Will the 8600M GT run Bioshock at MAX settings?

Will it? If not, how well?

 

Gee, we really aren't sure but I highly doubt it since it you need at least a 7900GT card and upwards to play it on high. Or at least a 8600GT DESKTOP version which are much more powerful than the mobile variants.

 

No. DX10 mode is crippling when it comes to performance. I'd think 1280x800, DX10, and low settings are what's going to be a playable bunch of settings.

 

moved to gaming...

 

remains to be seen.

its almost guaranteed that you could play it on max settings at a low resolution.

i think you will do 1440x900 at medium or 1280x800 at high.

the mobile card is almost as fast as the desktop card. you can overclock the mobile card just slightly and match the desktop card's performance.

 

Isn't dx10 supposed to be the opposite, do more with less? Or is it just that dx10 is still new and not optimized yet?

 

No it wont for sure. Even high would be kinda hard for the card.

 

I think he meant the desktop 8600GTS, which is much faster than the mobile 8600M-GT.

And no, you can't run it on max settings with any kind of high resolution. I suppose you have a shot at close to max settings (probably AA turned down) if you lower the resoltution enough. I'd say you'll probably want to play it at 1280x800 with 4xAA and mostly medium settings, or 1440x900 with 2xAA and mostly medium settings.

That's most likely blatantly untrue. The only indication we've had of this is from extremely unoptimized demos and betas, some of which were mere DX9 "ports". Bioshock has most likely been designed from the ground up for DX10, and is almost certaintly very highly optimized. I would guess that it's DX10 codepath will give better visuals at the same framerates than the DX9 codepath will.

 

if you can do 1280x800 w/ 4x aa at medium, you could probably also do 1280x800 with 2x aa or no aa and set things on high if you want.

i do agree that the dx10 shader path will most likely be the best one.

 

My laptops native res is 1680x1050.

 

Agreed. Though I've always felt that AA is one of the most important settings at resolutions lower than 1680x1050.

 

definitely varies from person to person. ill agree that aliasing is more pronounced in lower resolutions, but personally i like the look of 2x aa (at most) and feel like overuse of aa softens images too much.

some people will want more shader detail and such in place of anti aliasing. others like the sharp clean aa look and that is more important.

either way, if you have a 1680x1050 screen, you will need to run the game at lower than native res for sure (95% certain) to get it smooth and consistent.

 

Doesn't changing the resolution make everything blurry and stuff.

 

yeah, but it isn't all that bad, it kinda looks like its being AA'ed

 

the real questions is can a 8400m run this at medium-low?

 

An 8400M-GS would have to turn the resolution down (1280x800 max), with AA off and most settings at low, some medium, I would guess.

 

1280x800 looks okay on 1680x1050

1680x1050 will be hard on a DDR2 8600