XFX 8600GT comparison - please help!

I'm planning a new rig for when I recieve my tax returns and I'm at a toss-up between two GeForce 8600GT cards, both manufactured by XFX. I know my fellow lads and lassies at tbcs have the knowledge to help me make a decision so I need your input! :D


card A - XFX PVT84JUSD4 GeForce 8600GT link
Core clock: 680MHz
Memory: 256MB 1600MHz GDDR3
Price: $109.99 (-$30 MIR)

card B - XFX PVT84JYAJG GeForce 8600GT link
Core clock: 540MHz
Memory: 512MB 1180MHz GDDR2
Price: $99.99 (-$10 MIR)


My guess is that the extra 256MB of memory on card B is negligible if it runs more than 400MHz slower than card A. On top of that, the GPU is clocked at 140MHz higher on card A than card B. However, as much as I'd like to say that my "tech level" is "high" like most Newegg reviewers seem to, I honestly lack the experience to tell these cards apart in regard to real life application. What do you all think?

-Zac

P.S. This scenario reminds me of a ti4200 64MB vs. fx5200 128MB debate I encountered a few years ago, where the amount of memory was irrelevant as the titanium easily blew the fx card out of the water.

I'd go with card A. The amount of memory only really plays into the resolution you're going to be running your games at... and 256MB is good up until a little higher than 1280x1024 from what I know...

That and card a has gddr3. I say card a.

My money is on card A.

card a all the way. those are nice cards btw.

I've always been told that, for the most part, 256mb is all the memory you will need. With of course the exception of these new monster cards.

So if thats true, then card a is definitely the better deal. Even if thats not true, the faster 256mb equals out with the slower 512mb doesn't it? Maybe? So if thats true, then all you need to look at is the core clock. Which would be card a. Which also explains why its more expensive.

Also, since its not a battle between ATi and nVidia, you don't have to worry about company support and drivers, since nVidia has that down pretty well.

Looks like card a has the better features as well. More powerful heatsink, dual dvi instead of single with dsub. Although you don't get that svideo cable... darn. lol

It also says its HDCP/HDMI ready, whereas the other one doesn't. So at least you know this one won't give you any trouble gaurunteed. Although I don't know what kind of trouble you could get in with the other card if any at all.

Card a is the better choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zephik

Although I don't know what kind of trouble you could get in with the other card if any at all.

---

are you talking about the port or an actual cable?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spawn-Inc

are you talking about the port or an actual cable?

---

I don't know what I was talking about. lol Neither I guess.

What makes a card "HDMI/HDCP Ready"? :think:

I guess I was thinking drivers or something like that. So I guess if you didn't update the drivers on the non ready card, you might experience poorer quality or something. But I don't know if thats true or whatever, so yea. lol why do I feel really confused all the sudden. ><

or maybe its that if you use the HDMI/HDCP, that the card becomes too hot? So the larger heatsink on card a would make that "ready", since it could battle the heat more efficiently. But, like I said, I really have no idea.

not sure, i know some of the ati cards come with a connector that goes from dvi to HDMI, maybe you could take one from that and put it on the nvidia card?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spawn-Inc

not sure, i know some of the ati cards come with a connector that goes from dvi to HDMI, maybe you could take one from that and put it on the nvidia card?

---

Good question. I would only imagine that it would work, but I wonder if it would ACTUALLY work? What I mean is, I'm sure it would display something, most likely proper video just as if you used a regular DVI or DSUB connection, but would it actually display HDMI quality?

:think:

http://cgi.ebay.com/HDMI-Female-To-D...QQcmdZViewItem

well hit place bid and find out :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spawn-Inc

http://cgi.ebay.com/HDMI-Female-To-D...QQcmdZViewItem

well hit place bid and find out :)

---

Dang, now thats proper research! lol

My HDCP Ready 8800GT came with an S-video to RGB adapter, but since I don't know what HDCP stands for, and what the S-video to RGB adapter ACTUALLY does, I don't know if that's what it would be :redface:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .Maleficus.

My HDCP Ready 8800GT came with an S-video to RGB adapter, but since I don't know what HDCP stands for, and what the S-video to RGB adapter ACTUALLY does, I don't know if that's what it would be :redface:.

---

mine came with the svideo cable and adaptor for component. if you have a tv with that mal you can hook up your pc via that way. i have tried both ways and svideo worked out better for me but i have a older tv and it wasn't displayed properly. once we/me get a lcd/plasma i will try it then undoubtedly.

HDCP is basically a proprietary encryption method for High-def. Basically in order for Hi-def media like Blu-ray and HD-dvd to be watched, it needs a HDCP source and an HDCP monitor/screen.


As far as I understand, if your running HDCP encrypted media to a monitor that isn't HDCP compatible while using a cable not HDCP and analog(like VGA) it will downsize the resolution to like half. If you try running that same situation but with a non HDCP compliant digital connection (some DVI, like video cards without HDCP) you wont get any picture. It will be a black screen.


So if you have a HD-dvd drive or blu-ray or something similar player in your pc and try to watch those movies with a card not HDCP compatitble, you won't be able to. You would need a card like the first card, that can output the correct encrypted data, hence HDCP compatible.

Most people believe it was an attempt to stop piracy, and i tend to believe it, as I can't see a whole lot of use otherwise. As the digital signal doesn't "need" to be encrypted, and companies have to get licensed to get their products HDCP compatitble.



As for the video card. I would go with the 256mb faster card. Unless your running some rediculously high resolution and trying to game, which in that case i would probably look at a higher end card. But otherwise the first card is the better of the two. I don't see the second card being fast enough to pump out super high textures at a reasonable frame rate, thus rendering the extra memory useless in most things. Least imo

Thank you all for your help! I almost forget I made this thread because I haven't received any notifications for some reason but regardless, I really appreciate your input. Thanks again.

I know most of you who are into gaming have probably invested into some of the more extreme videocards out these days but to those who may like to know, I ended up purchasing card A. Anyone who wants a cheap card that will run newer games, I'd definitely recommend this card. I'm running it in Windows XP with the new Celeron 420 chip (1.6ghz with the Conroe architecture, overclocked flawlessly to 3.0ghz) and 2gb DDR2 800. It runs Bioshock really nicely at 1024 with max quality settings, Gears of War is smooth at 1024 with max quality, any game older seems to run at 1280 with max quality. All the while, the GPU seems to run cool as a cucumber at stock speeds (considerably quiet fan as well). I'm exteremely satisfied with my purchase. Thank you all again for your insight.

Good choice, Bird.

I've got a JUDD3, which is pretty much card A with worse (stock) cooling. I bought it because I needed a cheap upgrade fast. It does 15-45 FPS @ 1680 x 1050 with a Socket 478 Celeron D 335 @ 2.8ghz in CS:S; maxed besides 16xAA. 2Gb of 667.

Basically, if you are doing resolutions 1024 x 768 or 1280 x 1024 I would highly recommend card A.

It's too bad I didn't hold out a bit longer, that card is now $79.99 after a mail-in rebate.link In fact, not only are most of the 8600GT's considerably cheaper, a lot of stuff is! :evil:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a.Bird

It's too bad I didn't hold out a bit longer, that card is now $79.99 after a mail-in rebate.link In fact, not only are most of the 8600GT's considerably cheaper, a lot of stuff is! :evil:

---

Yeah, I have a $30 check in the mail from mine. :P