XFX PVT96OZDFU GeForce 9600 1GB PCI-E Bundle

$50 off SuperMicro 1U Barebone Server Intel 945GC Atom 230 coupon code SERVER1155X [Exp 11/8]

$40 off Onkyo TX-SR607 + FS coupon code RECEIVER1164 [Exp 11/8]

$40 off Onkyo TX-SR707 coupon code RECEIVER1154 [Exp 11/8]

$5 off Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 processor coupon code CPU1145 [Exp 11/10]

Newegg Powercolor AX4650 Radeon HD 4650 512MB PCI-E $35 Discuss (1)

Newegg Sapphire 00234HDMI Radeon HD 3450 512MB $30 Discuss (4)

Newegg Hauppauge WinTV HVR-1600 TV Tuner $80 Discuss (7)

Newegg Powercolor AX4650 Radeon HD 4650 512MB PCI-E $35 Discuss (4)

Another DDR2 card move on nothing to see here.

Want a card that would wipe the floor with this...
$65 -AR $10 plus VGASALE10 Code for another $7.50 and and that covers shipping.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125277

#1, I don't understand, benchmark-wise it doesn't mop the floor with this card.

That and you can pay 5 bucks more for a OC'd 9600GT (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127418) which is GDDR3 and outperforms the Radeon.

Graphics card prices are dropping across the market, and will more when the DX11 cards are released. These deals aren't that special considering your 200 dollar cards will be half that if you wait a few more months.

Oink

#1 is a big fat butt fuck with lots of time on his little hands.

Will this run Solitaire at 60 FPS?

#2: yes, the Radeon 4670 does mop the floor with this card. You're looking at a review of the wrong card.

You could make an entire graphics card lineup just from all the different cards that nVidia has sold under this same 9600GSO name.

On the high end, you'd take the 9600GSO's sold by galaxy early on which actually had 512mb of RAM onobard, and unlock them to being the same as the 8800GTS. (you can flash them with the 8800GTS bios to unlock the extra shaders, RAM, and memory bus)

Then, you'd have the traditional 9600GSO 768mb card, followed by the 384mb version.

Next down the line you could use the 9600GSO with only 48 shaders, less than half of the amount of the original 9600GSO.


Then, finally, you'd have this card. It has the 96 shaders of the 384/768mb 960GSO's, yet a slower 128 bit memory interface. To top it off it uses the ancient GDDR2 RAM. GDDR2 is a 5 year old memory standard that is pre-DDR2, essentially DDR1 with some tweaks. Since memory bandwidth is a function of bus width times memory speed, this card is horrendously slow.

Putting 1gb of slow old RAM onto a card with a 128 bit memory interface is completely useless, this offers absolutely no benefit over even 256mb of RAM. If you were to use game settings that utilize a good portion of the 1gb available, the extremely slow memory bandwidth would push your framerates down to the seconds per frame range.

Why does nVidia keep putting out new cards with the same name? How can you like a company which uses such a blatant bait-and-switch strategy to fool consumers into buying slow, expensive cards?

Remember the old 8800GTS? And more recently the GTX 260? One name, multiple cards.

Of course, they also like running the same card with multiple names. The 8800GS has been renamed 4 times now, appearing in the 8xxx. 9xxx, 1xx and 2xx generations.

Plus, they're trying to pawn this off at $60? Just a few days ago ZipZoomFly had the Radeon 4850 on sale for $55, cheaper than this card. That card is at least double the speed of this card.

#2: also, why would you spend $65 on a 9600GT? Those cards are noticably slower than the venrable 8800GT's. And, the 4830's, which are slightly faster than the 8800GT's, have been on sale many times in the $60-70 range. At $65 the 9600GT's are not a good deal, when Radeon 4830's, the good 9600GSO's(the ones with 768mb RAM), and the Radeon 3870's all are going on sale for less money.

The only price they'd really be a good buy at is the $30-40 range, and nVidia can't really make a profit on them in that price range.

Just a few days ago I bought a Radeon 4850 on ZipZoomFly for $55. That card is another quite noticable performance step up from the 8800GT/4830's, and at $55 it's really the best performance for the money of any card on the market.

CW - Telling it like it is since 2007!

CompWiz FTW

Oink

CompWiz17 wrote:

#2: also, why would you spend $65 on a 9600GT? Those cards are noticably slower than the venrable 8800GT's. And, the 4830's, which are slightly faster than the 8800GT's, have been on sale many times in the $60-70 range. At $65 the 9600GT's are not a good deal, when Radeon 4830's, the good 9600GSO's(the ones with 768mb RAM), and the Radeon 3870's all are going on sale for less money. The only price they'd really be a good buy at is the $30-40 range, and nVidia can't really make a profit on them in that price range. Just a few days ago I bought a Radeon 4850 on ZipZoomFly for $55. That card is another quite noticable performance step up from the 8800GT/4830's, and at $55 it's really the best performance for the money of any card on the market.

You would spend $65 on it because NVIDIA HAS DRIVERS THAT ACTUALLY WORK!

foo!

no, you need at least a gtx280 to open a pdf.

CheezWhiz17 wrote:

You would spend $65 on it because NVIDIA HAS DRIVERS THAT ACTUALLY WORK!

So, you'd say that they work well?

Remember how everyone hates Vista because it crashes a lot? Well, guess what's crashing it? Buggy nVidia drivers.

Seems to me, if a certain company's drivers caused one third of all windows crashes, I wouldn't consider them to be working well. Unless you like seeing the blue screen of death.

http://bensbargains.net

this will go well with my amd

<table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>Nobahar wrote:</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">#1, I don't understand, benchmark-wise it doesn't mop the floor with this card.
That and you can pay 5 bucks more for a OC'd 9600GT (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127418) which is GDDR3 and outperforms the Radeon.

Graphics card prices are dropping across the market, and will more when the DX11 cards are released. These deals aren't that special considering your 200 dollar cards will be half that if you wait a few more months.</td> </tr></table><span class="postbody">

Well this isn't half the card a venerable GSO was, this is more like taking a 9500GT with DDR2 and giving more Texture units. This 128-Bit is solely lack in memory bandwidth comparable to the original DDR3 on 192-Bit; and it's bandwith that makes a card game.
Here's the real deal for $55 -AR $15 and add the code... you pay shipping.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121314

I liked your MSI 9600GT choice that would be a stronger card to a 4670, but I was trying to stay in a lower consumption range, the particular 9600GSO listed might provide. While the 9600GT like the card you suggested, you'd need to consider their PSU limitations. There's a whole bunch of folk who have no use, or not willing to up there power because they aren't the high strung gamer.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/15559/1

I somewhat agree that as Win7 gets closer there are going to continue the be better deals, that's a given. However, that really ... [Truncated]

Casecutter wrote:

Here's the real deal for $55 -AR $15 and add the code... you pay shipping. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121314

wow, look at that, there's yet another card using the 9600GSO name. It seems like Asus took a 9600GSO 768mb and either disabled or left off some of the RAM chips.

At least it's one of the fast 9600GSO's.

What's really funny is that nVidia stated that they waited for the stock to run out of the old faster 9600GSO's(8800GS based) before introducing the new slower 9600GSO's(9600GT based). Yet, companies are still putting out new cards based on the old faster 9600GSO's, as well as selling the traditional 9600GSO's with 384 and 768mb of RAM.

I don't think the whole 8800GS/9600GSO/G130/GT225 setup could get much more confusing. You've got 4 different names for essentially the same product, but the most common one of those names actually covers 6 to 7 different graphics cards.

As you can see, when nVidia can't make cost effective new cards, they just rename their old cards and shuffle around which cards use what name.

Unfortunately, it seems that uninformed consumers, like our own CheezWhiz17, are falling for this rebranding scheme hook line and sinker.

Good job on that nVidia.

Oink

CompWiz17 wrote:

Asus took a 9600GSO 768mb and either disabled or left off some of the RAM chips. At least it's one of the fast 9600GSO's.

Not sure what you mean there are a bunch of 96 Shader version cards that get 768Mb. You mean it's new for Asus? Notice the memory clock is under the reference 1600Mhz to only a 1400 effective. Although the power section look well endowed compared to the other left on the Egg.

You want see a real odd duck, Jetway made a 128MB DDR3 on a 192-Bit.

http://www.jetway.com.tw/jw/vgacard_view.asp?productid=503&proname=N96GSO-EN-192W

To post comments, please Sign In or Register.       Forgot Password?

Registration takes seconds! Once registered you'll have members only access to a Favorites bookmark list, a fully customizable User Profile, and the ability to instantly add your thoughts to each discussion topic.