7950 GT vs 8600GTS

[HamishUK 0]

I would advice to wait a bit with dx10 cards, from 6 months of now

things will be very different(and prices too)

+1

Current cards don't seem to be doing so well using DX10. Having read a few test reports in PCG, PCZ and PCF using say Company of Heroes DX10 version you will lose appx 20 FPS.

This is not the only game that seems to a lot slower using DX10.

If it's DX10 you want I would wait till the next gen of cards are out and games have been better optimised for this technology.

[Deftoner 0]

My MSI 8600GT OC 256MB PCI-E works fine in ArmA.

Cant set things mega high...but then again I don't think anyone can

It does come factory overclocked though..

Just on a side note.... i get better performance with textures set to default and post processing on high for some reason...

[leckig 0]

I got lucky with my 8800 320 for $225, but in hight res (sig) my framerates drop when I switch details to very high.

[Wolfrug 0]

My MSI 8600GT OC 256MB PCI-E works fine in ArmA.

Cant set things mega high...but then again I don't think anyone can

It does come factory overclocked though..

Just on a side note.... i get better performance with textures set to default and post processing on high for some reason...

Looking at your specs, that is about what I have presently (1 gb ram, AMD Athlon 3200+) except for my old, true and tested 6600 GT. What kind of performance do you get out of your card, i.e., what is your average FPS on ok settings? I currently get about max 24 FPS or so if I turn Shaders on Very Low and grass off >_<

Regards,

Wolfrug

[TheReddog 0]

The 7xxx series cards are much more compatible with ArmA whereas the 8xxx series are not.

It's really as simple as that.

[Deftoner 0]

Looking at your specs, that is about what I have presently (1 gb ram, AMD Athlon 3200+) except for my old, true and tested 6600 GT. What kind of performance do you get out of your card, i.e., what is your average FPS on ok settings? I currently get about max 24 FPS or so if I turn Shaders on Very Low and grass off >_<

Regards,

Wolfrug

Obviously if you have the bucks go for an 8800....but at the price 8600GT OC is an improvement IMO....

I'm not one of those guys that counts his FPS.... the game runs smooth for me on (from memory...):

vis: 1500

Terrain: low (still see some grass)

Objects: normal

Textures: Default

Shader:low

PostP:high

AF: Normal

AA: low (or none?)

blood: low

Game looks fine.... .Im more into the playability than running all graphics at max.

Only slows down a little when there's A LOT going on.... but still perfectly manageable

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

I got the Asus EN7950GT and I must say it's SMOOTH, especially on an Asus P5N32-E SLI mobo, equipped with C2D E6600 and 2GB of RAM... I must say: SWEET!

[echo1 0]

Quote[/b] ]Well, "overrated malarkey" is what XP was back in the day as well

XP was definitely an improvement over what I had been using when I started using it, particularily in that it crashed much less. I think my PC has is crashing more ever since I switched over to Vista, which is why Im downgrading back to tried-and-tested XP, at least for the next year or so.

Quote[/b] ]Tell me again how it's worth it to pay over twice the price for a previous generation graphics card?

Because sometimes in the wonderful world of computer technology, the old stuff is better than the new stuff. However that site seems to be overpriced, but the 7950GT is more expensive because it is faster.

Quote[/b] ]I have a 7600 GT, with a M2N sLi Deluxe mobo. I'm thinking of buying another 7600GT so i can SLi them, is it worth buying another for "twin turbo performance" as i call it. Or just Upgrading to 7950/8600 GT.

Get a new card, SLI has all sorts of problems.

One of the big problems with midrange/lowrange DX10 cards is that by the time DX10 becomes widespread, cards like the 8600GT will not be able to play the latest games at high quality settings. Getting an 8800 is a good idea because theyre fast as s--t, but getting an 8600GT just because it supports DX10 is not a good choice, get an older, but better value for money card instead.

[PitViper 0]

hmmm..

How about 7950 GX2 (1gig) vs. 8800 GTS (640mb)?

Given Maruk's post, I'm guessing the 7950GX2 "plays" better with Arma but the 8800 has a bit more muscle. I'm a bit scared reading about all the 8800 issues posted on most arma forums. Is there still the 8800 fog issue?

Maruk, Do you think the 8800 issues will be resolved for ArmA? or are we talking about fundamental design issues?

[Wolfrug 0]

Well, my problem remains entirely financial. I now know that:

the 7950 with all their related GTs and Xs and such with as much Mbs as possible = best card to play ArmA, possibly best card to play most things.

the 8800 with slightly less Mbs = not as good for ArmA as the previously mentioned, but generally a very good card for playing all kinds of stuff, PLUS it's DX10 compatible.

Both of the above are about equally priced, up in the 270€ region, which is generally not unmanageable but...er...something just clicks when I see the 8600 only carrying HALF the price tag. So, as I see it...

the 8600 with lots of MBs = not as good as 8800, not as good as 7950, but better than the 6600 GT I have now, and DX10 compatible AND affordable.

Although reading Deftoner's post, I'm not entirely sure though. I can run the game on about those specs on my cranking old card as well, although not on the bigger and better missions. Aaah, well...not easy, this, not easy at all.

Ultimately: will the performance increase from the 6600 GT 128 mb to the 8600 GT 512mb be over 2 x , or is the 8600 GT just a fancily named Home-Televison card meant for HD TV junkies and graphics editors, who don't need to get high FPSs to enjoy watching a whole city being leveled by a nuclear blast while zooming around in an NBC-protected Mi-24 Hind?

Thank you for the discussion, incidentally!

Regards,

Wolfrug

[Deftoner 0]

Well, my problem remains entirely financial. I now know that:

the 7950 with all their related GTs and Xs and such with as much Mbs as possible = best card to play ArmA, possibly best card to play most things.

the 8800 with slightly less Mbs = not as good for ArmA as the previously mentioned, but generally a very good card for playing all kinds of stuff, PLUS it's DX10 compatible.

Both of the above are about equally priced, up in the 270€ region, which is generally not unmanageable but...er...something just clicks when I see the 8600 only carrying HALF the price tag. So, as I see it...

the 8600 with lots of MBs = not as good as 8800, not as good as 7950, but better than the 6600 GT I have now, and DX10 compatible AND affordable.

Although reading Deftoner's post, I'm not entirely sure though. I can run the game on about those specs on my cranking old card as well, although not on the bigger and better missions. Aaah, well...not easy, this, not easy at all.

Ultimately: will the performance increase from the 6600 GT 128 mb to the 8600 GT 512mb be over 2 x , or is the 8600 GT just a fancily named Home-Televison card meant for HD TV junkies and graphics editors, who don't need to get high FPSs to enjoy watching a whole city being leveled by a nuclear blast while zooming around in an NBC-protected Mi-24 Hind?

Thank you for the discussion, incidentally!

Regards,

Wolfrug

8600GT is just a DX10 7600... its not the best...but does the job. Other games run great for me... I put ArmA's sluggishness down to poor coding in part.

...but yeah...what everyone is saying is correct, 7 series is better/faster.

I got my 8600Gt as a business gift....so i really had no choice. Its just in place while I wait for prices to drop or something better to come out once DX10 games are a reality.

[Major Fubar 0]

At the risk of getting another batch of complaint PMs, I'm closing this thread as it can well and truly be discussed in either the Hardware and settings for ArmA thread or the PC Discussion thread.

We don't just shut down threads like this for the fun of it, we do it to reduce the number of duplicate threads, questions and answers, for the benefit of the forum bandwidth, tidiness and ease of looking for a particular piece of info.