nvidia 8600 gs benchmark (Asus F3Sv)

It seems the santa rosa platform has hit the market overnight, and while the mobile 8xxx series still seems elusive, there has already been some models shipped to test with the new video cards.

Just in today, here's a review of the new Asus F3Sv: http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/taxid;2136212931;pid;3529;pt;1#cb

with it, is the 3dmark scores of the 8600 gs:
"While the Centrino Pro platform offers a more powerful integrated 965 Express graphics chipset with Clear Video technology aimed at increasing the brightness and clarity of images, many notebooks are likely to come with either NVIDIA's or ATI's latest mobile graphics solutions. Our ASUS test machine is installed with an NVIDIA 8600GS. It scored 2459 in 3DMark 2006, a figure that suggests it can handle some newer games albeit at medium settings. In 3DMark 2001 SE it scored a whopping 16415, so older games will run without a hitch."

I personally think that this score of 2459 in 3dmark06 is a tad disappointing, as the current Asus G1 with the 7700 gets scores that are a little higher. Of course the 8 series is still a next gen cards with a few specs that give it some advantage, but i was expecting performance that would come close to previous gen 7800's. I know these scores are not yet set in stone, as there's probably some more updates with the drivers due to come. Still, drivers don't work miracles.

Did anyone else expect more from the 8600 gs?

 

Thanks for posting that! But just 2500 3dmark06 points? That is very disappointing. I saw a review of a Zepto notebook with 8600 and it scored 3000 3dmark06 points, which is more promising.

I hope that drivers will result in better scores.

 

What were the resolutions? 8600M GT in Zeptos http://uk.zepto.com/Shop/Notebook.aspx?notebookid=636 scores about 4100 points 3Dmark06 at 1024x768. I was thinkin to get FS3v but thought it would be with GT.

 

I'm going to reserve judgement of the 8600M until we actually have a review of a notebook with one on this site with game benchmarks. I would not suggest judging these cards off of synthetic 3D scores either. Remember they're not real games and a lot of the time do not equate to real-world performance.

 

I agree, I was hoping Asus would be leading the way in placing the 8600m gt in their 15.4-14.1 inch screen laptops; but so far, the only laptop that asus has announced with the gt is the G1 and G2 refreshes. Hopefully Asus places the GT in their other configs soon, since they look so much better than zepto's.

 

12 Cell battery: 4 hours and 30 minutes
6 Cell battery: 2 hours and 45 minutes

I guess the battery life is the only thing they forgot to improve.

 

Probably beta driver/software issue, hopefully.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2984&p=2

 

I didnt expect more from the GS , I expect a lot from the GT though and so far its proven with like 3500+ 3dmark06 if i recall.

The acer gemstone 15.4" has the GT and it looks really nice.

 

The ATI 2600 XT performs _alot_ better : / it got 4002 3Dmark06 at 1650x1080
http://laptopmag.com/Review/HP-Pavilion-HDX-Entertainment-Notebook-PC.htm If It cant even beat a 7700 or x1700 ill probally get the f3jp.

 

yeah, but is the ATI 2600 XT scheduled to come in a package that can still be considered a laptop? preferably 15.4" or smaller?

 

its a mid range card so one would assume so, traditionally x400-x700 are found in 14.1-15.4" models.

 

I thought F3Sv would come with GT, so I'm all now for G1

 

Where in the article does it say that?

 

Yea its scheduled in hp's 15.4" business lineup (8510 i think).

Nobody knows if its the XT version though , unless they are calling all of them that.

 

"We expected to see high scores from the HDX, and we weren't disappointed. This preproduction model wouldn't run PCMark05, but its 3DMark03 score of 12,240 and 3DMark06 score of 4,002 mean this system can plow through graphics-intensive applications. Strangely, the HDX notched 31 fps on our F.E.A.R gaming test on autodetect, and 26 fps with the settings maxed out. (We suspect this subpar showing might be a driver issue related to Windows Vista.)"

 

Yeah, said nothing about resolution, I would bet it was 1024x768 which makes Mobility 2600XT on par with 8600M GT.

 

Well I hope the HD 2600 doesn't turn out the the 8600 series. The 8600 series gets great 3DMark scores, but it's real world performance doesn't reflect that.

 

Have you read this?

http://www.pcwelt.de/defaults/drucken/579/80123/

Its in german (wich I dont understand) but the numbers are easy to understand =) the 8400 outperforms the 7400 IN GAME TESTS (fps) so is no sinthethyc test) maybe the leap isnt to great but is something..... Im looking for something similar but for the 8600m xx. (why the A8j refresh got only the 8400 =( )

 

Only the GS and G was benchmark, which this cards are 64bits. The GT, however IMO will be a leap ahead the old 7400.

 

the best I could find about the 8600m xx

http://www.hardwarezone.com.au/reviews/view.php?id=2112&cid=3&pg=1

 

I dont think this is grounds for disappointment. With nvidia, the _600gs models are never very fast. The 6800 series is faster than the 7600s. Expecting the 8600 to be faster than the 7800 is just setting it up for failure. The 8600 will be for people who want a midline card, decent battery, AND DX10. People who want better performance but still a 15" have the 7700. I doubt we'll see an 8800go in a 15" for a while, but haven't looked into that. How long did it take for the 7700 to come out? A looong while after the 7600 did. Patience all, patience.

 

exactly the same thoughts as me. cant wait for the a8js refresh.

 

One A8Js refresh is coming in August. It's called the F8 and will be offered with a strong chassis and supposedly an 8600M GT. The stronger chassis, of course, will prevent the notebook from scratching whenever you touch it, and add more style to a pretty bland notebook to begin with.

 

Sounds promising! Cant wait either xD and it better be at least a 8600GT...

 

You'll have one as soon as Zepto get this freakin' laptop to me!

 

Since the 8xxx series is still struggling on even desktop platforms with immature drivers, it would be pretty unfair to think that numbers you see now from a benchmark can reflect accuratly on how it will preform once drivers have matured. The notebook versions are even newer than the desktop ones so I think they may hold even more true.

Then make sure you know if benchmarks were done on XP or Vista. As of now performance is down on Vista machines by 3-6% on most games again due to drivers and the OS's diffrent coding/setup.

The first DX10 games are just starting to show up, and they suck lol. Poorly optimized (ones a console port, the other we dont have a playble demo for yet) The idea behind DX10 is not supposed to be higher details or better graphics despite what everybody seems to tend to think (thus why you get so many people flaming at how the DX9 version of a game is nearly identical to the DX10 version in looks) the actual reason for DX10 was greater efficantcy. More processing power at a lower cost.

So a game that runs at 30fps on DX9 should run at say 50fps (just pulling numbers ouf the the air) on the same game optimized for DX10 on a equal quality video card.

This can be a very great thing indeed once DX10 has had time to mature, so that means in the long run once DX10 is mainstream. Even if a card like the 8600GS/GT score lower than there 7xxx brothers on a bench like 3dmark. Its very well possible it will be a stronger gaming card when it can play the DX10 version wich is easier to run and looks the same/better. While the older card will be stuck working with the old DX9.

You will of course see DX10 games that look better than DX9 because they have several new technologies in it, and since a game can run easier at the same visual settings, it will make it possible for programers to add extra content for DX10 games only that the DX9 version wont be able to have because it would be too demanding on a system. This I suppose is the source of why people think DX10 is supposed to look better than DX9, more rendering power = more ability to add things in. However that was not the real intent/goal.

So to everybody I say sit tight and see how the drivers mature for the DX10 cards and vista itself. Also wait for the DX10 game market to expand then it will become much more clear on wether or not a 8xxx is worth having. Its also the first generation of DX10 cards, surly the next cycle will do everything this card can but much better. There is a price to pay to be the first one thru the door to new technology.