much better than the 256 version anyways

 

Do you guys think that most nb's with 8600GT are going to stay at ddr2, or do you think that in the future, all or most will refresh to ddr3's (and ddr2 will become old news)..?

 

DDR2 memory was chose because it was more cost effective. I highly doubt that very many notebooks (if any at all) will refresh to GDDR3 memory, because by the time that GDDR3 memory becomes cost effective enough for budget notebooks, there will be a new graphics card series out (nVidia 9m series, or whatever).

 

Does any of this all matter? Bottom line is:

(1) THE GAMES: It all depends on the game you're playing. CS:S may render a 28% improvement, but the fps is not noticeable to the human eye in either case. Oblivion may be only 5% since you're comparing 28fps vs 30fps. Bioshock same thing... check the benchmark for the types of games you'll play. Some are RAM sensitive, others CPU, others GPU speed.

(2) RESOLUTION: 8600GT should run most pre 2007 games at 1440x900 without much issue with max settings. 2007 games should run well at 1440x900 in most cases, but dump down to 1280x800 for DDR2 or 1440x900 DDR3. 2008 both will probably require 1280x800... etc etc. It's not so bad to run at 1280x800

(3) DEVELOPERS $$$: As much as I hate it, because I think it stifles creativity quite a bit, game making is a business. And businesses need to make money. Developers won't make games that won't run on most PC's. They want a wide market. Otherwise they'd stranglehold themselves to a niche market and make no money. The 8600m is considered a faster than average card for 2007, and will probably be the bogey "average" GPU for games in 2008.

(4) DETAILS: Games have detail settings for a reason. www.tweakguides.com is a great site to learn what settings affect fps the most and what the tradeoff is. Most times you can dump down a few settings and gain 15-20% FPS improvement with very little degradation to the visual settings.

(5) PRICE: GDDR3 costs more than DDR2. Period. You have to pay for the performance. So either open your wallet or shut up. I wish we did have the option in most cases to choose from a specific vendor, but there are usually good reasons why they don't offer it.

(6) OBSOLESENCE: The day you buy a laptop or other piece of PC hardware it's obsolete. It's the nature of the business. But that doesn't mean it won't perform well. I always had to have the best of the best, and realized I was wasting so much money because the next step down hardware would perform with no noticeable differences to me. Future-proofing is counted in months. An 8700m with GDDR3 might gain you three more months for playing that one new hardcore game in 2009 @ 20fps, that the 8600m DDR2 will just chug along at 8fps no matter what you do.

(7) LAPTOPS: Laptops by their very nature are a compromise. You lack upgradability and power for portability. I'd love to have a 15" laptop that would get 6 hours on battery, graphics equal to an 8800 GTX, dual 500GB HDD's, with easily swappable components, and cost under $2000. Reality is, it just will never happen. Laptop technology typically lags behind desktop technology (at least performance-wise) about a year. You will have to be an early adopter to keep up with the curve, and trade-up often.

Bottom line is GDDR3 in most cases won't have a huge performance delta compared with DDR2 in general, with the same GPU. I doubt there'll be isntances where a laptop with an 8600m DDR2 won't be able to run at playable framerates but an 8600m GDDR3 will. You may have to drop the res down or reduce graphic options a bit.

 

Thats not a GDDR3 card even though its advertised that way. Some people in Sager and Clevo forums were able to find out a month back(I can't seem to locate the posts regarding this). Thats a Compal IFL90 machine which I believe comes with GDDR2 version of 8600GT.

 

Of course it's DDR2, even that link advertises it as a DDR2 card. The only 512mb GDDR3 8600M-GT card I know of is the one in the upcoming MSI notebook.

 

What's the difference at 1280x800?

 

Not much. I can't find the comparison right now, but I believe it's around 5-15%, depending on the game.

 

Sweet. I'm getting a Vostros soon I think, but its the DDR2 version - but I'll be playing at 1280x800 or possibly even 1024x768 on an external sometimes. Guess it's not something I'm gonna have to bother worrying about now....

 

Hello guys, I am looking at a new laptop and I was wondering if using GDD3 over GDDR2 would produce any noticeable benefits in CAD/CAE applications such as Catia V5, Ansys, etc) and Surface modeling (i do not use Alias or Studio Max or other rendering apps but just Mechanical Cad apps, although I do surface modeling with them.
I was thinking at a Vostro 1500, Asus G1S or Asus C90s with 2Gb Ram, 7200rpm hd, WXSGA+ screen and T7300 or E6600 for the C90...

 

why not get a notebook with asus g1s performance thats built for cad? Go with the t61p lower price than the g1s for the same performance.