New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nvidia GeForce 8700M GT

post #1 of 42
6/20/07 at 5:05pm
Thread Starter 
Just found this, I think I'm a little late...http://news.firingsquad.com/news/new...searchid=15950

It also on the nvidia website atop the Enthusiast column for notebook gfx cards...I think only toshiba has it rite now, I'm curious to see the performance. It says its up to 70% faster than the 7900GS if thats any indication Also ATI has there 2600 XT card that I haven't heard anything about...I'd like to see how those measure up to the 7900, 7950.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 42
6/20/07 at 5:07pm
Thread Starter 
nvm about the 2600m, found the benchmarks, not too hot
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 42
6/20/07 at 5:08pm
yeah, I really hope ASUS decides to use these in a nice 17"
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 42
6/20/07 at 5:13pm
Thread Starter 
Apparently they're just a very overclocked 8600? No benchmarks yet
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 42
6/20/07 at 9:51pm
for me it's the 8800 series or Bust lol
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 42
6/20/07 at 10:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuckinasquare3 View Post
Apparently they're just a very overclocked 8600? No benchmarks yet

Yeah it is just a very overclocked 8600. Someone overclocked the 8600 in a G1s and got very far on the core, so I imagine it might be possible to get 8700 core speeds on a 8600.
Video ram i'm not so sure about and was the limiting factor on that G1s.

None of this solves the 128bit memory bus.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 42
6/20/07 at 10:58pm
70% faster than 7900GS, thats alot...
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 42
6/20/07 at 11:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by kelv View Post
70% faster than 7900GS, thats alot...
Stock GS can pump out 6.5k 3Dmark05 score. Does the 70% faster mean it will pump out about 11000 mark? I doubt it.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 42
6/21/07 at 1:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kelv View Post
70% faster than 7900GS, thats alot...

Your believing the marketing BS.
Basically the moment you pump up the graphics the 8600 is going to get choked and fall behind the 7900gs. It might be faster in some specific benchmarks, but considering I run my games at 1920*1200 with AA etc the 8600 won't keep up.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 42
6/21/07 at 11:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by megaphat View Post
Your believing the marketing BS. Basically the moment you pump up the graphics the 8600 is going to get choked and fall behind the 7900gs. It might be faster in some specific benchmarks, but considering I run my games at 1920*1200 with AA etc the 8600 won't keep up.
Why do you need AA @ 1920x1200?
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 42
6/21/07 at 2:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Flowerday View Post
Why do you need AA @ 1920x1200?
becuase it makes me all tingly inside... But actually, it does make a difference in the fine lines like power lines in 2142/HL2. Now the 70% crap... I read the benchies. Maybe against a stock "hobbled" GS card. But with my 600/800 perm overclock rev0 card, I will smoke it. Bad. The 128bit memory bus on the 8700 is about the stupidest thing... Now lets think... Could the 8800m be basically the 8600/8700 with a 256/384bit memory bus, better ram, and a higher clock?
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 42
6/21/07 at 8:16pm
3Dmark06 is hardly the benchmark to see if the 70% performance increase is true. The better review websites hardly even use that as a tool to measure a cards abilities.

I guess the better question is if it is comparing its performance to the 7900GS Desktop or Go.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 42
6/21/07 at 8:25pm
Why would they try to compare desktop component to mobile?
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 42
6/21/07 at 8:27pm
to give people an idea of the performance in comparison to its desktop versions I would assume.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 42
6/21/07 at 8:37pm
Wouldn't it be easier for people to compare mobile vs mobile? As person like me wouldn't even know where the desktop GS would stand against mobile GS.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 42
6/21/07 at 10:00pm
true enough, still though most people have desktop variants of the GPU's that they display. I know when I was looking to buy my first gaming laptop I wanted to know how it compared to my desktop equivalent not versus another laptop.

Especially in most cases the laptop variant isn't capable of keeping up with its desktop equivalent, I'd like to know how much less it is.

But yeah it would be easier to compare mobile versus mobile. If you want to get an idea how your mobile GS compares, at least for 3DMark06, you can use the dynamic compare in the futuremark Orb. That's what I did with my Go 7800GTX / 7800 GTX
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 42
6/22/07 at 6:49pm
Thread Starter 
For those wondering about the comparison between the 8700m and 7900, here's the benchmark i found http://gizmodo.com/photogallery/nvidia8700GT/2016781
Its the mobile version of the card, 70% increase in 3d05, 48% in 06, see for yourself...
Also, I'm wondering, for those who are saying you're overclocked 7900gs will do better, what about overclocking the 8700? How much do you think these guys can overclock?
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 42
6/22/07 at 6:53pm
yeah but those are the 7900GS stock scores. I think what it will come down to is how well it overclocks. If it overclocks like a monster, like the 7900GS, then I think the concensus would agree the 8700 is better.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 42
6/22/07 at 7:00pm
Plus, as I mentioned in yolda's thread, there are already plenty of reviews showing how the 3dmark performance of the 8xxx series does not reflect their ingame real world performance unlike most other cards. Just look for some desktop 8600 gts versus 7900gs desktop reviews and you'll see; http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=639&p=2 you see the 8600gts beating the 7900gs in 3dmarks, and then getting decimated in X3 Reunion and Company of Heroes (both benches without the extra dx10 effects, obviously). This also comes up in 86xx versus ati's 19xx reviews. So sadly, the 8700M is probably going to suck unless its an insane overclocker. EDIT: And as many have mentioned, the memory bandwidth will be the death of the 8xxx mobile series. A comment from the review on the similarly memory bandwidth limited 8600gts: "What we found strange here is that an 8% core and 17% memory frequency boost was able to create a 100% performance gain in Company of Heroes?!?!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuckinasquare3 View Post
For those wondering about the comparison between the 8700m and 7900, here's the benchmark i found http://gizmodo.com/photogallery/nvidia8700GT/2016781 Its the mobile version of the card, 70% increase in 3d05, 48% in 06, see for yourself... Also, I'm wondering, for those who are saying you're overclocked 7900gs will do better, what about overclocking the 8700? How much do you think these guys can overclock?
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 42
6/22/07 at 7:04pm
true, then again, supposedly when DX10 does come out it will be more efficient than DX9.0C

I'm guessing that the increased efficiency will then increase FPS. Sadly this is just speculation from what I read, the DX10 demos actually prove the opposite. I would say buy the DX10 card just cause you will have the DX10 capability, but then again by the time DX10 is running they way it should be another series of laptop video cards are probably going to be released.

It is a hard call, I honestly would wait and see how the reviews go.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home