GeForce 8600 Series Round Up
PCI Express x16 graphics cardsChipset GeForce 8600GTS/GT 256 MB, 128 bit
After looking at the performance, or rather, lack of performance from the GeForce 8600GTS and GT in our last article, we had to ask ourselves: Is this the fate for many mainstream gamers? True, the GeForce 8600GT is more affordable than last generation high end cards. Even the premium GeForce 8600GTS have started to come down in price, particularly with the introduction of AMD Radeon HD2400 and 2600 series. From the many reviews and comparisons around the web, it would seem that both AMD and NVIDIA have pretty much the same idea for mainstream cards.
They basically suck.
Okay, that's the short version. The long version is that these cards definitely won't be the choice for games who play with details maxed out, running with AA and AF enabled. In our experience, gamers would prefer to max out details first, then turn on graphical features such as AA and AF if the frame rates they got is high enough. Resolutions depends on the monitors they use. Even the premium GeForce 8600GTS is not fast enough to provide high frame rates above 30 fps with 4x AA at 1024 x 768 at all times. At least, not with the current (and future), graphically advanced crop of games. You basically have to play games without AA or at least drop down to 2x AA to get comfortable frame rates. Sometimes, you even have to throttle down the detail settings to get more playable frame rates. A little consolation does exist - you can push 16x AF with minimal performance penalty. Plus, HDR seems to be less of a burden on these cards compared to the GeForce 7 series.
This is our main 'beef' with these mainstream cards. Both AMD and NVIDIA argue that performance is not the only influencing factor for the mainstream market. Both touts video acceleration features as the 'must have' feature for mainstream gamers. The reasoning - mainstream gamers typically don't use high end processors, so offloading the burden to the graphics card is 'better value for money' for them. It's also the reason why we don't see full UVD on high end cards or at least, not on the level present on these mainstream cards. The transistor is spent elsewhere to improve graphics performance.
We beg to differ. We think mainstream gamers focus more on price / performance of graphics cards. Performance as in 'graphics performance' and since we're talking about gamers, that means gaming performance. Gamers in general don't care about additional features like UVD, video inputs and the lot. They're nice to have, but if the cards don't have the performance to begin with, why bother with them at all. Plus, having more performance means you likely don't have to buy a new card every year or every 6 months - and that's value to the consumer. In our last article, we either recommend you to stay with your current card or upgrade to at least a GeForce 8800GTS 320 MB if you want performance. As for price, when we talk about price / performance, that means you get very good performance with an affordable card - not the other way around which is you get lousy performance from a cheap card.
So, why are we doiing this round up? That's certainly not an easy question to answer. After much debate, we realize that there IS a market for these cards. 'Mainstream is the new low end'. So unlike our usual comparison test, we decided to deprioritize performance for this round up. After all, this seems to be inline with what AMD and NVIDIA with these cards. In so doing, we do find these GeForce 8600 cards a bargain - but we still won't recommend it if you're serious about playing games.
Now, that we got that out of the way, let's take a look at these mainstream cards.
Overview - GeForce 8600GTS
ASUS EN8600GTS
NVIDIA GeForce 8600GTS, 256 MB GDDR3Core / Shader Clock : 675 / 1458 MHz
Memory Clock : 504 MHz (1008 MHz GDDR3)
Overall Score: 82.5 points
For this comparison, ASUS sent us a sample of their passively cooled GeForce 8600GTS and GT. The most obvious difference between them is the additional heatsink over the top of the board as you can see on the picture above. The second difference is the amount of heatpipes used to transfer heat from the core to the heatsinks. Two heatpipes connects the main heatsink to the base, while another connects the additional heatsink on the top of the board. You'll undoubtedly notice the space between the heatsink and the board - this card will take two slots, though the cooling is decidedly still a single slot cooler. You'll also notice ASUS didn't use this opportunity to attach heat sinks to the memory chips. We think this design should be able to accomodate heat sinks on the memory and too bad ASUS didn't feel the need for it.
Inside the box, you'll find the standard accesories like a single DVI-to-analog dongle, an HDTV cable, two CDS for the drivers and electronic version of the manual. ASUS still bundles a CD case with their cards and the ASUS EN8600GTS is no exception. You'll find no other software for DVD playback or game bundles - this should bring the cost a bit, which is usually an important factor for buyers of mainstream cards. One think that may irk some users is the absence of a 6 pin ATX converter - make sure your power supply has one or buy yone when you get this card. Overall, after looking at the package we get the sense that the only differentiating factor with this card (and indeed, the 8600GT card) is passive cooling.
[Previous Page]
[Go to top]
[Next Page]