GTX 260 - 216 SP Review

[taltamir]

I see what you are saying, but I am saying that the x2 cannot be compared to a single GPU in terms of value of it as a card, but to multi GPUs.
Specifically two of the 4870, or two GTX260, or two 4850, etc. because the problem you list with it are not problems unique to it, but problems shared by all MGPU, and they mean different things to different people.

Comparing it to two individual 4870 1GB cards, it is much cheaper then two 4870 1GB.

But, two of the 4870 512 are slightly cheaper then it, and most games don't need more then that. So it could be an unwise choice compare to those... unless you do NOT have a CF board, then it is much cheaper then getting a new mobo and two 4870 512MB.

the cheapest 4870x2 on the egg is 540$ shipped (visiontek too!), the cheapest 4870 1GB I see is 310$ shipped. and the cheapest 4870 512MB is 250$ shipped. the 4870x2 = 2x 4870 1GB. And doesn't require two PCIe slots...

Now getting into weather 1GB is overpriced is a whole different beast.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: taltamir
I see what you are saying, but I am saying that the x2 cannot be compared to a single GPU in terms of value of it as a card, but to multi GPUs.
Specifically two of the 4870.
Where it is much cheaper then two 4870 1GB.

But, two of the 4870 512 are slightly cheaper then it, and most games don't need more then that. So it could be an unwise choice compare to those... unless you do NOT have a CF board, then it is much cheaper then getting a new mobo and two 4870 512MB.

the cheapest 4870x2 i see is 540$ shipped, the cheapest 4870 1GB I see is 310$ shipped. the 4870x2 = 2x 4870 1GB
And doesn't require two PCIe slots...

i am saying it is a bit overpriced in relation to either 4870 CF or 280GTX

i don't see ANY value in 4870/1gb UNLESS you are needing it for CrossfireX3.
- i don't see any more smoothness at 19x12 with my X2's core disabled.

Anyway, i got to get to "work"

Cat 8.9 is out and hopefully they will fix my X3 issues

and i have to add Clear Sky and Warhead to my benching suite along with CoH4 .. a few more benches with 8.9 and then i rebuild my PC with x48 and OC my e8600

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

Originally posted by: woolfe9999

Originally posted by: taltamir
that was obviously not his point. He was countering the same "style" of pointless "accusations" about nvidia. It is a sarcastic remark in reply to woolfe9999, obviously all "why"s in both posts are ridiculous.

My post was not a "pointless accusation" against Nvidia. It was not an accusation, period. It was an inference that the appearance of this new product suggests that we more than likely will have to wait until Christmas to see .55nm. As with all inferences, I may be incorrect. However, I doubt that I am.

- woolfe

Actually it wasn't a sarcastic remark. I'm aware of ATI using GDDR5. But when they start using 512mb vram with a 256mbit memory bandwith it makes you wonder is this a next-gen card? (yes I know there is a 1gb card that has been released) The 2900XT had 1gb vram and a 512mbit memory bandwith. Instead of matching Nvidia's cards why not beat them? The 4870 never demolished the GTX 260. They were always close. On the other side what's up with Nvidia not putting DirectX 10.1? When I bought my x850XT everyone said Shader Model 3.0 isn't that important. Now most games require it. Oh, for all those saying a 4870 is way cheaper, there is a GTX 260 for $220 AR at newegg. I've never seen a price tag like that for a 4870.

 

[taltamir]

i bought my overclocked GTX260 for 220 after MIR with free shipping at the egg... the cheapest 4870 i see is 250 after mir and free shipping. this isn't the first time that the GTX260 dipped into the 220s, but the 4870 is consistently more expensive.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: apoppin

i don't agree

what alternative is there to the 280? if you want single core?

you forget, they are benching *stock* 280s against O/C'd 260s
- the 280 also O/Cs very nicely

so .. you have the 4870/512 priced above $250 with the regular 260 and even some O/C'd versions - cool, that is choice and each card offers great value with different features.

How does GTX280 offer any "value" with respect to $250 4870 or 260? It costs what $380 for 20% gain on average. That doesn't sound like value to me. Also I am not sure your comparison of 4870 1GB makes sense. I already said in my other analyses that paying EXTRA for more memory doesn't make a lot of sense as history has shown for same level of card. So $320 4870 1GB is just a poor proposition to begin with. Of course if you are already going to spend $320 on 4870, you might as well get the 280. But who in their right mind would spend $70 for extra 512mb of ram that has little to no use, except in few cases and few games?

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: taltamir
i bought my overclocked GTX260 for 220 after MIR with free shipping at the egg... the cheapest 4870 i see is 250 after mir and free shipping. this isn't the first time that the GTX260 dipped into the 220s, but the 4870 is consistently more expensive.

It's cheaper than the GTX 260.

The GTX 260 Core 216 that is

Which is what we're talking about.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: apoppin

i don't agree

what alternative is there to the 280? if you want single core?

you forget, they are benching *stock* 280s against O/C'd 260s
- the 280 also O/Cs very nicely

so .. you have the 4870/512 priced above $250 with the regular 260 and even some O/C'd versions - cool, that is choice and each card offers great value with different features.

How does GTX280 offer any "value" with respect to $250 4870 or 260? It costs what $380 for 20% gain on average. That doesn't sound like value to me. Also I am not sure your comparison of 4870 1GB makes sense. I already said in my other analyses that paying EXTRA for more memory doesn't make a lot of sense as history has shown for same level of card. So $320 4870 1GB is just a poor proposition to begin with. Of course if you are already going to spend $320 on 4870, you might as well get the 280. But who in their right mind would spend $70 for extra 512mb of ram that has little to no use, except in few cases and few games?

That IS what i am saying .. if you are going to get a 1GB 4870, a 280GTX makes sense

otoh, do you think paying $170 more for a 4870x2 makes ANY sense over a 280GTX? For *maybe +20%* - when it scales

that is my point

the 280 "fits" in PERFECTLY with the current pricing; there is usually great bang for buck with the 3850, a little less with the 260 and 4870 and diminishing returns as we move up the performance food chain to the most overpriced HW - the X2.


btw, remember when i said i was nearly done with my comparisons?
- well, i finished with cat 8.8 today - a few minutes before cat 8.9 was released
- that means i will ReDo *all* my benches .. starting this time with CF-X3. So, i will be a couple of days late with Part 1 [but i am adding CoD4/Clear Sky and Warhead; so it's all good]

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: apoppin

How does GTX280 offer any "value" with respect to $250 4870 or 260? It costs what $380 for 20% gain on average. That doesn't sound like value to me. Also I am not sure your comparison of 4870 1GB makes sense. I already said in my other analyses that paying EXTRA for more memory doesn't make a lot of sense as history has shown for same level of card. So $320 4870 1GB is just a poor proposition to begin with. Of course if you are already going to spend $320 on 4870, you might as well get the 280. But who in their right mind would spend $70 for extra 512mb of ram that has little to no use, except in few cases and few games?[/quote]

That IS what i am saying .. if you are going to get a 1GB 4870, a 280GTX makes sense

otoh, do you think paying $170 more for a 4870x2 makes ANY sense over a 280GTX? For *maybe +20%* - when it scales

that is my point

the 280 "fits" in PERFECTLY with the current pricing; there is usually great bang for buck with the 3850, a little less with the 260 and 4870 and diminishing returns as we move up the performance food chain to the most overpriced HW - the X2.[/quote]



None of it makes any sense. Its all for fantasy - so those that have the big bucks, spend them.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: ronnn

Originally posted by: apoppin

How does GTX280 offer any "value" with respect to $250 4870 or 260? It costs what $380 for 20% gain on average. That doesn't sound like value to me. Also I am not sure your comparison of 4870 1GB makes sense. I already said in my other analyses that paying EXTRA for more memory doesn't make a lot of sense as history has shown for same level of card. So $320 4870 1GB is just a poor proposition to begin with. Of course if you are already going to spend $320 on 4870, you might as well get the 280. But who in their right mind would spend $70 for extra 512mb of ram that has little to no use, except in few cases and few games?

That IS what i am saying .. if you are going to get a 1GB 4870, a 280GTX makes sense

otoh, do you think paying $170 more for a 4870x2 makes ANY sense over a 280GTX? For *maybe +20%* - when it scales

that is my point

the 280 "fits" in PERFECTLY with the current pricing; there is usually great bang for buck with the 3850, a little less with the 260 and 4870 and diminishing returns as we move up the performance food chain to the most overpriced HW - the X2.

[/quote]

None of it makes any sense. Its all for fantasy - so those that have the big bucks, spend them.

it's all entertainment

we are privileged those of us who are even posting here; a lot of people world wide have insufficient food to eat
- but that is not what we are discussing

The pricing makes sense - within its framework

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: apoppin
The pricing makes sense - within its framework

hehe, I remember for my first own build AXP1600+ I bought Asus Via266A chipset board that cost $100 more than the 266 board because I wanted the *latest* revision.

Then for my 2nd build I spent $225 ($100 extra) on 1 Gig of 2-2-2-5 Patriot PC3200 ram over 3-3-3-7 parts. So in retrospect 280 isn't so bad I suppose

You live, you learn. I am realizing strategically best *bang for the buck* is to buy $100-150 cards or even cheaper and upgrading more often. That's going to be my preference moving forward. I paid $270 for my 8800GTS and 1.5 years later you can get 9600GSO with almost identical performance for $50.

 

[badnewcastle]

How come none of the new benchies coming out have the 9800 GX2 I'm considering the 4870 or the 9800 GX2 as they can be had for a similar price point.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: apoppin
The pricing makes sense - within its framework

hehe, I remember for my first own build AXP1600+ I bought Asus Via266A chipset board that cost $100 more than the 266 board because I wanted the *latest* revision.

Then for my 2nd build I spent $225 ($100 extra) on 1 Gig of 2-2-2-5 Patriot PC3200 ram over 3-3-3-7 parts. So in retrospect 280 isn't so bad I suppose

You live, you learn. I am realizing strategically best *bang for the buck* is to buy $100-150 cards or even cheaper and upgrading more often. That's going to be my preference moving forward. I paid $270 for my 8800GTS and 1.5 years later you can get 9600GSO with almost identical performance for $50.

there is a difference here, if you are willing to spend $320 for a 1GB HD4870, then $60 more gets you a solid advantage for a GTX280 for $380 - a much better GPU!
- but it is really diminishing returns to spend ANOTHER $170 over the GTX for an X2 what gives a similar performance increase only when it scales

don't give us your *lame* past choices as examples .. i just got a Asus P5e for $220 which i can flash the bios in to the $400 "rampage"
- it works both ways if you are smart

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: apoppin
The pricing makes sense - within its framework

hehe, I remember for my first own build AXP1600+ I bought Asus Via266A chipset board that cost $100 more than the 266 board because I wanted the *latest* revision.

Then for my 2nd build I spent $225 ($100 extra) on 1 Gig of 2-2-2-5 Patriot PC3200 ram over 3-3-3-7 parts. So in retrospect 280 isn't so bad I suppose

You live, you learn. I am realizing strategically best *bang for the buck* is to buy $100-150 cards or even cheaper and upgrading more often. That's going to be my preference moving forward. I paid $270 for my 8800GTS and 1.5 years later you can get 9600GSO with almost identical performance for $50.

there is a difference here, if you are willing to spend $320 for a 1GB HD4870, then $60 more gets you a solid advantage for a GTX280 for $380 - a much better GPU!
- but it is really diminishing returns to spend ANOTHER $170 over the GTX for an X2 what gives a similar performance increase only when it scales

don't give us your *lame* past choices as examples .. i just got a Asus P5e for $220 which i can flash the bios in to the $400 "rampage"
- it works both ways if you are smart

The HD 4870 performs closer to the nVidia's flagship than the HD 2900XT ever hoped to perform when compared to the 8800GTX. So is not a much better GPU, is better overall. The 1GB 4870 is listed at 299 in Newegg, and the GTX 280 after MIR would cost less than $380.00. The performance difference between the X2 and the GTX 280 is wider than the performance difference between the HD 4870 1GB and GTX 280 (Stock 280 of course). Otherwise the X2 wouldn't be able to outperform the GTX 280. After all, the HD 3870X2 was considerably slower than the 8800Ultra and the HD 3870X2 barely outperformed it.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: apoppin
The pricing makes sense - within its framework

hehe, I remember for my first own build AXP1600+ I bought Asus Via266A chipset board that cost $100 more than the 266 board because I wanted the *latest* revision.

Then for my 2nd build I spent $225 ($100 extra) on 1 Gig of 2-2-2-5 Patriot PC3200 ram over 3-3-3-7 parts. So in retrospect 280 isn't so bad I suppose

You live, you learn. I am realizing strategically best *bang for the buck* is to buy $100-150 cards or even cheaper and upgrading more often. That's going to be my preference moving forward. I paid $270 for my 8800GTS and 1.5 years later you can get 9600GSO with almost identical performance for $50.

there is a difference here, if you are willing to spend $320 for a 1GB HD4870, then $60 more gets you a solid advantage for a GTX280 for $380 - a much better GPU!
- but it is really diminishing returns to spend ANOTHER $170 over the GTX for an X2 what gives a similar performance increase only when it scales

don't give us your *lame* past choices as examples .. i just got a Asus P5e for $220 which i can flash the bios in to the $400 "rampage"
- it works both ways if you are smart

The fps/$ is far better than either the x2 or the 280 for the 4870 512mb, and I suspect it's still better for the 4870 1Gb at 299.

When do diminishing returns become 'really diminishing returns'? What do you define as an acceptable fps/$ ratio, and why?

That extra $60 for the 280 (somewhere $80 if evolucion is right, I have no idea personally) is awful value for money, but if you want the extra frames that's irrelevant really.

Same with the x2. Even although for games it scales in, it stomps all over the 280's face (even the 4870 512mb is close to the 280 in some games!), the value for money is still awful. But if you want the extra faps, you've no choice but to pay the extra price.

If all we cared about what fps/$, we'd all have 4850s or 9600GSOs (at a guess).

At the top end, absolute performance becomes all that matters, fps/$ goes out the window.

For most of us, there's some trade-off between the two, and I suspect that's entirely personal to your finances and the importance you place on the games you play and they fps you get.

It comes down to your personal value judgement on others. You value the perfomance benefits of the 280 over the 4870 512mb or 1GB more than the cost, and you don't value the x2's leg up over the 280 in games where it scales. That's great and all, but it doesn't mean we have to, or should, agree with you

 

[nemesismk2]

There is one area where the GTX 260 with 216 SP doesn't compete very well with the 4870 and that is the price!

RADEON 4870 - £140
GTX 260 192 SP - £144
GTX 260 216 SP - £190 :Q

 

[taltamir]

thats only in the magical land of eu ropa nemesismk2.
Here in the center of the earth (USA) the 4870 is more expensive.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: taltamir
thats only in the magical land of eu ropa nemesismk2.
Here in the center of the earth (USA) the 4870 is more expensive.

o rly?

I understood from everything in this thread that the GTX 260 216 was more expnsive than the 4870.

My bad

EDIT: The 'egg hasn't got the news, the cheapest 4870 after MIR is $250.

The cheapest 260 216 is $280 after MIR.

 

[BF04]

I just ordered a new system for the wife. This is the second system in the past month I will build to play Warhammer, first was for a friend. The only difference will be I will use the EVGA GTX 260 - 216 in her system. My friends I put in the 4870. Price was only $20 difference on Newegg for the 2 cards I was looking at. I figure this way I support both sides and help the economy.

I figure I can not go wrong with either card and they both will keep the cards for the life of the system 2-4yrs.


I am still using my 8800 GTS 320mg card, but I will wait for the GTX 380, AMD 5870 or whatever the next gen will be next year.

Having fun in WAR!

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: apoppin
The pricing makes sense - within its framework

hehe, I remember for my first own build AXP1600+ I bought Asus Via266A chipset board that cost $100 more than the 266 board because I wanted the *latest* revision.

Then for my 2nd build I spent $225 ($100 extra) on 1 Gig of 2-2-2-5 Patriot PC3200 ram over 3-3-3-7 parts. So in retrospect 280 isn't so bad I suppose

You live, you learn. I am realizing strategically best *bang for the buck* is to buy $100-150 cards or even cheaper and upgrading more often. That's going to be my preference moving forward. I paid $270 for my 8800GTS and 1.5 years later you can get 9600GSO with almost identical performance for $50.

there is a difference here, if you are willing to spend $320 for a 1GB HD4870, then $60 more gets you a solid advantage for a GTX280 for $380 - a much better GPU!
- but it is really diminishing returns to spend ANOTHER $170 over the GTX for an X2 what gives a similar performance increase only when it scales

don't give us your *lame* past choices as examples .. i just got a Asus P5e for $220 which i can flash the bios in to the $400 "rampage"
- it works both ways if you are smart

The HD 4870 performs closer to the nVidia's flagship than the HD 2900XT ever hoped to perform when compared to the 8800GTX. So is not a much better GPU, is better overall. The 1GB 4870 is listed at 299 in Newegg, and the GTX 280 after MIR would cost less than $380.00. The performance difference between the X2 and the GTX 280 is wider than the performance difference between the HD 4870 1GB and GTX 280 (Stock 280 of course). Otherwise the X2 wouldn't be able to outperform the GTX 280. After all, the HD 3870X2 was considerably slower than the 8800Ultra and the HD 3870X2 barely outperformed it.

Why are you bringing up 2900xt? ,, it was a lame ATi solution that flopped and was ultimately positioned by AMD - late - not against the GTX, but against the GTS which it competed with nicely, performancewise and was priced the same as the 640-GTS.

The 4870 is the 260's match .. it is not in the same league at the 280GTX nor was it positioned as such. PERIOD!

The X2 is the competitor to the 280 - and since it is faster, AMD has the "gouge" instead of Nvidia this time - it is ridiculous to be priced at $550 as it doesn't perform *consistently*

When do diminishing returns become 'really diminishing returns'? What do you define as an acceptable fps/$ ratio, and why?

when i speak for myself and i pay for them out of my own pocket

-imo - i am speaking as an owner and purchaser of all 3 of my cards - 4870/4870x2 and 280GTX

. . . no one gave them to me, Dug

 

[betasub]

Originally posted by: apoppin
when i speak for myself and i pay for them out of my own pocket

-imo - i am speaking as an owner and purchaser of all 3 of my cards - 4870/4870x2 and 280GTX

. . . no one gave them to me, Dug

Kudos

 

[MrSpadge]

Hi guys,

in the comments section to the article I posted the following:

"I read somewhere that the first batches of 48x0 cards had a bug in their bios which prevented power play from working properly. This is supposed to be fixed since some time now and idle power draw should be decreased significantly.

I'd say contact AMD or a card manufacturer. If it's true they should be more than happy to assist you in obtaining updated numbers. The current numbers are just plain horrible and may keep people from buying the Radeons.

Regards, MrS"

Seems like it was a pretty bad choice to post there - seems like no one noticed. Do you know anything about this? I mean, the 38x0 series had such great idle power consumption, it was one of their primary strengths! Sure, the RV7700 is more complex, but all of this logic should be switched off at idle anyway. Something seems wrong here!

MrS

 

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: apoppin

when i speak for myself and i pay for them out of my own pocket

-imo - i am speaking as an owner and purchaser of all 3 of my cards - 4870/4870x2 and 280GTX

. . . no one gave them to me, Dug

I bought 4 XFX 9800 GT and 2 HIS HD 4850 and I also have the HD 3870. No one gave them to me. :laugh:

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: taltamir
thats only in the magical land of eu ropa nemesismk2.
Here in the center of the earth (USA) the 4870 is more expensive.

o rly?

I understood from everything in this thread that the GTX 260 216 was more expnsive than the 4870.

My bad

EDIT: The 'egg hasn't got the news, the cheapest 4870 after MIR is $250.

The cheapest 260 216 is $280 after MIR.

look at the prices he posted:
RADEON 4870 - £140 (256.35$)
GTX 260 192 SP - £144 (263.67$)
GTX 260 216 SP - £190 (347.91$, that is 91.55$ more then the 4870!)

Now yes, the 216 SP version is more expensive then the 4870.
But the 192 SP version is cheaper.
GTX 260 192SP - 220$
Radeon 4870 - 250$
GTX 260 216SP - 280$

the 216SP is not 91.55$ more expensive, it is only 30$ more. And it is going down in price fast.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: taltamir
thats only in the magical land of eu ropa nemesismk2.
Here in the center of the earth (USA) the 4870 is more expensive.

o rly?

I understood from everything in this thread that the GTX 260 216 was more expnsive than the 4870.

My bad

EDIT: The 'egg hasn't got the news, the cheapest 4870 after MIR is $250.

The cheapest 260 216 is $280 after MIR.

look at the prices he posted:
RADEON 4870 - £140 (256.35$)
GTX 260 192 SP - £144 (263.67$)
GTX 260 216 SP - £190 (347.91$, that is 91.55$ more then the 4870!)

Now yes, the 216 SP version is more expensive then the 4870.
But the 192 SP version is cheaper.
GTX 260 192SP - 220$
Radeon 4870 - 250$
GTX 260 216SP - 280$

the 216SP is not 91.55$ more expensive, it is only 30$ more. And it is going down in price fast.

Hmm, 896mb vs 512mb. Don't you think 1gb 4870 for $300 would be more fair?

 

[taltamir]

well, no, because the performance is similar at that level. More ram is a technical choice. Just like ram type or how many bits your bus is.