| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 88908 | 2008-04-14 04:24:00 | 8600GT? | kiwiguy68 (13624) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 658619 | 2008-04-14 04:24:00 | hey guys, Does anyone know what kinds of framerates I would get on games like Battlefield, Call of Duty etc with a 513MB 8600GT? Thanks- |
kiwiguy68 (13624) | ||
| 658620 | 2008-04-14 05:05:00 | Google for some benchmarks. I wouldn't choose less than an 8800. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 658621 | 2008-04-14 06:32:00 | 8800GTS 640MB or 8800GT are good cheaper cards. ;) | wratterus (105) | ||
| 658622 | 2008-04-14 07:13:00 | 1st question, is what monitor resolution are you running, the 86GT should be good for most of 2006 games @ 12x10. Last years games will stuggle at that resolution. However you should note that the extra 256MB of RAM is wasted on this card as the card doesnt have the core speed, ROP or bandwidth to use it. Most of these cards are only 256Mb. |
SolMiester (139) | ||
| 658623 | 2008-04-15 00:44:00 | A better deal would be 9600GT, 8800GT, 8800GTS G92 and HD3870, but i don't how much you have to pay for such vgas like this in New Zealand. | Crow1985 (6683) | ||
| 658624 | 2008-04-15 00:49:00 | hey guys, Does anyone know what kinds of framerates I would get on games like Battlefield, Call of Duty etc with a 513MB 8600GT? Thanks- The first question that should have been asked is what resolution do you plan to play in, there is a huge frame rate difference between 1280x1024 and 1900x1200. As above a 512MB version is not going to help over the 256MB, but as you can now pick up a 512MB for the same price around $120 so you may as well. 8800GTS 640MB or 8800GT are good cheaper cards. ;) Ka? the 8800GTS 640 is obsolete and replaced by the G92 GTS 512Mb and the GT is around is around $250 more exspensive than a 8600GT. I suggest a 9600GT, as it can be picked up for around $270 and is only about 15-20% slower than a 8800GT making it the best "value" card right now, and far better than a 8600Gt of course. |
Battleneter2 (9361) | ||
| 658625 | 2008-04-15 02:22:00 | Ka? the 8800GTS 640 is obsolete and replaced by the G92 GTS 512Mb and the GT is around is around $250 more exspensive than a 8600GT. Which is why he said cheaper...................assuming someone still has stock. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 658626 | 2008-04-15 03:21:00 | thanks for the replies guys, at the moment im just going to have a 17' CRT, so resolutions of no higher than 1024 x 720 is what id be playing at. Any ideas just real generally of framerates in fps like quake 4, battlefield etc? i know the card wont run games like crysis that great |
kiwiguy68 (13624) | ||
| 658627 | 2008-04-15 04:18:00 | Which is why he said cheaper...................assuming someone still has stock. :thumbs: I'm pretty sure there are still some around. |
wratterus (105) | ||
| 658628 | 2008-04-15 05:04:00 | :thumbs: I'm pretty sure there are still some around . Last time I saw the 8800GTS 640 listed anywhere they were more expensive than the 8800GT, as the GT is the better card . . . . . actually I think the significantly cheaper 9600Gt will also beat it, so the Old 8800GTS 640 is a poor suggestion . |
Battleneter2 (9361) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||