Yeah, so its time for me to upgrade teh good ole video card. Just was wondering from you guys which one you would favor if you had the money to buy them. Comparison is the 8800GT against the latest 9600GT. Discuss

They're similar enough overall, the 8800GT is slightly faster and more expensive, but older. The 9600GT is newer and cheaper, but will fall behind if you want to run in very high resolutions / other intensive activities.

Depends on budget, the rest of your system, and the kind of games you'll be playing I guess.

And theres the thread. Mine has been serving me quite well.

I have an 8800 GT and its smoking everything I play so far, including Crysis at 1280 by 1024 with high settings and 4x AA. I get about 35-40 fps in game with those settings. Looks gorgeous.

What does being older have to do with it? It uses the same Core and Bus and has more shaders, It's not really relevant how old it is.

Anyway just listen to what Elanzer said and if you would like to know how each card performs have a looks here.

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_gef...ance/page11.asp

So the 9600GT 512 is about the same as the GT 256 with the GT 512 being about 15% faster.

Isn't the G92 architecture on the new 8800 cards only 6 or 7 months old?

Dunno, something like that.

Actually the 9600GT does use a newer core - the G94 instead of the G92. If it was the same it wouldn't be as fast as the 8 series despite having half the physical capability... And to me it's both a good thing and relevant because the 8 series still, 2 years on, has problems with my favourite games, and the 9 series doesn't. I'd personally take the 9 series anyday.

Your favourite games like what? What sorts of problems? Only the 9600 is G94 the rest are G92's, Remember that the GT is a better card and that the games you play with problems might not be the games he would play so in that case he wouldn't rather have a G94 based card.

Actually the only 9 series to use the G92 are the 9800s. The other cards currently out use G94/G96/soon G98 and GT100/200 when the 9 series 'properly' arrives with the 9900.

As for a good example of the 8 series incompatibility - Med2. Go download it and try if you're so eager to see all the horrible shadow and fog issues. No he may not play the same games as me, nor you, so what? He might play ones that have even worse issues instead. What exactly is wrong with telling someone asking for advice that the 8 series has an awful track record? I think the fact you own one is making you just a little biased towards the facts - They are the most problematic Nvidia GPU's I've seen to date.

Well cards currently out are all G92 apart from the 9500 which will be crap anyway.

Suppose i'd had money for any kind of video card. What would you guys suggest i buy ?

I'd suggest you take the initiative to post existing specs beforehand when asking such a question, like everyone should but always fail to do, so accurate advice can be given.

I'm really stupid. Forgive me, i forgot about that. Pfss . . .


*Uploading spec*


AMD Athlon™ 64 Processor 3000+, MMX, 3DNow, ~1.8GHz
Memory : 1024MB RAM
Hard Drive : 160 GB Total
Video Card: Ati RADEON X700 Series
Monitor : Plug and Play Monitor
Sound Card : Realtek AC97 Audio
Keyboard : Razer Tarantula Gaming Keyboard
Mouse : Razer Copperhead
OS : Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 2 (2600.xpsp_sp2_gdr.050301-1519)

*Done*

Nothing too beefy, it'll just get bottlenecked.

I would say something around a 7900/X1900 I guess.

They go for pretty cheap prices if you can find them around.

I don't want something cheap.

Well there's no point in getting anything faster since it'll just be bottlenecked by the rest of your system.

This means i'd just have to get a new comp

I fail to see why a 7900 is cheap. Other than the price being cheap, its still a good card.

Because its two series old... if that make sense. My 7900 GT goes for 50 bucks on ebay now.

I have a question:I want to upgrade my comp this summer from these specs : CPU pantuimD 3.2GHZ/RAM 512 MB/HDD 80 GB /7100GS . And add 1.5 GB of RAM(that is a total of 2 GB) with 160 GB HDD .my question is will a 8600 GT be a good card to add to the combination or will it be bottlenecked ?

An 8600 would't bottleneck it that much if at all, but I'm more concerned about you upgrading to a Pentium D. They're awful. It doesn't help either you wouldn't be using your RAM in dual channel configuration.

I'm not upgrading to pentuim D . I already have it , and by the way i'm not sure it is pentuim D , cpu-z (a testing software) reads it as pentuim 640 so i assumed it is the D .but i'm not sure (obviously I'm not the one who bought it) . Also is the 8600 a good card compared to a 9600 ? How big is the difference ?

About double the performance.

Ah, it was worded oddly with the 'and add some RAM' straight after, led to misreading. Adding RAM is considered part of an upgrade, you don't need to list it separately.

Out of curiosity what are the other parts you're upgrading to?

Oh .i'm sorry my post wasn't clear at all ,but for a good reason though ; I was using the phone's opera mini-browser which has a small amount of text space to write in at one time . Anyway what I was trying to do is post my current specs and state the things that I would like to add...so lets do it again : {current specs} : (pentuim D 3.2 GHZ/mainboard albatron 945PL /ram 512 MB/HDD 80 GB ATA /7100 GS) {UPGRADES }: same CPU And mainboard with 2 GB of ram and 160 GB HDD ,along with the best graphics card my money can buy (not sure how much is it though).I'm afraid this is as far clarification I can give you with a phone browser since I don't seem to have the ability to leave some lines empty in order to have a tidy post , sorry guys .