7600gt vs 6600gt Wheres the review?

Aris · Post by **Aris** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:24 am

I am completely dissapointed with my "regular" set of tech review sites (tomshardware and anandtech). I was looking forward to yesterday (first day of CEBIT) to see the upcomming 7600gt card, and while they both did do a review of it, they didnt even compare once to the card its replacing. Anandtech didnt even do benchmarks with a single 7600gt, instead only showing SLI results for it. Even if they didnt post results from the card its replacing, you'd think at the very least they would put up results from the card its in direct competition with (x1600xt). Nope they cant even do that right. Tomshardware didnt even have the x1600xt, and while anandtech did, it doesnt matter because you dont have a single benchmark result for a 7600gt in non sli mode.

PLEASE, please tell me that someone out their has a site with a review of the new 7600gt that doesnt completely suck.

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:31 am

Aris wrote:PLEASE, please tell me that someone out their has a site with a review of the new 7600gt that doesnt completely suck.

I just read a very good comparison/review at Beyond3D.

I'd also recommend the FiringSquad 7600GT review/comparsion. It is more gamer-focused instead of the 3D developer focus of Beyond3D.

This graph should be interesting to SPCR folks:

Beyond3D wrote:3DMark03's graphics intensive Game Tests were then looped through 4 times, to load up the graphics, and then on the fifth run of Game Test 2 the power reading was taken; then the core temperature read immediately after dropping out of the 3D scene; the system case temperature noted, and finally the case side removed and the noise level measured. 3DMark03 is used as it has a fairly low CPU utilisation, placing much of the emphasis on the graphics capabilities.

moritz · Post by **moritz** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:33 am

Ehn. Anandtech did review single 7600GTs. I'd mock you, but I had to look for it too at first. It's on a seperate page of the article, mid-range benchmarks, along with the X1600. The dual-7600GTs were on the high performance benchmark page. The 6600 isn't there - because it's so old. I think you're being too harsh.

Aris · Post by **Aris** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:39 am

moritz wrote:Ehn. Anandtech did review single 7600GTs. I'd mock you, but I had to look for it too at first. It's on a seperate page of the article, mid-range benchmarks, along with the X1600. The dual-7600GTs were on the high performance benchmark page. The 6600 isn't there - because it's so old. I think you're being too harsh.

nvidia didnt think it was "too old" 2 days ago. 2 days ago it was their best selling video card of all time, and their primary mid range card. to not put the 6600gt in the review with the card thats supposed to replace it is just assinine. most people who are going to buy the new 7600gt have 6600gt's now, and all of them are going to want to know "how much faster is this new card than the one i have", and does the speed bump justify the price tag of buying a new card.

i find a french site that had benchmarks of all the proper video cards i would expect to see in a benchmark review of this card (sans the 6600gt). very interesting results, its almost as fast as the 7800gt at 1280x1024 on quake 4. very impressive numbers. it totally cleans house against any mid range/mid priced ati offering. and you can already buy 7600gt's from newegg for $200. nice launch by nvidia, and nice framerates.

http://www.presence-pc.com/tests/ATI-X1 ... -GT-436/5/

Erssa · Post by **Erssa** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:58 am

How hard is it to draw conclusions? You should know/see from other benchmarks how 6600GT compares to 6800GS and then know that 7600GT is about 20% faster then 6800GS.

F.E.A.R. 1024x768 4x AA

GF6600GT 20fps
GF7600GT 43fps

BF2 1024x768 4x AA

GF66000GT 40.8fps
GF7600GT 62.1fps

Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory 1024x768 4x AA

GF6600GT 22.5fps
GF7600GT 54fps

Just couple of benchies to give in image. BF2 with 1600x1200 4xAA with GF7600GT is borderline playable. And totally unplayble with gf6600gt. All numbers combined from Anandtech articles.

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:58 am

Aris wrote:nvidia didnt think it was "too old" 2 days ago. 2 days ago it was their best selling video card of all time, and their primary mid range card. to not put the 6600gt in the review with the card thats supposed to replace it is just assinine. most people who are going to buy the new 7600gt have 6600gt's now, and all of them are going to want to know "how much faster is this new card than the one i have", and does the speed bump justify the price tag of buying a new card.

The 7600GT is more of a cheaper/cooler replacement for the 6800GS than a replacement for the 6600GT. (cheaper=cheaper to make.)

The 7600GT is memory bandwith limited in almost all senarios, but it is amazing how much performance nVidia was able to pull out of a 128-bit wide memory bus card. I wonder if it is too good to be true--like maybe they are compessing all textures. Though it does stumble a lot in high FSAA modes.

It would be natural for ATI to release a sort of half-X1900/double-X1600 chip with 2 quads with three pixel shaders per pipeline (24 shader units total) as their mid-range product instead of the x1800GTO. Maybe in the fall?

diver · Post by **diver** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:11 am

That power graph from Beyoond3D does not look right to me. How does a pair of 7600 GT's in SLI use less power than a single 6600 GT?

frostedflakes · Post by **frostedflakes** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:14 am

90nm. Same reason the 7900GT uses less power than a 6800GS and a 512MB 650MHz 7900GTX uses the same amount of power as a 256MB 450MHz 7800GTX.

EDIT: Although looking at the graph again, the jump in idle power consumption @ SLI doesn't seem to match up with load @ SLI. Is this what you were referring to? Does seem a little odd.

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:20 am

diver wrote:That power graph from Beyoond3D does not look right to me. How does a pair of 7600 GT's in SLI use less power than a single 6600 GT?

Easily, they run cooler to start with, and their architecture doesn't seem to be very effective in SLI--so maybe they are just idling away cycles/processing units in SLI mode.

The 7600GT already has processing power in excess of its ability to feed those processors data. Splitting the workload in SLI is not as effective at increasing memory bandwidth as it is effective at splitting up processing workload.

Combine that with intelligent power gating in a newer core, and a pair of 7600GT's is not doing a whole lot more processing in SLI mode than a single 7600GT is doing in non-SLI.

I bet that the SLI power picture would change in a very pixel shader intensive application. Maybe 3DMark2006?

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:28 am

Delete me

Aris · Post by **Aris** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:54 am

very nice review at beyond3d, although i dont really like how they do their graphs, but at least they got the important stuff right.

so lets sum up. it runs on less power than the 6600gt, its faster than the 6800gs, and in some cases almost as fast as the 7800gt. its clearly faster than any mid range card ati currently has out.

the biggest selling point though, for me, is its physical deminsions. since its using the same PCB boards as the 6600gt it will be only 6" long. for those of us who use SFF cases that cant fit large high end video cards, this looks to be the highest performance card available to us right now. the fastest offering from ATI in a small physical package is their x1600xt, and this card clearly cleans house against it. add to that that this board is available NOW at only $200.

i had high expectations for the 7600gt, and nvidia didnt let me down. i cant wait till my card gets here.

as for the whole "its only 128bit" thing. if i had to choose between 128bit and a $200 price tag, or 256bit and a $250+ price tag. id choose 128bit. nvidia did a good job making up for this one limiting factor in lots of other ways, and i think they made the right decision. in the end, its the real world frame rates that matter. not "its being limited by this or that". and in real world benchmarks, this card rocks for its class and price point.

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:11 am

Aris wrote:so lets sum up. it runs on less power than the 6600gt, its faster than the 6800gs, and in some cases almost as fast as the 7800gt. its clearly faster than any mid range card ati currently has out.

Not completely true.

Is is faster until you turn up the memory bandwidth requirements. It is not faster at high resolutions/high FSAA levels.

It really depends on what resolution/settings you want to use. I personally don't see much point in slightly faster frame rates at mid-resolutions. I want 1600x1200 and 6X FSAA if I can run it.

ATI doesn't really have any mid range cards. They sell their old high end chips for the mid range, and old high-end cards have more memory bandwidth than purpose-built mid range cards.

moritz · Post by **moritz** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:13 am

I admit that your falsely claiming Anandtech didn't review the 7600GT at all in single configuration contributed to my saying you were harsh. That said I don't think leaving out the 6600(GT) is too bad, since it's performance relative to other cards that were tested (e.g. 7800 GT) is well known or at least easily lookup up. For what it's worth, I'm upgrading from Nvidia's low/mid-range offer before the 6600, namely the GF4 Ti4200, but I'm not too surprised nobody wasted time including it in a comparative review...

Aris · Post by **Aris** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:28 am

QuietOC wrote:Is is faster until you turn up the memory bandwidth requirements. It is not faster at high resolutions/high FSAA levels.

It really depends on what resolution/settings you want to use. I personally don't see much point in slightly faster frame rates at mid-resolutions. I want 1600x1200 and 6X FSAA if I can run it.

i dont see the point in using any resolution higher than 1280x1024. on CRT's i never use anything except 1024x768. and only use the latter when using an LCD display so that its running at its native resolution.(as almost all gamming lcd's are 19"). i also dont see the point in FSAA or Anistropic Filtering.

When i'm playing a game like cstrike or fear, i dont stop to admire the textures and the pretty sceneri. i'm their to kill or be killed in a fast paced environment, and kicking up the resolution and turning on the eye candy only reduces framerates and inhibits my ability to win. sure it would be nice to take a moment right after i buy a card to admire what it can do at max settings, but when im really playing i'm not gunna leave it at that setting. IMO, that moment of video bliss before reality hits isnt worth a price tag higher than $200. the only other reason i can possibly see to use such resolutions and eye candy is for bragging rights. and personally, i'm happy with the bragging rights i get when my name is at the top of the frag list, and my team is at the top of the ladder boards. i dont need fancy textures and pretty scenery or a top end overly expensive video card to do it.

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:42 am

Aris wrote:Sure it would be nice to take a moment right after i buy a card to admire what it can do at max settings, but when im really playing i'm not gunna leave it at that setting. IMO, that moment of video bliss before reality hits isnt worth a price tag higher than $200. the only other reason i can possibly see to use such resolutions and eye candy is for bragging rights.

Well, then fine a GF4 Ti 4200 should be all you need then...

I kinda like my $121 X800GTO, even if it is a little old and hot...

Erssa · Post by **Erssa** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:44 am

Aris wrote:so lets sum up. it runs on less power than the 6600gt, its faster than the 6800gs, and in some cases almost as fast as the 7800gt. its clearly faster than any mid range card ati currently has out.

Not true. Ati released X1800GTO the same day the 7600GT was released, and they seem very equal in terms of performance. The price will tell which will end up stronger in my book.

stupid · Post by **stupid** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:53 am

Aris wrote: i dont see the point in using any resolution higher than 1280x1024. on CRT's i never use anything except 1024x768. and only use the latter when using an LCD display so that its running at its native resolution.(as almost all gamming lcd's are 19"). i also dont see the point in FSAA or Anistropic Filtering.

It's all a matter of preference. There are people willing to dish out the $$$ for both high resolution and high graphics quality. To each their own, which is why I have the 7900GT on my list. It should last me a good 3 years, maybe more since I don't play that many games anymore.

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:54 am

Erssa wrote:
Aris wrote:so lets sum up. it runs on less power than the 6600gt, its faster than the 6800gs, and in some cases almost as fast as the 7800gt. its clearly faster than any mid range card ati currently has out.
Not true. Ati released X1800GTO the same day the 7600GT was released, and they seem very equal in terms of performance. The price will tell which will end up stronger in my book.

The X1800GTO isn't all that great until the resolution and FSAA are turned up. ATI shouldn't have reduced the pixel pipelines. It would be a much more interesting with 16 pipelines, but I think ATI still needs a real mid range card like the 8 pipeline, 24 shader double-X1600 I mentioned--X1700XT???

In fact the X1800GTO could well be slower than my $121 overclocked X800GTO. My cheapy has the same pixel pipeline configuration, and I have it clocked 50MHz faster for core and memory.

=assassin= · Post by **=assassin=** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 am

7600GT perfomance is great - I want one!!!

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 am

Aris wrote:very nice review at beyond3d, although i dont really like how they do their graphs, but at least they got the important stuff right.

so lets sum up. it runs on less power than the 6600gt, its faster than the 6800gs, and in some cases almost as fast as the 7800gt. its clearly faster than any mid range card ati currently has out....(snipped)

Where is it shown the 7600 uses less power than a 6600GT?

Nevermind, I went to the review and saw it, but I think there is another review showing lower power requirements for the 6600GT.

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:11 am

Same website with power ratings for 6600GT in another review versus the one listed with 7600:

http://www.beyond3d.com/previews/nvidia ... x.php?p=19

Source: http://www.beyond3d.com/reviews/bfg/660 ... ex.php?p=5

Why are the power ratings for the 6600GT different from review including the 7600?

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:17 am

JVM wrote:Why are the power ratings for the 6600GT different from review including the 7600?

The graph units are system power not card power. Different motherboard/cpu/power supply/all of the above?

Also I don't think you'll find the 7600GT runs cooler than the 6600GT in all situations. 3DMark03 just doesn't have the pixel shader loads needed to really push the shader-biased cards (X1900/6800GS/7600/X1600).

I'd also recommend the FiringSquad 7600GT review/comparsion. It is more gamer-focused instead of the 3D developer focus of Beyond3D.

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:52 am

QuietOC wrote:
JVM wrote:Why are the power ratings for the 6600GT different from review including the 7600?
The graph units are system power not card power. Different motherboard/cpu/power supply/all of the above?

Also I don't think you'll find the 7600GT runs cooler than the 6600GT in all situations. 3DMark03 just doesn't have the pixel shader loads needed to really push the shader-biased cards (X1900/6800GS/7600/X1600).

I am very interested to know if the 7600GTS (there are different versions of this card) would be easier to cool than a 6600GT with 256MB. Even if the 7600 doesn't run cooler but at least runs as cool as the 6600GT would be interesting. However, the length of the 7600 is slightly more than two inches longer than the 6600GT and I don't know how that will work in my proposed new build with ASUS A8N-SLI Premium in a P150.

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:59 am

JVM wrote:I am very interested to know if the 7600GTS (there are different versions of this card) would be easier to cool than a 6600GT with 256MB. Even if the 7600 doesn't run cooler but at least runs as cool as the 6600GT would be interesting. However, the length of the 7600 is slightly more than two inches longer than the 6600GT and I don't know how that will work in my proposed new build with ASUS A8N-SLI Premium in a P150.

I believe the 7600GT is pin compatible with the 6600GT. Meaning you should be able to get it on any PCB the 6600GT uses [Edit: Aris already mentioned this above.] ATI did this with the X1900/X1800 series too. GPU ZIF sockets anyone?

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 12:34 pm

QuietOC wrote:
JVM wrote:I am very interested to know if the 7600GTS (there are different versions of this card) would be easier to cool than a 6600GT with 256MB. Even if the 7600 doesn't run cooler but at least runs as cool as the 6600GT would be interesting. However, the length of the 7600 is slightly more than two inches longer than the 6600GT and I don't know how that will work in my proposed new build with ASUS A8N-SLI Premium in a P150.
I believe the 7600GT is pin compatible with the 6600GT. Meaning you should be able to get it on any PCB the 6600GT uses [Edit: Aris already mentioned this above.] ATI did this with the X1900/X1800 series too. GPU ZIF sockets anyone?

I am getting so hopped up about this card that I would like to get it if the Zalman VF700-Cu or VF700CuAl would keep it cool enough running at 5 volts in the silent mode. If that works out, then I have to decide on which brand to get

EVGA, XFX, Pny, or Leadtek?

I'm pretty sure the VF700 can cool the 6600GT at 5 volts, but what about this 7600GT? There are different versions but I can do with either 560 or 580, although the 560 clock speed would likely be a bit easier to cool???

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:13 pm

Aris wrote:very nice review at beyond3d, although i dont really like how they do their graphs, but at least they got the important stuff right.

so lets sum up. it runs on less power than the 6600gt, its faster than the 6800gs, and in some cases almost as fast as the 7800gt. its clearly faster than any mid range card ati currently has out.

the biggest selling point though, for me, is its physical deminsions. since its using the same PCB boards as the 6600gt it will be only 6" long. for those of us who use SFF cases that cant fit large high end video cards, this looks to be the highest performance card available to us right now. (snipped)

Sorry to disappoint, but the 7600GT is slightly more than two inches longer than the 6600GT:

7600GT:
Height: 4.7 inches 106mm

Length: 8.98 inches 228mm

6600GT:
Height: 3.88 inches 88.4mm

Length: 6.88 inches 174.6mm

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:03 pm

Interesting review at VR-Zone showing running temps of 7900GT lower than 7600GT http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=3335&s=10

But power rating for 7600GT is lower:

http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=3335&s=8

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:05 pm

And another review of the 7600GT http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=3338

Aris · Post by **Aris** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:53 pm

Erssa wrote:
Aris wrote:so lets sum up. it runs on less power than the 6600gt, its faster than the 6800gs, and in some cases almost as fast as the 7800gt. its clearly faster than any mid range card ati currently has out.
Not true. Ati released X1800GTO the same day the 7600GT was released, and they seem very equal in terms of performance. The price will tell which will end up stronger in my book.

too bad the PCB for that card is larger than 7" long. it wont fit in alot of SFF and HTPC cases. which is the whole reason ive been waiting for the 7600gt

Aris · Post by **Aris** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:00 pm

JVM wrote:
Aris wrote:very nice review at beyond3d, although i dont really like how they do their graphs, but at least they got the important stuff right.

so lets sum up. it runs on less power than the 6600gt, its faster than the 6800gs, and in some cases almost as fast as the 7800gt. its clearly faster than any mid range card ati currently has out.

the biggest selling point though, for me, is its physical deminsions. since its using the same PCB boards as the 6600gt it will be only 6" long. for those of us who use SFF cases that cant fit large high end video cards, this looks to be the highest performance card available to us right now. (snipped)
Sorry to disappoint, but the 7600GT is slightly more than two inches longer than the 6600GT:

7600GT:
Height: 4.7 inches 106mm

Length: 8.98 inches 228mm

6600GT:
Height: 3.88 inches 88.4mm

Length: 6.88 inches 174.6mm

WRONG AGAIN. look at the pictures. that board is NOT 9inches long. its 6 inches. ive been looking at pictures of cards, and getting measurements from real world customers, including measuring my own card. i have a 6600gt, and it is EXACTLY 6 inches from end to end. and the pcb hangover from the edge of the pci-express slot to the end of the board in the pictures of the 7600gt is exactly the same length as the hangover on my 6600gt.

also if you had read anything about this card before it came out, you'd know it was pin to pin compatible with the 6600gt. did you ever wonder why they went with 128bit pipeline when everything else they make now is 256bit? its because the PCB is IDENTICLE to the 6600gt, which is also 128bit. the only things they changed in the 7600gt was the processor and the memory. everything else is identicle. which is also why they can sell them for $200 bucks the day of their release, and have them in huge quanities in stock at every retailer in the country.

7600gt vs 6600gt Wheres the review?

7600gt vs 6600gt Wheres the review?

Re: 7600gt vs 6600gt Wheres the review?

Re: 7600gt vs 6600gt Wheres the review?