06-07-2007, 11:37 PM

Can anybody confirm that the 8600M GT is better than the previously used ATI Mobility X1600 and explain why this exactly is? I know that the 8600M supports DirectX 10.0 whereas X1600 only supports DirectX 9.0, but what is it that gives this GeForce card the advantage? I've always been a ATI supporter and am I little bit disappointed that they switched to nVidia.

Also, is the GeForce 8600M GT 256MB upgrade significant to the 128MB?

Any input given has my appreciation. Thanks.

06-10-2007, 06:22 PM

You can see on this link
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...ist.844.0.html

06-10-2007, 07:15 PM

The X1600 and the 8600 are both mid-range cards. The main difference is that the X1600 is from the previous generation whereas the 8600 is the current generation. So this means that the 8600 has support for newer technologies, one in particular is DirectX 10. Also, since the mid-range card is often a slightly crippled version of the higher end model, it is also faster than the mid-range card from the previous generation.

So while they're both mid-range cards, since the 8600 is the latest in tech, it's the superior card.

06-10-2007, 07:42 PM

while an OK question to ask...

i dont see apple downgrading the pro from a x1600 to something slower.

they just dont do stuff like that

06-10-2007, 08:11 PM

I've heard numbers as high as 60% better performance; can't remember the source of that info though.

06-10-2007, 08:17 PM

Wouldn't it just be a driver upgrade from ATI to make the card direct x 10 compatible?

06-10-2007, 08:20 PM

No, DirectX support is hardware based, not software

06-10-2007, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by Kash

No, DirectX support is hardware based, not software

Thanks Kash....after I posted that I had a niggling feeling that it was hardware based.

06-11-2007, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by andrewc

Can anybody confirm that the 8600M GT is better than the previously used ATI Mobility X1600 and explain why this exactly is? I know that the 8600M supports DirectX 10.0 whereas X1600 only supports DirectX 9.0, but what is it that gives this GeForce card the advantage? I've always been a ATI supporter and am I little bit disappointed that they switched to nVidia.

Also, is the GeForce 8600M GT 256MB upgrade significant to the 128MB?

Any input given has my appreciation. Thanks.

I find that Nvidia cards usually offer better performance.

My Dell notebook has an Nvidia go 7900 gs. Benchmarked, it's leaps and bounds above the x1600 and they're practically same gen chips. It's a 17" Inspiron and not worth comparing to a last gen 17" MBP from some people, but it does have some better hardware in it and I can get a 1920x1200 resolution. The new MBP's are capable of this though.

06-11-2007, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by Village Idiot

I find that Nvidia cards usually offer better performance.

My Dell notebook has an Nvidia go 7900 gs. Benchmarked, it's leaps and bounds above the x1600 and they're practically same gen chips. It's a 17" Inspiron and not worth comparing to a last gen 17" MBP from some people, but it does have some better hardware in it and I can get a 1920x1200 resolution. The new MBP's are capable of this though.

same gen? maybe but u need to be comparing a 7600gt to the x1600, or a x1900 to that 7900gs

why on earth you are comparing a 900 series nvidia to a 600 series ati is beyond me

06-11-2007, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by kgeier82

same gen? maybe but u need to be comparing a 7600gt to the x1600, or a x1900 to that 7900gs

why on earth you are comparing a 900 series nvidia to a 600 series ati is beyond me

It was the only card that apple offered in their top of the line notebooks at the moment.

Nvidia just made an amazing gpu with the go 7900gs. It could be over clocked in the laptop and with a few other tweaks, it wouldn't even cause a great deal of heat and it would perform almost as well at the go 7900gt. Dell just happened to offer that in their 17" inspiron.

06-11-2007, 03:48 PM

yea id take a 7900 any day over my x1600

but for some people, the x1600 is even too much

im glad apple switched to nvidia, i was waiting for that. theyll probably go and switch back before its time for me to buy though

06-18-2007, 09:08 PM

Well the nvidia will rock it out of course, but the x1600 is capable of much better performance than what apple clocked the chip at, they UNDERCLOCKED it (yes be mad) because they wanted the mbp to run cooler. That chip can run up to 475mhz safely according to ATI. So yes the nvidia will outperform but if you OC your x1600 you'll see possibly a less drastic performance difference. Probably 60% would be more like 30-40% difference with OC job.