backtop


Print 70 comment(s) - last by rainyday.. on Apr 14 at 11:10 PM

NVIDIA's next-generation mid-range offerings are just 10 days away

Earlier this week review publications received their test kits for the GeForce 8300 through 8600. The bulk of these cards, the GeForce 8500 GT, GeForce 8600 GT and GeForce 8600 GTS will launch on April 17, with the GeForce 8300 GS and GeForce 8400 GS following soon after.

DailyTech published technical details of these cards last month. In a nutshell:
  • GeForce 8600 GTS -- 256 MB GDDR3, 675 MHz core clock, 1000 MHz memory clock
  • GeForce 8600 GT -- 256 MB GDDR3, 540 MHz core clock, 700 MHz memory clock
  • GeForce 8500 GT -- 128 to 256 MB DDR2 or GDDR3, 450 MHz core clock, 700 MHz memory clock
NVIDIA claims these three cards will be available at launch.  The 8600 GTS will fill the $199 to $229 price point, followed by the 8600 GT ($149 to $159) and the GeForce 8500 GT ($89 to $129).

The GeForce 8400 GS and 8300 GS will bring up the rear with 450 MHz core clocks and 400 MHz memory clocks. However, these two GPUs will only show up in OEM systems and will not likely make an appearance in your local hardware store.





Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Very informative article
By TechLuster on 4/8/2007 2:50:54 AM , Rating: 5
Why on earth did this post get modded down? I was making an important technical point, namely that the number of shaders and shader clocks are a major *currently unknown* factor which will affect the performance of these cards, especially on future titles (which are going to be much more shader intensive than current games).

To those people who modded me down: you need to understand that there's much more to performance than core clocks and memory bandwidth (which is even more true now that the shaders on GeForce 8 cards are in a separate clock domain). Thus while the "Very informative article" post above was correct that useful information was succinctly presented, it was NOT correct to say that the article contains "exactly the info we all wanted."

If I had said something like "omg this DT article sux! lol!" then you should mod me down, but that's not what I did. I simply pointed out that while the article was good, relevant information was missing. I then attempted to fill in the holes with the best information available for the benefit of my fellow DT readers.

Please don't mod down posts of people who are genuinely trying to add something useful to the discussion.


"We are going to continue to work with them to make sure they understand the reality of the Internet.  A lot of these people don't have Ph.Ds, and they don't have a degree in computer science." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis
Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki