Nvidia 9600GT Benchmarks & Specs

The newly revealed Nvidia 9600GT card that was previously mentioned here has been benchmarked by Tomshardware, the premiere site for graphic card benchmarks. And L33tzone is proud to present the summary of the results for its readers.

g94a.jpg

The 9600GT Is it just another version of the G92 – the same graphics processor all the GeForce cards such as GeForce 8800 GT 256 MB, 8800 GT 512 MB, 8800 GT 1 GB, 8800 GTS 512 MB,are based upon, however, the essential difference is that the G94 only has half the number of stream processors of the G92: 64. This pales in comparison to the 112 a “simple” GeForce 8800 GT 256 MB boasted, you’re thinking. That’s not untrue, but the shader frequency is higher (compared to the 8800 GT only, since the G92 on the 8800 GTS uses the same frequency), attaining 1625 MHz for these units (650 MHz for the rest of the GPU). But even at that frequency, the raw processing power of this G94 is still a full 38% lower than that of the 8800 GT.

the G94 has only 505 million transistors, or 33% fewer than the G92, and it has a surface area we measured at 225 mm2, or 31% smaller, despite the same engraving depth (65 nm). That value is still 15% higher than on the RV670 used in the AMD 3D graphics cards it directly targets.

Please Note: Following link has benchmark results in the form of pictures. Please Wait while they download.

Here are the Specifications of the Card:

GPU 9600 GT
GPU frequency 650 MHz
Shader frequency 1625 MHz
Memory frequency 900 MHz
Memory bus width 256 bits
Type of memory GDDR3
Memory 512 MB
Number of Pixels/Vertex Pipelines (16)
Number of texturing units 32
Number of ROPs 16
Processing power 208 GFlops
Memory bandwidth 57.6 GB/s
Number of transistors 505 million
Process 0.065µ
Die surface area 225 mm²
Generation 2008
Shader model supported 4.0

 Benchmark Results:

Although there are more benchmarks given at the Original Benchmark post, here are some of the things that i found quite interesting:

 bench1.png

bench4.png

bench6.png

bench9.png

Conclusion

The bottom line is that the performance of this GeForce 9600 GT came as a pleasant surprise. Despite the chip having only 64 stream processors, 38% lower processing power, and 33% fewer transistors, gaming performance was only 12% below the 8800 GT on average. And it was even better than the 8800 GT 256 MB, by an amount ranging from 1% without antialiasing, up to 45% with it enabled. The 8800 GT 256 MB is greatly hampered by its 256 MB of memory, and these results mean that it is really no longer even worth considering! Meaning that it was an extremely good choice to put 512 MB of memory on the 9600 GT, even if that doesn’t account for everything, since the 8800 GT has the same amount.

The upshot is that the 9600 GT puts Nvidia in a much more favorable position to compete with AMD. First, the HD 3850 is beaten hands down performance-wise, since even compared to its 512 MB version (which can be found on sale at 165-170 €, the expected MSRP for the 9600 GT), performance was approximately 15% better. Only the 256 MB version still has no competition, given its 140 € price point.

This card is a valid replacement for the GeForce 8800 GT 256 MB, and is the best low-cost solution for gamers who play with antialiasing enabled. Without the filters enabled, its performance drops behind the HD 3870 (while still staying ahead of the HD 3850s), but its price is expected to be slightly lower than that of the AMD card.

Pros

  • Performance/price ratio
  • The best card in its price range for performance with antialiasing enabled
  • Reduced power consumption and noise

Cons

  • Performance below that of the HD 3870 without filters
  • Not really any more a “GeForce 9” card than the 8800 GTs

SOURCE: TOMSHARDWARE

Advertisements

7 comments on “Nvidia 9600GT Benchmarks & Specs

  1. Eli says:

    GeForce 9600 GT still a great card for the money. Who ever is considering buy a new video card will need look at that 12% difference and decide weather the 8800 GT is worth the extra $40 – $50. In mind it isnt. Specially if you’re an planning on throwing another 9600 for an SLI setup. …… So What will it be?

    Good article !

  2. @tof says:

    Id go with the 8800GT 😀 Even tho, 9600 is the newer card, since there are no new chips from nvidia yet, (just the same G92 / G94 setups), that means, 8800gt wud be a wiser “LONG-TERM” choice, as compared to 9600gt, which will soon be overshadowed by the 9800gt, as soon as it comes 🙂

  3. Artica says:

    Go for the 9600GT SLI, it’s up to 80% Performance increase. It defeats the 3870×2 of ATi in some games =D

    Okay, the 8800GT is better in SLI, but for that you pay 300+ EU
    In my country, Holland ftw, the cheapest OC’ed 9600GT is 139EU, so 278 for better performance for 3870×2 ( from 320EU I guess )

  4. c0d3r says:

    Well, idt be interesting to see whether 9600GTsli wud be better as compared to 8800GT sli …. id got with the 8800gt sli … 😀

  5. […] fps. Het ligt er puur aan welke games je wilt spelen. Waar haal je dat vandaan? Volgens dit en ditpresteerd hij ongeveer hetzelfde als alle andere midrange kaarten en minder dan de 8800GT? […]

  6. […] @DB I prefer the P5K-E Mobo (Can’t seem to find the local price of the other Mobo online). ASUS P5K-E/WiFi-AP P35 M/B HK$ 1,225.00 As for your CPU choices: Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 (2.66GHz) CPU/4M BOX HK$ 1,456.00 Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 (3GHz) CPU/4M BOX HK$ 2,058.00 Intel Core 2 Duo E8200 (2.66GHz) CPU/6M BOX HK$ 1,480.00 Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 (3GHz) CPU/6M BOX HK$ 1,800.00 Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600(2.4G)8M BOX (G0/95W) HK$ 2,050.00 Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 (2.66GHz) CPU/8M BOX HK$ 4,180.00 Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 (2.5GHz) CPU/6M BOX HK$ 2,252.00 Intel Core 2 Quad QX9650 (3GHz)/12M BOX HK$ 8,880.00 I prefer the one’s in bold. — Vid Cards ASUS EN88GT1 EN8800GT PCI-E 1GB DDR3 HK$ 2,190.00 ASUS EN88GT5 EN8800GT PCI-E 512MB DDR3 HK$ 1,740.00 ASUS EN96GT5 EN9600GT PCI-E 512MB DDR3 HK$ 1,400.00 I think I prefer to get the 8800GT 1gb or 512mb rather than the 9600GT. See a review here. Nvidia 9600GT Benchmarks & Specs ? L33tZ0ne […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s