gtx 460 - 768 comparison with gtx 260 - 216 oc

[bryanW1995]

Just got in the gtx 460 - 768 so it's benchmark time. I kinda got lazy and only benched a couple games before pulling the gtx 260, but the info should be useful. btw, the gtx 260 is the msi oc v2 edition that newegg had for a long time, oc is at 655 core and mem 1050. here it is. the gtx 460 - 768 is here. for some reason the 460 came clocked at 720, according to msi afterburner and gpu-z that is stock speed even though it allegedly is supposed to be 675. shaders locked to core speed on both.

The 260 isn't 100% stable over the base factory oc so I just leave it there typically. I tested 3dmark vantage (yeah, I know), my own little custom loop of nwn2, and crysis demo.

cpu: i7 920 @ 3.78, HT on

pcmark vantage:
gtx 260 @655/2100 - p10179
gtx 460 @720/3600 - p11431
gtx 460 @905/4000 - p13122
= 14.8% improvement over stock
= 28.9% improvement over old gtx 260 - 216


crysis demo 4xAA, 16xAF 1680x1050, everything VERY HIGH except postprocessing and shaders set to HIGH
gtx 260 @655/2100 - bad data I think, shows 23.2 avg
gtx 460 @720/3600 - 36.10 avg
gtx 460 @905/4000/1.087v - 43.02 avg
= 19.1% improvement over stock


nwn2 - bandit camp. have neeshka and khelgar in party, party runs to edge of bandit fort wall and back to entrance to area. area already cleared out. cpu still i7-920 @ 3780, HT on, all gpu settings max, 8xQ msaa
deleted, couldn't get consistent results and never saved with fraps. will use them to test out my oc improvement in real world game, however.

gtx 460 @720/3600 - min 32, max 61, avg 42.800
gtx 460 @905/4000/1.087v - min 34, max 61, avg 48.2
= 12.6% improvement over stock

all settings same, changing AA to 8x SSAA yields:

gtx 460 @720/3600 - min 19, max 61, avg 26.2
gtx 460 @905/4000/1.087v - min 23, max 60, avg 30.9
= 17.9% improvement over stock

 

[toyota]

the 768mb model is about 10-15% faster on average according to reviews. sadly in some cases its no better at all.

 

[bryanW1995]

we'll see once I'm done overclocking. it looks like its 28% faster in a spot where it makes all the difference in the world: 29.94 vs 23.33. I screwed up my nwn loop and then was unable to repeat the exact sequence from last night with the gtx 260 so I'll just use that to compare my oc performance in a real world game.

 

[happy medium]

Well come on man overclock that sucker Bryan.
Is it a Evga version? I think there bios update raised there stock clocks.

 

[bryanW1995]

strange, avgs in crysis are all the same no matter what I do with core or mem oc. mins, however, are changing pretty dramatically. let's see what 3dmark thinks...

@happy: they must have done it while I wasn't looking since I haven't touched the bios. it makes sense to jump the core to 720, however, since even appears to be very conservative. I'm already at 850 on stock volts, it's not even getting over 59c in furmark for 10 minutes yet.

btw, this card is significantly shorter than the gtx 260. 2-3 inches I would guess.

 

[happy medium]

strange, avgs in crysis are all the same no matter what I do with core or mem oc. mins, however, are changing pretty dramatically. let's see what 3dmark thinks...

@happy: they must have done it while I wasn't looking since I haven't touched the bios. it makes sense to jump the core to 720, however, since even appears to be very conservative. I'm already at 850 on stock volts, it's not even getting over 59c in furmark for 10 minutes yet.

btw, this card is significantly shorter than the gtx 260. 2-3 inches I would guess.

You might have gotten a card already updated.

See...720 core

http://www.guru3d.com/news/evga-releases-gtx--460-bios-update--calls-it-free-performance-boost/

I want to see 905 core @ 1.087 voltage Bry, nothing less.
That puts you as fast as a gtx470.

 

[NoSoup4You]

For what it's worth, I just went from a 192 core MSI GTX260 to a Gigabyte GTX460 1GB. The 260 was at the stock oc of 620 core, while I have the 460 at 800 core / 1600 shader.

There's a noticeable difference in every game I've thrown at it. I play on a 40" Samsung tv @ 1920x1080, the 460 seems like the perfect card for that resolution. But it's not a huge jump, and it's almost certainly the weakest bump I've gotten from a gpu upgrade. But it was still worth it since my understanding was that the GTX475 was still a ways off and the 470/480 are space heaters, so no thank you there.

If money's tight then you'd be crazy to ditch the 260 for a 460. But if you're dying to upgrade your computer after nearly 2 years of solid service from your 260, like I was, then I say definitely go for it. I bought it knowing not to expect a huge difference and so far I've been pleasantly surprised. Sure, low expectations will do that but really at 1080p the GTX260 is a little underpowered in many modern games, especially a couple of the games I've been playing recently (Metro 2033, Just Cause 2).

 

[happy medium]

For what it's worth, I just went from a 192 core MSI GTX260 to a Gigabyte GTX460 1GB. The 260 was at the stock oc of 620 core, while I have the 460 at 800 core / 1600 shader.

There's a noticeable difference in every game I've thrown at it. I play on a 40" Samsung tv @ 1920x1080, the 460 seems like the perfect card for that resolution. But it's not a huge jump, and it's almost certainly the weakest bump I've gotten from a gpu upgrade. But it was still worth it since my understanding was that the GTX475 was still a ways off and the 470/480 are space heaters, so no thank you there.

If money's tight then you'd be crazy to ditch the 260 for a 460. But if you're dying to upgrade your computer after nearly 2 years of solid service from your 260, like I was, then I say definitely go for it. I bought it knowing not to expect a huge difference and so far I've been pleasantly surprised. Sure, low expectations will do that but really at 1080p the GTX260 is a little underpowered in many modern games, especially a couple of the games I've been playing recently (Metro 2033, Just Cause 2).

I think with the op's res. 1600x1050, he should see much better gains.
And If I know him, he won't settle for 800 on the core. If temps are right he will shoot for 900. :thumbsup:

 

[RussianSensation]

At 900mhz, GTX460 is going to be near 5870, if not faster at times. In fact, at about 800mhz-810, it's already as fast as the GTX470 in some titles unless you apply heavy AA in Metro 2033.

Benches at 800mhz for 1GB version here: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/nvidia-geforce-gtx-460_12.html#sect2

 

[minmaster]

i just got the evga SC (superclocked) version of the same card and according to benchmarks, it is up there with the 1GB version on some of the tests.

 

[tviceman]

I wish my gtx460 would hurry up and arrive. I back ordered the 1 gig asus top edition (800mhz factory overclock) 3 weeks ago off amazon for $210. Tomorrow is the last date in amazon's expected shipping date range and the card has been showing in stock at various e-tailers, so I'm optimistic it's close even if it doesn't get shipped within amazon's estimated range.

Hell at this point I'd probably cancel my order and wait for the gtx475 but the rumor mill has been super quiet regarding if/when we'll see that card.

 

[happy medium]

At 900mhz, GTX460 is going to be near 5870, if not faster at times. In fact, at about 800mhz-810, it's already as fast as the GTX470 in some titles unless you apply heavy AA in Metro 2033.

Benches at 800mhz for 1GB version here: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/nvidia-geforce-gtx-460_12.html#sect2

How about a factory overclocked gtx460 card at 900 core! wow!
Thats the fastest yet.

http://www.fudzilla.com/graphics/graphics/graphics/colorful-launches-900mhz-gtx-460

 

[bryanW1995]

strange problems for a while with crysis benchmark and 3d mark vantage. very frustrating for a while, got them figured out finally. however, my results from crysis demo are bad. I'm not pissed off enough to reinstall the gtx 260, however.

What do I need in vantage to = a gtx 470? remember I'm on a 768mb card, so I don't know if it's even possible. running right now at 4000 mem / 850 core.

 

[toyota]

strange problems for a while with crysis benchmark and 3d mark vantage. very frustrating for a while, got them figured out finally. however, my results from crysis demo are bad. I'm not pissed off enough to reinstall the gtx 260, however.

What do I need in vantage to = a gtx 470? remember I'm on a 768mb card, so I don't know if it's even possible. running right now at 4000 mem / 850 core.

with that 192 bit card you wont come close to getting the memory bandwidth and rop performance of the gtx470 if that matters.

 

[happy medium]

What do I need in vantage to = a gtx 470? remember I'm on a 768mb card, so I don't know if it's even possible. running right now at 4000 mem / 850 core.

905 core , I'm pretty sure.

 

[bryanW1995]

wtf is wrong with crysis demo? I was stable at 875/2000 at stock volts in furmark for 10 min, max temp 62c, but couldn't run crysis demo for more than 1 loop until I dropped back to 855 core. Ok, I can handle that. however, I can change settings in afterburner, furmark recognizes them no problem, but crysis is all over the place. I've gotten as much as 40.63 avg at 850/1900, but just ran it allegedly at 855/2000 and got 36.32 avg. that happens to be exactly what I got on it while running earlier at stock settings after getting it to actually, you know, recognize my clock changes. no wonder people use vantage, at least it's reliable. screw you crysis, I'm moving on...

I'll just use crysis to stability test from now on, this is ridiculous.

edit: and maybe not even that. vantage wouldn't report results due to "errors" at 855/2000, now trying at 850/2000. jane nash and new calico sure take a long time to load!

 

[RussianSensation]

My quick Vantage Score (I believe in Performance mode, whatever the demo lets you run) was 18.6k at stock speeds.

Remember GTX460 has higher texture fill-rate than the 470.

At 810mhz GPU, GTX460 768 will match 470's shader and vertex operations, with texture fill-rate being 33% higher (45.4 GTexels/sec vs. 34 for the 470). However, pixel fill-rate will still be 20% slower (19.4 GPixels/sec vs. 24.3 for the 470). Shockingly enough, at 810mhz, 460's texture fill-rate is actually even higher than the 480.
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=628&card2=633#

460 won't beat the 470 once you enable Tessellation. Texture fill-rate is a weak spot for 470/480s -- exactly why 5870 catches up to the 480, as noted by Xbitlabs in their 2560x1600 performance benches.

 

[ModestGamer]

wtf is wrong with crysis demo? I was stable at 875/2000 at stock volts in furmark for 10 min, max temp 62c, but couldn't run crysis demo for more than 1 loop until I dropped back to 855 core. Ok, I can handle that. however, I can change settings in afterburner, furmark recognizes them no problem, but crysis is all over the place. I've gotten as much as 40.63 avg at 850/1900, but just ran it allegedly at 855/2000 and got 36.32 avg. that happens to be exactly what I got on it while running earlier at stock settings after getting it to actually, you know, recognize my clock changes. no wonder people use vantage, at least it's reliable. screw you crysis, I'm moving on...

I'll just use crysis to stability test from now on, this is ridiculous.

edit: and maybe not even that. vantage wouldn't report results due to "errors" at 855/2000, now trying at 850/2000. jane nash and new calico sure take a long time to load!

well even crysis is fiarly poorly optimized what do you expect ?

 

[bryanW1995]

as you can see, I'm nowhere near you in 3dmark. I'd be curious to see what you get@stock in crysis demo @stock with my settings for cpu/gpu, however.


will run card at 1.087v/905/2000 overnight and see if seti plays nice with it or not.

 

[RussianSensation]

I'd love to run a quick Crysis bench, but I am not going to be able to use my desktop I am away for a couple months for work. Maybe someone else with the 470 can run it for you?

I see a similar system to mine gets just 26 fps with GTX470 in Crysis @ 1920x1080 4AA, VeryHigh - http://www.overclockers.com/gtx-470-mini-review/

Xbitlabs has similar results - http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/geforce-gtx470-sli_7.html#sect1
1920x1080 4AA/16AF -GTX470 = 26
1600x900 4AA/16AF - GTX470 = 34 fps

 

[toyota]

I knew your gtx260 216sp Crysis results looked screwy so I ran the exact same settings and got 32.61 fps even with my old oced 192sp version and E8500. I also ran it without AA and got 40.64 fps.

 

[bryanW1995]

yeah, I don't know what was going on there. it's like it was pegged at 30fps no matter what I did...

btw, going to 32x MSAA on nwn II yields 36/61 with an avg of 46. looks amazing at 32x msaa, think I'll run it on that.

 

[bryanW1995]

My quick Vantage Score (I believe in Performance mode, whatever the demo lets you run) was 18.6k at stock speeds.

Remember GTX460 has higher texture fill-rate than the 470.

At 810mhz GPU, GTX460 768 will match 470's shader and vertex operations, with texture fill-rate being 33% higher (45.4 GTexels/sec vs. 34 for the 470). However, pixel fill-rate will still be 20% slower (19.4 GPixels/sec vs. 24.3 for the 470). Shockingly enough, at 810mhz, 460's texture fill-rate is actually even higher than the 480.
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=628&card2=633#

460 won't beat the 470 once you enable Tessellation. Texture fill-rate is a weak spot for 470/480s -- exactly why 5870 catches up to the 480, as noted by Xbitlabs in their 2560x1600 performance benches.

forgot that you're in sli, try it with only one gpu.

here's where I am with 905/1810/4400: http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=628&card2=633#

don't know if the extra texture and shader make up for less pixel/mem but it's certainly possible.


edit: didn't link it, here is the data:

Core Clock: 905 MHz
Memory Clock: 2200 MHz (4400 DDR)
Memory Bandwidth: 105.6 GB/sec
Shader Operations: 304080 MOperations/sec
Pixel Fill Rate: 21720 MPixels/sec
Texture Fill Rate: 50680 MTexels/sec
Vertex Operations: 76020 MVertices/se

 

[RussianSensation]

forgot that you're in sli, try it with only one gpu.

here's where I am with 905/1810/4400: http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=628&card2=633#

Your overclock is awesome on a card with no aftermarket cooler (i.e., Gigabyte and MSI models). And can you imagine people even try to say that 5830 is not a bad deal? GTX460 overclocked is fast.

BTW, I am not running SLI on a 520W. Just one of the cards. The 2nd one I gave to my dad. I'll run Crysis bench when I have a chance (probably a month or so).

 

[bryanW1995]

ok. I just assumed it was sli b/c p18600 is such a huge jump over my current max of 13577 @ 905/1810/4400