Confused about the NVidia perf numbers

[Maiyr]

Hi all,

Somewhere over the past couple of years I have lost my way. Having a child will do that to you. Now don't laugh, but my current video card is an NVidia GTX 260. It is time to upgrade, but finances are scarce for such things. I want to stay NVidia; alas I cannot afford the new Titan. So I need to get something midway between what I have and that beast.

I am not sure if it has always been this way, or if I have just been out of the PC building game for so long that I never even noticed it...

When looking at benchmarks on the Anand site I see this.

Let me say that I realize there are other factors involved here on my system specifically such as CPU, etc, but I presume the benchmarks are all done on the same system, just swapping the video cards when plausible.

I choose my card, GTX 260 and I choose another card, GTX 470.
The Bench says this
Crysis @ 1920x1200 Framerate
GTX 260 = 17.2
GTX 470 = 27.5

Awesome, the 470 gets me just a little shy of twice the Framrate on Crysis.

Then this happens...
GTX 470 = 27.5
GTX 560 = 26.5

What just happend here? Is it just bad data for the graphs or is a 470 better at Crysis @ 1920x1200 than a 560?

It is the samething if you compare the 470 against a 660. The 660 is only showing 10 FPS over the 460. How can a card a full 2 series ahead have such and abysmal performance increase?

There must be something here concerning the NVidia numbering scheme that I am unaware of. I want to buy a new card soon, but I am bit confused here by looking at some of these numbers.

Thanks,

Maiyr

 

[cmdrdredd]

You are comparing a mid-range card (GTX 470) to a low end card (560 and 660).

 

[Ferzerp]

nvidia's numbering scheme is [generation][performance][0 (5 used to denote something special, but they've stopped using it)]

They also skipped 3.

260 means 2 for generation, performance of 6 (which is third tier). 470 is 4 for gen (newer than 2) and performance of 7 (which is one notch below top tier for nvidia). 560 is 5 for gen, 6 for performance (back down to third tier).

Also, unless you just really want nvidia, are going to use SLI, or are springing for a titan because you want the fastest non-multigpu option, you will get higher performance out of an AMD card at most prices, so it's worth looking at.

 

[Maiyr]

Hi cmdrdredd,

Thank you for the reply. Sounds wonky to me, but OK, if that is the way they do it then that is the way they do it.

So where is the cutoff within a series from low end to mid-range to high end. In my limited mind I would think they should KIS. The higher the number the better the performance. Even comparing a 470 to a 570 the performance gain is still pretty bad.

I can totally see people upgrading by series numbers only and being pretty disappointed with what could conceivably be a negative gain in performance. LOL

Is there a way to look at the series numbers and know which card is low, mid and high for that series?

Thanks,

Maiyr

 

[Greenlepricon]

precisely. I don't know if you were looking at the 560 or 560ti, and likewise the 660 or 660ti. The latter on each should be a liitle better. Move to the 570/670 if you want to see a bigger jump, but that might be out of your price range.

 

[Eureka]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

Don't worry about low mid and high. This chart will tell you where cards are in relation to each other.

 

[Maiyr]

Thank you for the explanation Ferzerp. I'll look at the AMD's, but I am just hard headed sometimes.

Maiyr

 

[Maiyr]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

Eureka,

Thank you. This helps a LOT and can steer my purchasing decision.

Maiyr

 

[tviceman]

Hi cmdrdredd,

Thank you for the reply. Sounds wonky to me, but OK, if that is the way they do it then that is the way they do it.

So where is the cutoff within a series from low end to mid-range to high end. In my limited mind I would think they should KIS. The higher the number the better the performance. Even comparing a 470 to a 570 the performance gain is still pretty bad.

I can totally see people upgrading by series numbers only and being pretty disappointed with what could conceivably be a negative gain in performance. LOL

Is there a way to look at the series numbers and know which card is low, mid and high for that series?

Thanks,

Maiyr

Typical for the last two generations Nvidia has relased the "x60 TI" and higher is considered high end from that point up insofar as performance.

The gtx560 TI roughly equaled the gtx470 in performance.
The gtx660 TI roughly equaled (or slightly faster) the gtx580 in performance.

The only real way to know how much you are getting for your dollar is to look up reviews.

 

[Wall Street]

If you want to stay nVidia and don't want to spend silly Titan money then you should:

Get a GTX 660 (non-Ti) if you budget is for just over $200.
or
Get a GTX 670 if your budget is up to $350.

These are pretty much the best two cards for the mainstream gamer (in my opinion, others may disagree). GTX 650 and lower won't show good enough improvement, and the higher cards cost a lot for a little performance gain relative to the GTX 670. The GTX 660 Ti is too expensive relative to the non-Ti in my opinion given the performance difference.

There are older cards available on clearance or used, however, 1) there are too many to give a through recomendation, 2) the prices and performance are all over the map and 3) the 600 series are smaller cards that are much better on power and noise. Therefore, if you want new, I again recommend the GTX 660 (non-TI) or the GTX 670.

 

[Maiyr]

the 600 series are smaller cards that are much better on power and noise. Therefore, if you want new, I again recommend the GTX 660 (non-TI) or the GTX 670.

Thank you Wall Street, I will look at these for sure. I would like to stay in the 200 dollar range, but if the performance leap is big enough I might be able to talk myself into the 670.

Maiyr

 

[Eureka]

In my opinion, the 660 and 670 are priced fairly relative to each other. You pay 50% more for a 670, but you will get 50% more performance (a little bit more, given that the 670 overclocks better than the 660). The 660 Ti, I don't feel is worth the premium over the 660 at normal retail prices ($260+), but if it's cheaper it's worthwhile to look at too.

The GTX 660, I think, would be a good choice for you. It's around $200, and the Zotac GTX 660 is usually below $200. It will max out most games at 1080p, with the exception of the newest, most demanding games, which it will be able to play with some lower settings. The GTX 660 is quite powerful for its price, and unless you're a hardcore gamer, I doubt you would really care for the extra eye candy given by the 670.

 

[Yuriman]

Pick a pricepoint and see where you land here: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/GPU12/372

GTX660 and HD7870 are about equal in price and with the 7870 having a slight performance edge (a bit larger when overclocked). I don't think either is a bad choice, but if you can pony up for a 670 I'd suggest a 7950 instead, it's a lot more bang for your buck.