GTX 260 - 216 SP Review

[ViperV990]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: jaredpace
Probably best general representation of these card's speeds (relative to each other) are found in the Witcher graph. Looks like an average of all the reviews and benches I've seen.

http://images.anandtech.com/gr...091508220645/17388.png

Ya, Anand was saying how the new 260 beats the 4870 in 3 games, loses in 3 games and ties the last (witcher).

Still a draw / buy for brand preference.

Except on pricing as the 4870 is obviously cheaper at this point in time. We'll have to see where the price of the new GTX260 Core 216 settles to after it has been out awhile.

Why in the world did they choose to slap "Core 216" on the end? Are they trying to imply that it is somehow related to the Intel Core 2 series of CPUs?

I guess it's basically the same thing as AMD slapping "XP" on Athlon 6 or so years ago - "hey this sounds familiar and kinda cool."

Anyway, yes the 4870 is cheaper, but it also only has 512MB of RAM versus the GTX' 896MB. I've been waiting for the 1GB 4870s to show up (I don't want to deal with CF) and now with the 216 being competitive, there's a chance I might go for it instead.

Edit: Just checked newegg, looks like the 1GB 4870s are finally in stock - most cards are priced $299. Also in stock is a 216 at $299 - $20 MIR. Tempting.

 

[taltamir]

i was actually worried it will be a silent upgrade, like the 8800GTS (G80) with extra SP cluster (released mere weeks before the 8800GTS using the G92 die, and used the same name as the previous 8800GTS)

 

[Zenoth]

Nice card, nice price, I think that's going to be my next upgrade, but I'll still wait for a future price drop on it, and then I'll get that little beast.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
cod4
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-58.JPG
crysis
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-18.JPG
etqw
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-33.JPG
prey
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-36.JPG
DMC4
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-31.JPG
WIC
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-48.JPG

Looks to be stomping a mud hole into the 4870.

 

[Tempered81]

Yah it is.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
Probably best general representation of these card's speeds (relative to each other) are found in the Witcher graph. Looks like an average of all the reviews and benches I've seen.

http://images.anandtech.com/gr...091508220645/17388.png

This seems indicative of not just core performance, but of memory bandwidth at those high resolutions. If it were a benchmark at lower resolutions, I'd think that the new 260 would have been smack in-between the original 260 and the 280 in performance.

Originally posted by: Creig
Why in the world did they choose to slap "Core 216" on the end?

EVGA naming fail?

Regardless of 192 or 216 cores, NVIDIA calls it a GTX 260. No GTX+ or 265 or "Core 216."

The new 260 at BFG is called "Maxcore." Not quite rolling off the tongue yet, but IMO less fail.

Originally posted by: woolfe9999
Where are Nvidia's .55nm versions of its latest architecture?

Not yet available, and that's the final word.

Just because a smaller process is available doesn't mean top end products are going to jump on it first. For instance, the AMD 65nm Brisbane chips have just recently caught up to the 90nm Windsor chips in speed. On the one hand, sure you may want the latest/greatest to be using the "best" process, however you don't necessarily want to "fix what isn't broken." Also, sales/profit-wise smaller processes benefit larger volumes, and I would think that the cheaper products sell in greater volumes than top-end top-priced products.

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
GTX265 would have been a better name.

My vote would have been the GTX 270...

260 - 192 cores
270 - 216 cores
280 - 240 cores

But, that would have made too much sense.

 

[taltamir]

ust because a smaller process is available doesn't mean top end products are going to jump on it first

True, but the CEO's statement makes it SOUND like the product is tapped out, and the only reason it isn't in stores yet is because they need to sell older stock first...
(you know, I really have no problem with that; and he is being refreshingly honest about it)

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: jaredpace
cod4
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-58.JPG
crysis
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-18.JPG
etqw
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-33.JPG
prey
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-36.JPG
DMC4
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-31.JPG
WIC
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-48.JPG

Looks to be stomping a mud hole into the 4870.

stomping a mud hole?


*Where* the hell do you come up with this?
- Does it give you great pleasure that AMD's #3 Video card is getting beat by its NEW competition - Nvidia's No2, the "gold" GT260?

Give them a little time to OC their own "platinum" 1GB versions of 4870 and drop the price

Damn .. for the first time i am glad i have a GTX280 and a HD4870x2 - so none of this fluff bothers me
- btw, you are going to *love* my preliminary report on Crossfire-X3
-- look for a new thread


hint:


it sux .. in just about every way imaginable on a p35 MB with a fast stock C2D. Hot, scales badly, a driver mess .. noisy as to be irritating :|
:brokenheart:

 

[Sylvanas]

What a stupid release. It is pretty much dead even with the 4870 yet costs more....I know what I'd choose. Also what a stupid name, seriously I wonder if Nvidia can actually take a hint and read the part of the reviews that say 'we don't need another suffix'. I hope they can get to 55nm before years end, that might be a little more interesting.

 

[KikassAssassin]

Been looking around trying to find reviews that benchmark stock clocked 260-216's instead of the more expensive overclocked models that have been sent out to all the review sites.

There's of course Anand's: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3408
Guru3D: http://www.guru3d.com/article/...216--bfg-ocx-maxcore/9
Hexus: http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=15464&page=1

Those all underclocked their cards to the standard clock speed, and they all seem to be showing similar results--that the 4870 and the stock-clocked 260-216 trade blows and each wins at about half the benchmarks, so when it's all averaged out, they tend to perform pretty similarly.

 

[BFG10K]

I can't believe nVidia didn't even change the name of the product to differentiate it from a regular GTX260. Something like GTX260+ but no, it's up to the partner to come up with whatever name they please and of course all of them are going to have different names. :roll:

This is will cause nothing but confusion for customers and likely allow nVidia to sneakily get rid of their old GTX260 stock.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: jaredpace
cod4
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-58.JPG
crysis
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-18.JPG
etqw
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-33.JPG
prey
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-36.JPG
DMC4
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-31.JPG
WIC
http://images.hardwarecanucks....CORE216/CORE216-48.JPG

Looks to be stomping a mud hole into the 4870.

:roll:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3408&p=10

Final Words

We tested seven games. AMD and NVIDIA split it, each winning three of them and virtually tied in the seventh. I hate to disappoint those looking for a one sided fight here, but this one is a wash.

http://www.firingsquad.com/har...0_216shader/page17.asp

Conclusion
ATI?s Radeon 4870 continues to put up a strong showing also. It performed neck-and-neck with the 216 shader GTX 260 in Crysis, and actually outran all GeForce boards in Devil May Cry 4. The Radeon 4870 also continued to outperform the stock 216 shader GeForce GTX 260 in most of our tests with 8xAA.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/...16--bfg-ocx-maxcore/17

The Verdict
So the bottom line. The GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 is merely a notch faster than it's predecessor .. making it compete fiercely with the competitors best Single-GPU product. (ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB)

Looks to be pretty much breaking even with a 512MB 4870.

 

[evolucion8]

When the HD 4870 debuted, it was slighly faster than the GTX 260, now with recent driver improvements, the HD 4870 can even keep up with the GTX 260 (GTX 260, Core 216, Maxcore whatever the hell the name of the card is), looks like an act of desesperation from nVidia, good job ATi, competition will benefit us all, no matter which vendor we choose. What nVidia should do is to slash the prices down, but an expensive GPU like this will cut profits even further.

Oh my God, HardOCP review sucks badly, even the old GTX 260 is faster most of the time against the HD 4870, and they used an overclocked GTX 260 Core 216, that's called fair comparison /end sarcasm :disgust:

 

[dug777]

What a yawn

Bring on a die shrink already!

 

[scheibler1]

I'de take this over a 4870 any day. I don't know what you guys are complaining about...sure its not a die shrink, but it is faster then the 4870 and has more ram.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: scheibler1
I'de take this over a 4870 any day. I don't know what you guys are complaining about...sure its not a die shrink, but it is faster then the 4870 and has more ram.

It's faster in some things, and slower in others. Most reviews have concluded that it pretty much breaks even across a wide gamut of games. Did you even read any of the reviews?

The extra RAM doesn't seem to give the 261 any appreciable benefits over the 4870 either, unless the mere fact of having more RAM is a benefit

I understand that the 4870 is also cheaper.

Many are complaining primarily about Nvidia's daft naming plays of recent times.

I think that about covers it. Anything I left out?

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: evolucion8
looks like an act of desesperation from nVidia, good job ATi, competition will benefit us all, no matter which vendor we choose.

I agree that competition benefits us all, but why do you think it was "an act of desperation from NVIDIA?" Companies make product refinements and price moves all the time. Some of them are done just because it is time to do them (for instance to spur sales), and others are as a result of maneuvering with competitors (which looks to be the case this time).

Desperation would be "OMG slash prices and sell assets to stay afloat!"

Wait, that sounds like AMD. :Q Sorry, wrong forum.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: evolucion8
looks like an act of desesperation from nVidia, good job ATi, competition will benefit us all, no matter which vendor we choose.

I agree that competition benefits us all, but why do you think it was "an act of desperation from NVIDIA?" Companies make product refinements and price moves all the time. Some of them are done just because it is time to do them (for instance to spur sales), and others are as a result of maneuvering with competitors (which looks to be the case this time).

Desperation would be "OMG slash prices and sell assets to stay afloat!"

Wait, that sounds like AMD. :Q Sorry, wrong forum.

Yeah loll, the only thing that AMD is worthy is it's graphic division

 

[taltamir]

zap got it. It is not an act of desperation. It is just fine tuning and existing prodcut. Now they actually match AMD's offer, and their MSRP is also the same, sure it is more expensive now (due to limited stock), but prices will settle.
If they slashed prices to sell existing stock in a loss (just to be rid of it / recoup some costs), cut production, and started selling off assets, then they would be desperate.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3408
AT review in case anyone missed that it was out.

This is NV's attempt? Not 55nm? :thumbsdown:

But The biggest standout here is not Core 216, but rather a reinforcement of how little value GTX 280 card provides for the price. There goes the argument that 1GB of ram is going to provide any more playability today...

Off topic: Let's not forget the contribution margin to net earnings on 65nm GTX series compared to 4800 series. NV might have similar performance but in this business you actually want to make $$$ too.

 

[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

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: Lonyo
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3408
AT review in case anyone missed that it was out.

This is NV's attempt? Not 55nm? :thumbsdown:

But The biggest standout here is not Core 216, but rather a reinforcement of how little value GTX 280 card provides for the price. There goes the argument that 1GB of ram is going to provide any more playability today...

Off topic: Let's not forget the contribution margin to net earnings on 65nm GTX series compared to 4800 series. NV might have similar performance but in this business you actually want to make $$$ too.

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.

Next you have 4870/1GB evidently priced just over $300 and the new GT260 comes in at a similar price to also be competitive - and the only choice for nvidia fans.

OK, that is wise for both companies. So you have a $325 4870/260 and what sits above that is GT280 .. $380 after MiR

imo, it is worth the fifty bucks over the 4870 as the benches show.

what is overpriced imo is the 4870X2 sitting $150 more than the GTX280 - i got lucky getting mine for $469 - when it scales it is awesome; when it does not, it is slower than a single 512MB 4870

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Off topic: Let's not forget the contribution margin to net earnings on 65nm GTX series compared to 4800 series. NV might have similar performance but in this business you actually want to make $$$ too.

Of course businesses want to make money. Regarding ATI and NVIDIA, does anyone (outside of their beancounters) know how much money they are making or not making? Is either company selling products at a loss? At a profit so small that they can't recoup dev costs? At a profit that they can recoup dev costs before the next product cycle? At a profit that makes stockholders content? At a profit that makes stockholders create offshore accounts and start planning for retirement? I don't know that information, well, except for perhaps that the last is likely not true. Does anyone who is posting in this thread know such information with 100% confidence?

I don't think so. Everything is speculation. Makes for lively discussion though.

 

[taltamir]

what is overpriced imo is the 4870X2 sitting $70 more than the GTX280 - i got lucky getting mine for $469 - when it scales it is awesome; when it does not, it is slower than a single 512MB 4870

While this is true, and a point i always bring against MGPU, this is a problem that ALL mGPU solutions have, and it does scale for most games, and slightly slower then 4870 512MB is still plenty fast. So I wouldn't say it is overpriced. It is actually cheaper then buying two 4870 1GB individually, and costs the same as two 4870 512MB, but does not require an extra mobo slot.

So I think it is actually a good deal for those who like MGPU. If you would never consider a MGPU because of scaling issue, then don't buy it. But if you DO intend to MGPU, then it is cheaper then two individual cards and thus a GOOD deal.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: taltamir

what is overpriced imo is the 4870X2 sitting $150 more than the GTX280 - i got lucky getting mine for $469 - when it scales it is awesome; when it does not, it is slower than a single 512MB 4870

While this is true, and a point i always bring against MGPU, this is a problem that ALL mGPU solutions have, and it does scale for most games, and slightly slower then 4870 512MB is still plenty fast. So I wouldn't say it is overpriced. It is actually cheaper then buying two 4870 1GB individually, and costs the same as two 4870 512MB, but does not require an extra mobo slot.

So I think it is actually a good deal for those who like MGPU. If you would never consider a MGPU because of scaling issue, then don't buy it. But if you DO intend to MGPU, then it is cheaper then two individual cards and thus a GOOD deal.

let me edit my own typo

i paid $90 more for my 4870x2 over my GTX280 .. [$470 vs. $380]

but i do not think X2 is worth $170 more than the 280
- $550 vs $380

not at all

OK, work with those new prices

i do not think X2 is a GOOD deal at $550 - considering it does not scale in many games .. when there is a great alternative for $170 cheaper. The X2 does not "blow away" the GTX280.

X2 is a BAD deal when you consider that $500 will get you two 4870s that will have the same performance all the way up to and including 19x12
- and i would not want an X2 for 25x16 - that is reserved for 280GTX SLi or maybe X3 [considering if it doesn't scale you are stuck at 25x16 with a single 4870's performance]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...rossfire_17.html#sect0