Quick Question on 9600m gt (DDR2) vs. 8600m gt (gddr3)

Hi, I have a quick question. I'm going to buy a compal whitebook and have had a tough time between the JHL90 and the FL92.

As you know the newer JHL90 has an 9600m gt ddr2 chip in it, but I was wondering if it performs better in games than the 8600mgt gddr3.

I already purchased an oem t9300 so I wouldn't gain any additional performance from putting it in the newer montevina platform I believe.

Besides that I also have a 160gb 7200rpm drive and 4gigs of ddr2-667 ram that I bought prior to this. The only problem is that I found out about compal's new montevina platform after I bought all these items and am now having a tough time deciding whether or not I should wait for the whitebook JHL90 to reach the etailers or just buy the older Santa Rosa FL92.

I would greatly appreciate any help at all thank you.

 

The 9600M GT will still perform better. It has 125mhz more on the core. You can reach it on the 8600M GT but hte 9600 will be much cooler and thus can even be OCed more.

 

the 9600m gt is between the 8600m gt ddr3 and 8700m gt

 

what notebookare you putting it in

 

itll run cooler and a bit faster nt much difference though (atleast wat i thought)

 

Yeah, a GDDR3 9600M GT should be as good as the 8700 though. Only 25mhz differance on the core.

 

I bought the parts off ebay. So, i guess barebones build.

Thanks for the responses. I guess I'll just wait this one out for another month to see if the JHL90 whitebook shows up in etailers stores.

 

9600m Gt Gddr2 > 9500m Gs Gddr2 > 8600m Gt Gddr3

 

9500M GS & 8600M GT are the same cards btw

 

yep just the 9500m gs has a smaller core adn using less power and heat that's it

 

But not much, it's still a 80nm G84.

 

Benchmarks and game tests show that the 9500M GS has optimizations such that its GDDR2 counterpart beats the 8600M GT GDDR3... so despite the core being the same, it's still better.

 

will the 9600gt ddr2 be able to run games such as CoD4 and AoC on high at 1280x800 with decent frames?

 

That's also possible with the 8600M GT, so with the 9600M GT it wouldn't be a problem to run on 1280x800 with decent frames.

 

Link please.

Because it is wrong, but still would like to see the incorrect link

 

Same here.

 

No. The GDDR3 8600m GT outperforms the DDR2 9500m GS.

If you have a link proving otherwise, that would be fantastic.

 

Here you go, compare the FPS in games for the 8600M GT GDDR3 and 9500M GS GDDR2:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-8600M-GT.3986.0.html

Supreme Commander: 1024x768, high details: 16-44 fps -> playable (large Multiplayer battles may need a faster GPU)
F.E.A.R.: 1024x768, CPU max, GPU max: 24-40 fps -> well playable
Doom 3: 1024x768, Details: Ultra: 67 fps -> well playable
Quake 3 Arena: 1024x768, max Details: 236.5 fps -> well playable

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-9500M-GS.8167.0.html

Supreme Commander (Benchmark): 1024x768, low: 27 fps -> well playable (especially smaller maps)
F.E.A.R.: 1024x768, med/med: 69 fps -> fully playable (in max/max avg. 34 fps)
Doom 3: 1024x768, ultra: 84,7 fps -> fully playable
Quake 3 Arena: 1024x768, highest: 501 fps -> fully playable

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Acer-Aspire-6920G-Notebook.8783.0.html

Acer Gemstone Blue 6920G with 9500M GS 512MB GDDR2 compared to Dell XPS M1530 with 8600M GT 512MB GDDR3

The Acer Aspire 6920G reached 4715 points In the PC Mark 2005 benchmark. Therewith, it is clearly behind comparably notebooks, like the Asus M51S or the Asus F8SN. However, this moderate result is put into perspective by the result of the powerful Dell XPS M1530, which is 4374 points and, so, clearly worse.

Although the Geforce 9500M GS can outperform the older 8600M in the OpenGL shading test, optimized user video cards, e.g, the Quadro FX 1600M inside the Dell Precision M6300 perform clearly better.

 

Dude.... Seriously?

 

That last link shows the XPS scoring higher in 3DMark06... may want to read your sources again. It only out-scored it in one PCMark test. Yay.

As far as I have ever seen on this site, the DDR3 8600m GT renders better framerates than the 9500m GS. I would dignify my statement with links, but I don't really have the urge to scavenge the NBR forums for framerates from both.

And Notebook check still ranks the 8600m GT a few notches above the 9500m GS.

 

What about the 512MB 9600M GT with GDDR3?

That's gotta be better, right?

 

that is definatly better than a ddr3 8600gt the ddr3 9600 is considered equal to an 8700m gt

 

All the ones I have seen are only GDDR2 ... but I'm sure there's gotta be a GDDR3 one out there somewhere. I imagine it would be right on par or slightly ahead of the 8700m GT ... but that's just an educated guess.

 

HP dv5t and dv7t have the 512MB NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT as an option.

Would the

dv5t with the t9400 and 512 9600m gt, wsxga+

be better then the

m1530 with the t9300 and 256 8600m gt, wuxga?

Or would they be about par?

 

The 8600M Gt DDR3 outperforms the 9500M GS.
NotebookCheck is a total failure.
They did not even bother to do an FPS test for each video card.
I have seen different cards on their site having the EXACT same FPS values for the EXACT same games, proving that their editors did nothing more than Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V.
Do not use NotebookCheck as a primary or trusted source.

 

The performance difference would be minimal, the dv5t coming out ahead though. So if the M1530 was cheaper by a decent amount, I would go with that. Also, Dell's warranty coverage > HP's in a heartbeat.

 

I have no doubt 9600GT can handle call of duty 4 easily. I had an M1530 with 8600GT DDR3 256, I played call of duty 4 at 1440 x 900 with everything turned up with VERY playable framrate, no lag what so ever. 9600GT will only beat it.

That said.. COD World at war is coming out.. its based on the same engine as COD 4, both card should handle that game fine as well.

 

my 8600m gs 256 pisses cod4 at 12800x800 on high settings with no aa so i think your safe!

 

so the conclusion is 9600gt(ddr2) > 8600gt(ddr3) >9500gs(ddr2)...???am i right?

 

Dude what are you talking about. The notebook forum review says the 9600m gt faster but look at its 3dmark scores, ~300 below 8600m gt ddr3. I suggest reading up more on user reviews of 9600m gt ddr2, because benchmarks show that it performs less well on games than the 8600m gt ddr3.

* stop reading benchmark reviews from notebookcheck, they are so inaccurate.

edit: notebookreview says that the 9600m gt ddr2 is: 'This score is slightly higher than that of an 8600M-GT (~3400 average)...15% faster..', yeh, in this cause they're comparing 9600m gt ddr2 vs 8600m gt ddr 2. 8600m gt ddr3 gets ~4200 3dmark scores.

 

8600GT is slightly more powerful than 9500M GS mainly because of the DDR2 vs GDDR3 RAM. They are the same card with the same die size, probably a something internal changed as 9500M seems to run a bit cooler.

When O/C both reach amazing performance-- reaching 9600GT levels.

9600GT should be about 40% stronger overall, something like 9700GT.

 

Does anyone actually own a 9600m gt ddr2 that can tell us your benchmark and performance?

Ryzeki: whats your 9500m gs benchmark performance ?

 

Well in the review of the dv5t on here it says ...

Well my all stock XPS M1530 gets approx. 4400 on 3dmark 06 as well on 1280 x 800 and I have a worse processor, but more RAM than the review ... so really they are about exactly the same, the minimal difference isn't worth arguing about really.

 

^^^The 1280x1024 3DMark06 score is slightly lower than that of my stock G1S when it had a T7300 instead of the T8300.

 

yea 9600m gt is good but usless on crytek games

 

so means 8600gt DDR3 > 9600 gt DDR2 >9500gt DDR2???

 

I am looking at the same comparison. HP has a great deal on that dv5t with the 30 percent off coupon (if it works, haven't tried it yet)

Have you bought anything yet?