• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

*55nm* EVGA GTX 260 Now In Stock at EVGA.com

No GTX 285 yet. 🙁

Still, will be very interested to see how well these OC. Also curious why those EVGA links don't show shader clocks, are they standard also?
 
Originally posted by: chizow
No GTX 285 yet. 🙁

Still, will be very interested to see how well these OC. Also curious why those EVGA links don't show shader clocks, are they standard also?
Click to expand...

Shader clocks are 1350MHz on both models. Also, expect these new 55nm cards to overclock to ~800MHz core speeds. 🙂
 
Are the 55 nm gtx260's smaller in size than the 65 nm ones? I mean the actually PCB length I've heard that their only 9.5 inches as opposed to 10.5 of the 65 nm version
 
Originally posted by: AuDioFreaK39
Originally posted by: chizow
No GTX 285 yet. 🙁

Still, will be very interested to see how well these OC. Also curious why those EVGA links don't show shader clocks, are they standard also?
Click to expand...

Shader clocks are 1350MHz on both models. Also, expect these new 55nm cards to overclock to ~800MHz core speeds. 🙂
Click to expand...

Hehe ya I'm looking forward to 800MHz core and hopefully 1800+ shaders. That's pretty sweet they're available for step-up, lucky for you guys. 🙂
 
Originally posted by: zod96
Are the 55 nm gtx260's smaller in size than the 65 nm ones? I mean the actually PCB length I've heard that their only 9.5 inches as opposed to 10.5 of the 65 nm version
Click to expand...

It would definitely be nice if the 55nm gtx260 has a shorter PCB than the 65nm version. The 55nm gtx260 would edge out the 4870 in performance (not to mention it already has much lower power consumption at idle), but I don't really want to use a dremel on my case just to fit one of the longer nVidia cards.

Most sites believe that AMD's margins on the RV770's are way bigger than nVidias margins on the GTXs, so it's not hard to imagin nVidia and/or their partners wanting to fit the new 55nm chips onto a smaller PCB.
 
Originally posted by: JaBro999
Originally posted by: zod96
Are the 55 nm gtx260's smaller in size than the 65 nm ones? I mean the actually PCB length I've heard that their only 9.5 inches as opposed to 10.5 of the 65 nm version
Click to expand...

Most sites believe that AMD's margins on the RV770's are way bigger than nVidias margins on the GTXs, so it's not hard to imagin nVidia and/or their partners wanting to fit the new 55nm chips onto a smaller PCB.
Click to expand...

I think the PCB is the same, only fewer layers. The 9800 GTX+ was redesigned to be shorter.
 
According to the evga site, they're both the same physical length, 9.5 inches. But when I measure mine, it's closer to 10.5, so they must be measuring something different. Anyway, the spec says they're the same so I assume there's no shrink unless there's other information later on.
 
While I can get it, I really don't see any need to step up, what is the 55nm going to net in the real world? Looks to me like they're not being clocked any higher from EVGA. Yeah they're slightly cooler, but so what? The Core 216's run reasonably cool as-is and the cooler gets the job done with little noise.

So color me meh on these cards, I don't really know what everyone is so excited about. I'll wait for the the reviews, but I'm not expecting the earth to move.
 
smaller manufacturing process generally means cooler cards that eat less power and overclock more. The only "problem" is that this is an optical shrink, from 65nm only to 55nm so the difference is small. The manufacturer gets the most benefit out of this because it's cheaper to produce(smaller die) and that usually means cheaper to buy
 
Originally posted by: nosfe
smaller manufacturing process generally means cooler cards that eat less power and overclock more. The only "problem" is that this is an optical shrink, from 65nm only to 55nm so the difference is small. The manufacturer gets the most benefit out of this because it's cheaper to produce(smaller die) and that usually means cheaper to buy
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get all that. But at current prices it would cost me around $40 for a card that is slower, even from the factory since I got one of the SSC cards. Sure I'll be able to clock it a bit higher, but what's that gonna net me? Not much I believe.

I'm just questioning why core 216 owners would even consider this unless the price difference was < $20, just doesn't seem worth it. You're not getting higher clocks from the factory, you're not getting a better cooler, you're not getting any new GPU features, etc, etc.

Now, I may consider jumping up to a 295 if the price is right, that makes a little more sense.
 
i think it's got more to do with the fact that nvidia finally went 55nm with the gt200 architecture which is what some of them have been waiting for since forever. it signals (hopefully) a new price war as nvidia should be able to lower the prices a bit more now that they went 55nm
 
Originally posted by: nosfe
i think it's got more to do with the fact that nvidia finally went 55nm with the gt200 architecture which is what some of them have been waiting for since forever. it signals (hopefully) a new price war as nvidia should be able to lower the prices a bit more now that they went 55nm
Click to expand...

Truth. Here's hoping we start seeing the 55nm GTX 260 216 priced around $175 or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top