EVGA GTX 260 Core 216 Review

Cookie Monster

Diamond Member
May 7, 2005
5,161
32
86
Link

Conclusion

Without a doubt, the EVGA GTX 260 Core 216 Superclocked Edition is an attractive card even without the inclusion of a 55nm core. It offers excellent performance when pitted against ATI?s HD 4870 512MB and 1GB cards and at times even comes close to the performance of the GTX 280. Some reports have been putting the 55nm Core 216 Superclock?s performance slightly above that of the GTX 280 but let me tell you now: that ain?t gonna happen. That doesn?t stop it from being able to play many of the newer games without a hitch even when you jack up the resolution and IQ settings. Indeed, from a price / performance standpoint, this is a tough act to beat.

However, the big question here is whether the change to a smaller manufacturing process will benefit you, the consumer. The answer to that is a resounding NO. Here is the bottom line: the 55nm core may mean lower production costs for Nvidia but in the end it doesn?t mean much to people like you and I since these lower costs have not yet filtered down to lower retail prices. The new core not only overclocks similarly to the outgoing 65nm version but its power consumption savings are minimal at best and it performs like a mirror image of the 65nm card. Heck, even temperatures remain pretty much the same courtesy of the bastardized GTX 260 heatsink. This is probably why there have been zero changes in the GTX 260 namesake and the price remains relatively unchanged as well.

We all know that Nvidia needed to launch the GTX 260 with 216 shaders in order to offer some proper competition to the HD 4870 1GB. However, when you really sit down and look at the mess that is now the GTX 260 lineup, it is more than evident that Nvidia has been trying to play catch-up to competition they never thought would be so strong. For the sake of brand clarity, it would have been much easier to have seen the GTX 260 with 216 SPs originally released with a 55nm core and named the GTX 265 or somesuch. As it stands, I can see this card being a very tough sell with the current price-cutting of the 65nm product carrying the same name.

With all of this being said, we have to commend EVGA for a job well done since they have taken a somewhat uninspiring GPU and have made it into a real contender. The Lifetime Warranty and Trade Up programs continue to work extremely well and the addition of the full Far Cry 2 game is sure to add some value. As prices for this GTX 260 Core 216 Superclocked fall once stock of the 65nm cards dries out, it will be at the forefront of the price war with ATI?s cards and in a prime position to gain some valuable market share.

All in all, if you have bought a GTX 260 with 216 SPs, you have nothing to fear considering the 55nm version doesn?t give you any tangible benefits. With prices of the 65nm GTX 260 cards falling through the floor, the card reviewed here today probably isn?t too appealing at this juncture but it shouldn?t be written off too quickly. It occupies the tough position of a transitionary product that some (myself included) were hoping would bring better overclocking and lower power consumption to the table. These hopes weren?t fully borne out and that comes as a disappointment. It is as plain and simple as that.

I can see why the B2 revision wasn't used for the GTX295, and i.e caused a imminent delay of that product to Jan 8th because the GT206 core went through its 3rd spin i.e the B3 revision. I guess we will only see a more drastic power consumption reductions from parts based on the B3 rev chip.
 

Hauk

Platinum Member
Nov 22, 2001
2,806
0
0
Good find Cookie. Well that pretty much sums up the 55nm version. It wasn't about bringing a better/faster product to the people, it was simply about remaining competitive while lowering production cost. Now let's see what happens with GTX 285..
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
6,486
2,363
136
So far I see 55nm card consumes less power, therefore dissipates less heat, and is quieter too. These are worth considering if you're a new card buyer.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,002
126
Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
So far I see 55nm card consumes less power, therefore dissipates less heat, and is quieter too. These are worth considering if you're a new card buyer.

Linky

According to this it uses about the same power (depending on the test sometimes more even). During gaming it's around 5 watts more then the 65nm GTX260 216.

The temps look to be very similar (since it uses almost the same amount of power).

 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
6,486
2,363
136
Read the review carefully. There are 6 power consumption tests. Idle, 3DMark Load, Folding Load and 3 game tests. In 4 of those tests 55nm card consumes less power, in 2 it consumes more. Overall I think it's fair to say it uses less power. The card does have lighter heatsink which means same temperatures as 65nm part, however GPU temperatures have no effect on heat being dissipated by the card.

So the new card
1. Uses less power
2. Dissipates less heat
3. Runs quieter

Yes, these improvements are somewhat marginal, and if you already have 65nm card it's probably not worth upgrading, but they are worth considering if you're buying a new card.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,002
126
Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Read the review carefully. There are 6 power consumption tests. Idle, 3DMark Load, Folding Load and 3 game tests. In 4 of those tests 55nm card consumes less power, in 2 it consumes more. Overall I think it's fair to say it uses less power. The card does have lighter heatsink which means same temperatures as 65nm part, however GPU temperatures have no effect on heat being dissipated by the card.

So the new card
1. Uses less power
2. Dissipates less heat
3. Runs quieter

Yes, these improvements are somewhat marginal, and if you already have 65nm card it's probably not worth upgrading, but they are worth considering if you're buying a new card.

Errr... I did look. Looking at load it averages out to 3.4 watts of power saved (depending on the test it can actually use more power) according to those tests. If that is worth consideration to you, then go for it. In most of those tests that's in the range of 1%. I'll consider that within the margin of error personally.

I understand GPU temp does not mean the same thing as heat dissipated. The new card has a slightly smaller cooler (looks like a smaller copper contact area and one less heat pipe) and shows a higher GPU temp by a few degrees when under load so that really doesn't prove anything in regards to it dissipating less heat. All we can tell from that is that it has a slightly smaller cooler and under load shows a slightly higher temp.

Again, if to you those are significant gains worth choosing that card over the 65nm version, then have at it. If I were buying I wouldn't worry about it based on what I've seen.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
The 285 TDP is supposedly dropped by a good amount on the 285, with around 10% performance gains. Wierd that didnt translate to the 260 55nm.
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
6,486
2,363
136
Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
Again, if to you those are significant gains worth choosing that card over the 65nm version, then have at it. If I were buying I wouldn't worry about it based on what I've seen.

I'm being forced to consider a new videocard right now. My 8800GT is dying. I've underclocked it by 50MHz and it's better, but still not fully stable. I'll try underclocking more, but if that fails I will either have to switch to my spare 8600GTS until GT212 arrives or buy new videocard right now.

So I've been reluctantly researching videocards again. I've briefly considered 4870, but immediately ruled it out because according to every single review it uses 20-30W more than GTX260 in idle. Considering 90% of the time the videocard on my PC is idling, I do not want those extra 20W of heat dumped back into my room. Both expreview and Canucks say 55nm card uses 5W less in idle than 65nm part. If I can save another 5W - I'll take that as well, every little bit helps.
 

Cookie Monster

Diamond Member
May 7, 2005
5,161
32
86
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
The 285 TDP is supposedly dropped by a good amount on the 285, with around 10% performance gains. Wierd that didnt translate to the 260 55nm.

Like I said before I think this has to do with the different rev chips that the GTX260 and 285 are using. The former is using the leftover B2 samples while the latter uses the B3 rev. Since B3 rev chips have only entered production not so long ago, this is why we are seeing a delayed launch of the GTX295 and 285.
 

error8

Diamond Member
Nov 28, 2007
3,204
0
76
Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
I've briefly considered 4870, but immediately ruled it out because according to every single review it uses 20-30W more than GTX260 in idle. Considering 90% of the time the videocard on my PC is idling, I do not want those extra 20W of heat dumped back into my room. Both expreview and Canucks say 55nm card uses 5W less in idle than 65nm part. If I can save another 5W - I'll take that as well, every little bit helps.

Why not? Those extra 20 W are very good now when it's winter, adding a bit of warmth inside your house. ;)

 

geokilla

Platinum Member
Oct 14, 2006
2,012
3
81
How come everything I post from Hardware Canucks, no one replies or there's only one reply....:( Anyways, I'll be reading this once I get to the Hardware Canucks site.

So what do you guys think this is compared to now? In my opinion, thanks to those driver updates, the 55nm GTX260 C216 should be the new best bang for buck if you game and run Folding@Home. Otherwise, the ATI 4870 would compete very well with the GTX260. Before, these driver updates from NVIDIA, the 4870 dominated over the GTX260 imo.
 

nitromullet

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2004
9,031
36
91
So what do you guys think this is compared to now? In my opinion, thanks to those driver updates, the 55nm GTX260 C216 should be the new best bang for buck if you game and run Folding@Home. Otherwise, the ATI 4870 would compete very well with the GTX260. Before, these driver updates from NVIDIA, the 4870 dominated over the GTX260 imo.

In terms of higher end bang for the buck, that still goes to the 65nm GTX 260 192sp. The 216sp cards (both 65nm and 55nm) are generally $50 more than the 192sp card, which is ~25% higher in price without offering anywhere near a 25% increase in performance. The 4870 1GB cards can also be found for around $20-30 less, making the 4870 1GB a slightly better deal also.
 

error8

Diamond Member
Nov 28, 2007
3,204
0
76
Originally posted by: geokilla


So what do you guys think this is compared to now? In my opinion, thanks to those driver updates, the 55nm GTX260 C216 should be the new best bang for buck if you game and run Folding@Home. Otherwise, the ATI 4870 would compete very well with the GTX260. Before, these driver updates from NVIDIA, the 4870 dominated over the GTX260 imo.

As I've seen in the benchmarks, the 1 gb 4870 is still there, winning and loosing at different games and settings, against this new GTX, but being all the time very close.
I don't see a real winner here, really. Depending on the price, one can choose one or the other.