Sapphire Radeon HD 3870 512M GDDR4 PCI-E DUAL DVI-I / TVO FULL  24.500 Ft
PCI-E, ATI X3870, 512MB, DDR4, 256bit, Sapphire, DirectX10.1, HDMI, Aktív, TV-out

Gigabyte R485512H-B AMD Radeon HD4850 512MB PCIe  34.377 Ft
PCI-E, Radeon HD 4850, 512MB, DDR3, 256bit, Gigabyte, Aktív, DirectX10.1, HDMI, TV-out, Mag/Ram órajel: 625/1986MHz

Gigabyte R487-512H-B RADEON HD4870 512MB PCIe 49.990 Ft
PCI-E, Radeon HD 4870, 512MB, DDR5, 256bit, Gigabyte, Aktív, DirectX10.1, Mag/Ram órajel: 750/3600MHz

Leadtek PX8800GT TD 512M GDDR3 PCIe  21.978 Ft
PCI-E, nVidia 8800, 512MB, GDDR-3, 256bit, ASUS, Aktív, DirectX10, TV-out

MSI NX8800GTS-T2D320E-HD-OC nVidia 8800GTS OC PCIe  23.900 Ft
PCI-E, nVidia 8800, 320MB, DDR3, 320bit, MSI, Halk, DirectX10, TV-out, Mag/Ram órajel: 575/1700MHz

Zotac 9600GT 512MB AMP EDITION  22.200 Ft
PCI-E, nVidia 9600GT, 512MB, GDDR-3, 256bit, Zotac, Aktív, DirectX10.1, HDMI, TV-out, 725MHz / 2000MHz

Asus EN9800GT HB/HTDI/512 512M PCIe  29.936 Ft
PCI-E, nVidia 9800GT, 512MB, GDDR-3, 256bit, ASUS, Aktív, DirectX10, TV-out, 600MHz/1500MHz/1800MHz

MSI N9800GX2-M2D1G nVidia 9800GX2 1GB PCIe  69.900 Ft
PCI-E, nVidia 9800GX2, 1GB, DDR3, 512bit, MSI, DirectX10, HDMI, TV-out, Mag/Ram órajel: 600/2000MHz, a memória sávszélességen a két GPU osztozik

Garancia: 2 év

További VGA kínálat: Itt

A principal mudança seria no uso da tecnologia V-Cool da Asus, que consiste em usar heatpipes para resfriar a placa de vídeo, o sistema passivo traz inúmeras vantagens para os usuários. Além de menor temperaturas, algo em torno de 10 graus Celsius comparada com as placas 9600GT com cooler, o produto teria a emissão de zero decibéis, além de ser mais fácil a instalação de duas placas em slots próximos.

A EN9600GT trabalharia a 650MHZ, 1625MHZ, 1800MHZ, respectivamente nas freqüências do core, Shaders e a memória GDDR3.

Só faltou na notícia da Asus citar a data de lançamento e o seu preço. Mas geralmente essa solução custa algo em torno de 30 % da semelhante da mesma empresa. É um bom investimento, já tive placa de vídeo passiva da Asus e me arrependi muito quando me desfiz, pois a mesma era eficiente e silenciosa. A mudança para a série posterior nem valeu a pena.

AMD has added a 2MB Level 3 cache to the Phemon to get rid of this problem. According to the company, this boosts performance because it allowes company, this boosts performance because it allows the delivery of a large amount of data to cone core, or smaller amounts of data to all four simultaneously. You acan also buy a triple-core Phenom, called hte X3, which is a cheapr alternative. Its bacsically a quad-core with one foailed core. I'll try and get hold of one and review that also.

Desipite shouting about the Phenom's 'true' quad-core design, AMD admits that none of the current models in its Phenom range (including this one) is a high-end processor that can compete with Intel's Core 2 Quad's. Instead, AMD aims to undercut Intel's prices and make quad-core processors available to everyone.

The 9600's four cores run at 2.3GHz, and each has 512K or L2 cache to play with. The new L3 cache is also available to any, or all of the other cores. Although the chip will work in AM2 motherboards, you'll need an AM2+ board (I used the MSI K9A2 CF) to get the most out of the Phenom. This is because AM2+ motherboards support the Phemon's superior power management and HyperTransport 3, the link between the processor and all the other components on the motherboard. This runs at 2.6GHz, whereas older AM2 motherboards with HyperTransport 2 have a slower 1.4GHz link. Then Phenom's integrated memory controller supports DDR2 RAM, up to 1066MHz.

Sadly, in my experience with the chip, the 9600's performance has been mildly dissapointing. Its audio-encoding isn't that advanced compared to dual-core chips. Although, its has lots of strength in video-encoding, being one of the fastest processors I have ever come across - second to the Core 2 Quad Q6600, which is about 1 and a 1/2 times better than the Phenom 9600.

Other Intel processors will probably cause problems for Phenom too. For around £120 you can buy a Core 2 Duo E6750 which is noticeably quicker overall. You might expect four cores to be more efficient at multitasking than two cores, although - I find multitasking is handled better by Intels Core 2 Duo E6750 than this Phenom 9600.

AMD will launch two new Phenoms over the next few weeks, the 9700 (at 2.4GHz) and the 9900 (at 2.6GHz), but Intel is also releasing new chips soon; New Core 2 Quads, bassed on a more efficient 45nm process, will be available around the same time (a few weeks), and I expect the Q9300 (at 2.5GHz) to cost somewhere around £165 - £170 and be much quicker than the Phenom 9600. Unless AMD drops its prices an the performance of the faster models is considerably better than that of the 9600, Intel's processors will still be better value.

Processor: Four cores running at 2.3GHz, Socket AM2+, 4x 512KB L2 cache, 2MB L3 cache.
Details: www.amd.com

GeForce 9600GT a aparut si mi-e rusine :). Mi-e rusine ca, pana acum o saptamana, nu am auzit de noua generatie de la NVidia desi, cum am observat abia acum, a fost anuntata prin mai multe articole pe net. Si impins de curiozitate, am purces in a invata mai multe despre ce au mai scos magicienii mei de suflet.

Prima privire am aruncat-o pe "Features", care prezinta acelasi repertoriu ca la seria 8 (PCIE2, SLI si alte prostii mai mult sau mai putin interesante, nu am vazut nimic in plus), lucru de asteptat avand in vedere ca placa intra in categoria "affordable". Avem de aface cu 64 procesoare de shadere (de doua ori mai mult fata de echivalentul din seria 8, GF8800GT), si frecvente mai mari in general, cu saltul cel mai notabil la frecventa shader processors (de la 1100 si ceva la 1625 MHz). Arhitectura pe 65 nm, notabil superioara celei de pe procesoarele G8* si 512 MB VRAM in toate versiunile disponibile azi ii asigura lui 9600GT un loc fruntas in batalia de pe segmentul desktop.

Din motive evidente orcarui roman, nu am putut face un test pe viu, deci am ramas cu cititul testelor facute de altii :(. Ce m-a surprins este comparatia dintre placa de care discutam si un Radeon3870, intre care e o diferenta de pret de aproximativ $50 (placa de la ATI fiind modelul mai scump). ATIul s-a dovedit a fi mai slab decat 9600GTul in toate testele (3DMark + jocuri), chiar daca este superior cand vine vorba de frecvente si arhitectura (ATI se joaca cu tehnologii pe 55 nm pe cand NV inca foloseste procesoare pe 90 nm in clasa high end), numarul mic de procesoare de shadere isi spune cuvantul. Notabil este ca GTul se tine aproape de 8800GTS in majoritatea testelor, lucru cel putin laudabil avand in vedere pretul la care noua placa este gasita.

In concluzie, tind sa cred ca NVidia face niste pasi enormi pe piata placilor video "low budget". Daca acum ceva timp m-am ofticat ca mi-am cumparat 8800GTSul fix inainte de aparitia lui 8800GT, am impresia ca voi avea parte de inca o sedinta de zgariat pe ochi, in curand.

De gasit o gasim si in Romania (m-am uitat pe DCShop si sunt sigur ca e si pe price.ro) la preturi incepand de la 6 milioane (de la XFX) ajungand pana pe la 6 jumate (tot XFX, varianta overclockata, cu vreo 200MHz in plus la memorie si la procesoare) si 7 milioane (de la ASUS, varianta standard). Pentru cei ca mine, mai saraci (si nu cu duhul :D), e o placa accesibila ce permite, la nevoie, overclocking (ce il puteti face manual, pentru un castig de juma de milion).

The GeForce 9600 GT 512MB comes with 64 stream processors, double the number found in the GeForce 8600 GTS but not quite as many as in the original GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB. To make up for the shortfall in stream processors, Nvidia gave the GeForce 9600 GT quicker clock speeds, pairing the 650MHz core clock with a speedy 1.62GHz shader clock. The 512MB of GDDR3 memory has an effective speed of 1.8GHz. Nvidia states that the card uses 95W of power and recommends a 400W power supply for the standard GeForce 9600 GT 512MB.

A worker at Nvidia said that the performance of the 9600 Gt is almost double than the previous 8600 Gt, and after some benchmarks have been done he seems to be right.

The GeForce 9600 GT 512MB performs spectacularly for a card in the mainstream category. It thoroughly trounced prior-generation parts like the GeForce 8600 GTS and Radeon HD 2600 XT, outperformed the more expensive Radeon HD 3870 in Crysis and Call of Duty 4, and waltzed past the comparably priced Radeon HD 3850 in all of our tests. The GeForce 9600 GT didn't beat the GeForce 8800 GT 512MB card or XFX GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB XXX Edition, which is considerably more expensive and overclocked.

Crysis runs quite well at medium detail levels. NVIDIA cards have historically held an advantage in Crysis, and the 9600GT proves true to this record. All of the cards in question maintain playable framerates, though the 8600GTS is still choppy at times. Relative performance rankings remain identical when we shift to high quality testing, but the performance hit is quite significant. Of the various cards we tested, only the 8800GT and 9600GT maintain semi-playable framerates. As for the 8600 GTS, again, there's not much to say when a card's performance could almost be charted in seconds-per-frame instead of frames-per-second.

The 9600 GT returned a markedly higher minimum framerate than the 8800 GT, even when repeatedly tested. I suspect this may be the result of further driver optimizations.

The competition in this price range is fierce, as ATI just announced price cuts for both of their competing GPUs. Choosing a video card got a little harder, as it depends on how the price war plays out. Regardless of card, you win. Lower prices and higher performance doesn't exactly hurt the consumer.

Source: www.gamespot.com

its shiny and i want.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_9600gt.html 

• December 1980: The top grossing comedy of 1981 (U.S.), Nine to Five, is released. The film features a scene between Jane Fonda and a contemporary Xerox 9500 Production Copier. In brief, she is attempting to use the machine without training and, while the copier is functioning as designed, goes haywire. This was intended to be a product placement for Xerox, but failed as the term xerox, both as a noun and as a verb, had fallen into common parlance and the relatively small market for the machine created no response. Additionally, the scene implied that the 9500 was difficult to operate.
• 1980: Xerox introduces the 10-series "Marathon" desktop copiers intended to compete with imported units. Kinko's, Orfalea's now-national company, introduces self-service with these devices.
• 1983: Xerox introduces the Color Copier, with no other model name or number. This analog machine was all but prohibitively expensive, with little regard for color matching and had poor registration. Of the ca. 400 machines produced 200 went to Kinko's who sold the output at $4.50 per "click". In most operating regions, Kinko's offered one such machine per region. The entire series was decommissioned by 1987.
• 1985: Aldus PageMaker. What the application does is described as desktop publishing. PageMaker is the single application which drives the printing industry to the Macintosh platform.
• 1986: Canon of Japan introduces a 400-dpi four-color digital copier, the CLC-100. CLC stands for Color Laser Copier. Within months it becomes the industry standard. It is replaced in 1990 by the legendary CLC-500. Both of these machines produce 4 images per minute. The laser technology is licensed from Apple computer. The machines, natively, provide interoperability with the Apple Macintosh system. The first retail installs sell images at a price comparable with the Xerox units.
• 1983-1986: As part of a settlement agreement with Xerox, Apple Computer develops and introduces the LaserWriter 300-dpi dry-ink printer. This is regarded as the beginning of the age of desktop publishing.
• 1988: The Xerox 5090, whose decedent machines are known as "50-series", is introduced to replace the 9000 series. New features include the ability to print upon specially prepared tabs, on-line stitching, on-line tape binding and the ability to use up to three different paper types within one document.
• 1989: Unknown location, The last new Xerox 9000-series, a 9350, is newly installed at a U.S. Naval Station.
• 1990: No mimeograph shops are known to exist in North America.
• April 1991: Xerox introduces the Docutech 135. It is a 135 click-per-minute 600-dpi black-only laser printer with integrated scanning function. The first installs are at universities, presumed to be the University of California system. The print engine is remarkably similar to the 50-series.
• April 1992: The Xerox 5775 is tested in retail environments. The first ten installs are all at Kinko's locations, six in New York City and four in Louisville, Kentucky. This is the introduction of digital color to the Xerox line. Xerox is the last copier company to add color permanently to its line up.
• 1992: Adobe announces plans to create a fully portable generic document digital file format.
• ca, 1992: Kinko's standardizes on 99-cent, 11-inch color copies across the United States. Opens first shops in Europe (the Netherlands) and Japan.
• 1996: The distinction between "desktop publishing" and "digital typesetting" ends.
• 1999: The last 9000 install, at a Kinko's in Washington state, is replaced with a Docutech 6135.
• 1999: A consortium including Canon, Kodak and Heidelberg, a German offset and web press company, introduces the Digimaster line. This is the first system to compete directly with the Docutech.
• 2001: The term "demand publishing" is coined. Utilizing the Docutech or similar equipment, with short-run finishing equipment, demand publishing allows very short runs of trade-paperback books. This becomes a specialty in 2005. The key to demand publishing is that the material published is typeset by the content provider.
• 2003: Xerox introduces "in-line color" with a line of machines introduced under the name Nuvera. The top-of-the-line machine produces 150 clicks-per-minute black and 60 clicks-per-minute color, synchronized into one document. The dominance of Xerox's Docutech line is limiting the number of Nuvera installs which feature a different interface and new print engine.
• Any minute now: Paper becomes obsolete.