backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 42 comment(s) - last by jrb531.. on Apr 17 at 12:44 PM


GeForce 8600 GTS - Image courtesy BootDaily
GeForce 8600 and 8500 unified shader amounts unveiled

DailyTech has come across more details of NVIDIA’s upcoming GeForce 8600 GTS, 8600 GT and 8500 GT graphics processors. NVIDIA expects to unleash the GeForce 8600 and 8500-series graphics processors later this month. AMD is ready to take on NVIDIA’s midrange offerings with its upcoming ATI Radeon HD2600 and 2400 offerings.

Slotting below NVIDIA’s GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB SKU is the GeForce 8600 GTS. The top end G86-based graphics processor features 32-stream processors clocked at 1.45 GHz. NVIDIA pairs the 32-stream processors with 256MB of GDDR3 memory clocked at 1.0 GHz. A 128-bit memory interface connects the memory to the GPU for 32GB/sec of memory bandwidth.

Sporting lower clock speeds is the GeForce 8600 GT. The GeForce 8600 GT has the same 32-stream processors as the GTS; however, the unified shaders have a 1.18 GHz clock. Core and memory clock are also lower at 540 MHz and 700 MHz, respectively. Memory bandwidth is downgraded to 22.4 GB/sec as a result of the lower memory clocks.

NVIDIA GeForce 8-series
Model
8600 GTS 8600 GT
8500 GT
8800 GTS
Stream processors
32 32 16 96
Core clock
675 MHz 540 MHz 450 MHz 500 MHz
Shader clock
1.45 GHz
1.18 GHz 900 MHz 1.2 GHz
Memory clock
1.0 GHz 700 MHz 400 MHz 900 MHz
Memory interface
128-bit 128-bit 128-bit 320-bit
Memory bandwidth
32 GB/sec 22.4 GB/sec 12.8 GB/sec 64 GB/sec
Texture fill rate (Billion/sec)
10.8 8.6 3.6 24

Filling in the bottom of the retail GeForce 8-series lineup is the GeForce 8500 GT. The value model has 16-stream processors clocked at 900 MHz – half the amount present on the GeForce 8600-series. NVIDIA pairs the 450 MHz core with DDR2 memory clocked at 400 MHz. The GeForce 8500 GT features the same 128-bit memory interface as the GeForce 8600-series. Memory bandwidth is downgraded to 12.8 GB/sec.

Expect NVIDIA to launch its new midrange product lineup tomorrow.  Additional details are already starting to leak out early, and some brick-and-mortar stores already have the cards on the shelf.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

8600 GTS
By Flunk on 4/16/2007 4:03:03 PM , Rating: 3
Compared to the 8800 GTS' 96 stream processors doesn't 32 see like a bit of a ripoff at the 8600 GTS' price point?




RE: 8600 GTS
By stromgald on 4/16/2007 4:11:02 PM , Rating: 4
True, but these mid-range cards aren't power sucking monsters that take up more space than what some mini towers have room for.


RE: 8600 GTS
By Belard on 4/16/2007 10:39:28 PM , Rating: 2
About the ONLY mini-tower PC the 8800 and other dual-slot-area cards that don't fit into are the Dell minis. Currently models e520/e521.... because of the stupid BTX design (Apparently, Dell is the ONLY BTX manufacture on the market, but at least its industry standard heheh).

8800GTX will fit in the older silver HPs and the new shiny-black HPs - which don't be fooled, they only flipped the motherboard. The CPU is at the bottom, slots are on top. The card will fit just above the Hard Drive bays.

Of course the PSU has to be replaced ;)


RE: 8600 GTS
By jmke on 4/17/2007 3:44:38 AM , Rating: 2
8800GTX doesn't fit in Antec Sonata I/II and other mid-tower cases where the HDD cage blocks the longer VGA card.


RE: 8600 GTS
By shabby on 4/16/2007 6:29:25 PM , Rating: 4
It is a ripoff, the 6600 was basically half of the 6800.
Same with the 7600, half the rops/pipes as the 7800.
Now this 8600 has a 1/4 of stream processors of the 8800, it should also cost a 1/4 of the price if you ask me.
I hope ati comes out with something better in the midrange then what nvidia.


RE: 8600 GTS
By slashbinslashbash on 4/16/2007 9:18:15 PM , Rating: 2
96 / 32 = 3

:)

Also, keep in mind that the GPU is only part of the cost of a video card. All of that high-speed RAM costs money too, as does the PCB, heatsink, etc.


RE: 8600 GTS
By Russell on 4/16/2007 10:00:28 PM , Rating: 2
Obviously they mean 1/4 of the high-end.


RE: 8600 GTS
By slashbinslashbash on 4/17/2007 12:36:33 AM , Rating: 2
Oops! I looked at the GTS numbers and thought they were for GTX.


RE: 8600 GTS
By Belard on 4/16/2007 10:46:11 PM , Rating: 2
Not really quite a rip.

The 6600s were about half the price of the 6800s.
And When I paid $175 for my 7600GT ($25 extra for the Gigabyte heatpipe version) the 7900GT was a $300~350 card.

The sub $200 ($150~175) is the sweet spot. If they provide good performance at that price. ATI lost market share because there mid-range cards were $50~75 too expensive.

But looking at the pricing:

$280 = 8800GTS 320 (They should have called it the "GT")
$400 = 8800GTS 640 (a bit faster)
$550 = 8800GTX 768

If the 8600GTX can equal a 7950GT for $200, it would be a fair price... but we'll see in a day or so.


RE: 8600 GTS
By lplatypus on 4/16/2007 7:43:22 PM , Rating: 2
How well do these stream processors scale? Do three times as many stream processors result in three times the performance?


RE: 8600 GTS
By JarredWalton on 4/16/2007 9:31:15 PM , Rating: 2
I seem to recall seeing some preliminary benches (can't find the link anymore) that showed 8600 GT (possibly GTS) slightly outperforming a 7900 GS. The question thus is: what's the price, and is DX10 performance remotely acceptable? It's a midrange card, but if it costs about $150 that's still good enough for a lot of people. Turn off AA, run at 1680x1050 or less, and you're probably set for a while.


Launch date?
By stromgald on 4/16/2007 4:08:29 PM , Rating: 4
So when are these things launching again? First, we heard a vague April 17 date, then we got this: http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=6616 , which says without pressure from ATI, nVidia was postponing the launch. Then just a few weeks later, we have this posted: http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=6825 , which reiterates and confirms the April 17 launch. Now, dailytech posts another article that infers launch will be in the 'upcoming weeks' instead of tomorrow.

Someone needs to get the facts straight. I need to know for my new HTPC build whether I should be getting a cheap DX9 card now, or hold off a week or two while prices settle and then get a mid-range DX10 card.




RE: Launch date?
By ZetaEpyon on 4/16/2007 4:44:30 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I was just at the local BestBuy yesterday, and I swear they had an 8600 GTS on the shelf.


RE: Launch date?
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2007 5:31:45 PM , Rating: 1
Yes they did. I am in Charleston, SC and was at Best Buy yesterday. They had several BFG 8600 GTS's on the shelf. I didn't think they'd come out yet. Apparently I was right.

Best Buy is selling a product before the launch date.


RE: Launch date?
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2007 5:32:30 PM , Rating: 1
By yesterday I meant Sunday the 15th btw.


RE: Launch date?
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 4/16/2007 4:52:00 PM , Rating: 6
That was supposed to read "tomorrow." We had the article sitting in the queue for a while. Hope that clears up any confusion,

Kristopher


RE: Launch date?
By crystal clear on 4/17/2007 4:18:30 AM , Rating: 2
Interview: NVIDIA's Keita Iida
The future of Direct X, Crysis and PS3 under the spotlight.

Keita Iida, Director of Content Management at NVIDIA sat down with IGN AU to discuss all things Direct X 10 and the evolution of their Geforce graphics cards. Iida goes into detail on the differences between developing for the PS3's RSX graphics processor, and the latest development tools to hit the scene.

quote:
Selected portions of the interview-


IGN AU: What are your thoughts on Microsoft effectively forcing gamers to upgrade to Vista in order to run Direct X 10 - when there's no real reason why it can't run on Windows XP?

Keita Iida: It's a business and marketing decision.

IGN AU: Can you comment on what happened with NVIDIA's Vista drivers? You guys have had access to Vista for years to build drivers and at the launch of Vista there were no drivers. The ones that are out now are still basically crippled. Why did this happen?

Keita Iida: On a high level, we had to prioritise. In our case, we have DX9, DX10, multiple APIs, Vista and XP - the driver models are completely different, and the DX9 and 10 drivers are completely different. Then you have single- and multi-card SLI - there are many variables to consider. Given that we were so far ahead with DX10 hardware, we've had to make sure that the drivers, although not necessarily available to a wide degree, or not stable, were good enough from a development standpoint.

If you compare our situation to our competitor's, we have double the variables to consider when we write the drivers; they have much more time to optimise and make sure their drivers work well on their DX10 hardware when it comes out. We've had to balance our priorities between making sure we have proper DX10 feature-supported drivers to facilitate development of DX10 content, but also make sure that the end user will have a good experience on Vista. To some degree, I think that we may have underestimated how many resources were necessary to have a stable Vista driver off the bat. I can assure you and your readers that our first priority right now is not performance, not anything else; it