LOOK----448core gtx560 ti review

[Stuka87]

Why is it nobody has brought up tripple head setups? This is the main reason the 6950 comes in a 2GB version. It is also the reason nVidia released a 2.5GB 570. And there is a pretty significant difference between the two at high resolutions (5760x1080).

Here is a review which shows the merits of having the extra video memory:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...pu-memory-surround-stereo-3d-performance.html

And the point made above, if the 570 and the 6950 have the same price/performance ratio, and one has bigger numbers than the other, which do you think the average consumer is going to buy? And NO, forum/techie people are not the average consumer. The fact is the average user looks at sales numbers and goes "oh, this one has more" and goes with that one.

EDIT: Oh and one thing most benchmarks do is they max out all settings. Well, not all settings use a significant amount of vram, but they do use a lot of GPU. You can turn off one or two and vram wont change much, but FPS will shoot up. HBAO comes to mind in BF3. HUGE FPS hit, not a real big visual change however.

 

[Vesku]

What about all those high res packs many games have officially or unofficially? You wanted to exclude in your original premise, Happy Medium. I mean if you have the vram why not fill it up with more detail? Still, it is really too close to next gen release at least for AMD cards to be considering a Christmas purchase. The time to upgrade from Nvidia 9800/200 and AMD 4800 series was with the Nvidia 500 and AMD 6900 series, now it's holding pattern time.

 

[happy medium]

Why is it nobody has brought up tripple head setups?

because no one has it? and 2% of all gamers have it and its really not relevent.

In most cases you need 2 cards to power a good triple monitor setup anyway.

 

[schneiderguy]

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/17/msi_r6950_1gb_twin_frozr_iii_power_edition_review/8

DA2 and Dirt3 can both use over 1GB vram at playable settings on the 6950. BF3 can as well.

 

[ocre]

lol, are you two acting retarded on purpose? 6950 1gb "beating" the 2gb model in those links??? there is less than 1/2 of a frame difference between a 6950 1gb and 2gb in Metro 2033 and Crysis...

They are acting like this 560 is at a disadvantage cause it dont have 2gb like the 6950s. I am showing for the most part its a bogus claim.

 

[3DVagabond]

nvidia didnt.

you make zero sense. Your logic would mean no one buys the gtx 500 series cards, they will only buy AMD and only Nvidia cards from only the non-reference vender added extra ram versions. I have yet to see a single person with an nvidia card like that but know of many gtx owners.

You are exaggerating my position as to make it invalid. This is debating 101 tactics. It's done when the other person's position has validity and you are trying to discredit it. Either that or the concept of marketing a 2gig card over a 1gig is too difficult for you to understand.

It's never black and white like you are making it. Sales, market penetration, profit, etc. are measured in percentage points, not all or nothing.

If nVidia can raise the avg. selling price of the 570 by 10% by offering this card to compete with the 6950, then it's a win as that 10% is pure profit. If on top of that, they can dump some further defective chips and make anything on them, that's pure profit (This we don't know about. Back to my original post stating it could be selling crap chips or purely because the competition is forcing it and they are going to have to use perfectly good 570/580 chips to increase margins on the 570.). They would also like to increase market penetration by taking sales from the 6950. Here I think it will fall short, because of the 1.25gig of RAM. How often do you see people recommend the 1gig 6950 over the 2gig? Hardly ever. The 2gig 6950 is perceived to be a better value. The 2gig 6950 will have the same perceived advantage over the 560 ti 448. Whether it is actually any better or not is another subject.

I'm just making a statement as to my opinion of the market value of this card. I don't see it as a particularly strong offering. Not a bad card, just nothing to get excited about. I'll leave it to others on these forums to attempt to drive sales with their rhetoric.

 

[happy medium]

What about all those high res packs many games have officially

Now thats ok. officially is ok, not some mod and not some old game that has been beaten last year and given some graphical enhancements.

A game that is "released" with a official high res package. I dont know any.

 

[happy medium]

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/17/msi_r6950_1gb_twin_frozr_iii_power_edition_review/8

DA2 and Dirt3 can both use over 1GB vram at playable settings on the 6950. BF3 can as well.

40 fps minimums..... no but good try, really, nice try.

 

[ocre]

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/17/msi_r6950_1gb_twin_frozr_iii_power_edition_review/8

DA2 and Dirt3 can both use over 1GB vram at playable settings on the 6950. BF3 can as well.

but not in crysis!!!!!!

Aint that all that matters!!!

just joking!

This reviewer has results that are wildly different than anyone else.

But eventually i am sure you can find a case where it does better. but i have listed 20 games at 5 resolutions and settings (100 total) where it makes little difference at all.

None of that is the point. The point is the 1.25 gb on the 560 isnt much of an issue. Thats my point anyway!

 

[happy medium]

How often do you see people recommend the 1gig 6950 over the 2gig? Hardly ever.

Mabe becuase until VERY recently the 1gb card only cost 10$ less?

How often do you see people recommend the 1gig 6950 over the 2gig? Hardly ever. The 2gig 6950 is perceived to be a better value.

The 2gig 6950 will have the same perceived advantage over the 560 ti 448.

Thats why you wont answer my question? because the "percieved" advantage of the 6950 that you talk about is all BS? Sound about right.

 

[schneiderguy]

40 fps minimums..... no but good try, really, nice try.

So because the results don't meet your completely arbitrary FPS minimum they aren't valid?

 

[happy medium]

So because the results don't meet your completely arbitrary FPS minimum they aren't valid?

29 fps for a racer is a no go and the other was 7 fps.

No it dont meet the minimum.

Hey you came close, at least you played.

 

[3DVagabond]

Now thats ok. officially is ok, not some mod and not some old game that has been beaten last year and given some graphical enhancements.

A game that is "released" with a official high res package. I dont know any.

40 fps minimums..... no but good try, really, nice try.

Another one using very basic debate tactics. You find condidions that makes your position correct and then insist that everyone adheres to your rules of the debate. Very interesting. Why not just remove your artificial limitations? Oh, because then people might see the value to 2gigs of vram?

Which, was never the premise of my original post, by the way. I was just pointing to the possibility of marketing fail by this card. Although you are trying real hard to avoid that premise and instead have jumped into full press sales mode on the card.

 

[happy medium]

Another one using very basic debate tactics

Still waiting.........stop spinning and prove me wrong. Dont change the rules, back your claim.

I say 2gb on a 6950 is worthless without crossfire.
You say..........?

2gb is a marketing tool that makes people think a 6950 2gb card is just as fast as a gx560ti 448 core and actually never uses more than 1gb of memory before running out of fps unless its run in crossfire.?

Hows that?

 

[ocre]

Why is it nobody has brought up tripple head setups? This is the main reason the 6950 comes in a 2GB version. It is also the reason nVidia released a 2.5GB 570. And there is a pretty significant difference between the two at high resolutions (5760x1080).

Here is a review which shows the merits of having the extra video memory:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...pu-memory-surround-stereo-3d-performance.html

And the point made above, if the 570 and the 6950 have the same price/performance ratio, and one has bigger numbers than the other, which do you think the average consumer is going to buy? And NO, forum/techie people are not the average consumer. The fact is the average user looks at sales numbers and goes "oh, this one has more" and goes with that one.

EDIT: Oh and one thing most benchmarks do is they max out all settings. Well, not all settings use a significant amount of vram, but they do use a lot of GPU. You can turn off one or two and vram wont change much, but FPS will shoot up. HBAO comes to mind in BF3. HUGE FPS hit, not a real big visual change however.

I get the first part, the ram can help in those situations.

but-

AMD has been the only company with a lot of vram!
Nvidia wouldnt have sold a single 580, 570, 560 if ppl care only about the ram. If thats all the seen as you say. Only very recently has partners offered these special GPUs with 2gb or more. Nvidia has been gaining in discrete market share and the majority of cards they sell are well below 2gb.

I think your wrong and i use the market share gains from nvidia as proof. ppl did not choose AMD 2gb cards more than nvidia <2gb cards. Actually nvidia took some of the discrete market from AMD so......

 

[WMD]

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/17/msi_r6950_1gb_twin_frozr_iii_power_edition_review/8

DA2 and Dirt3 can both use over 1GB vram at playable settings on the 6950. BF3 can as well.

They use 8xAA at 2560x1600 which is IMO unnecessary. And those are not really playable settings.

Frankly I am a sucker for VRAM but Happy does have a point. Its hard to see the benefits of 2GB on a single 6950 card at resolution/ settings that allow ~ 60fps. And I really don't see the point of 2GB if I have to crank resolution or settings to play at a choppy 30fps.

But those just my personal preference. If you want high levels of AA with 2560x1600 or eyefinity resolutions and fine with 30fps or less, then 1GB on a 6950/ gtx560 class of GPU just wont cut it.

 

[notty22]

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/17/msi_r6950_1gb_twin_frozr_iii_power_edition_review/8

DA2 and Dirt3 can both use over 1GB vram at playable settings on the 6950. BF3 can as well.

@2560x1600with 8xMSAA.

We could go back in time and run a 10 game benchmark at those settings and the 1.5gb gtx 480 would have demolished the 2gpu 5970 1gb in every game.
The gtx 480 would have avg mostly low 20's fps and the 5970 would have been in the 10's because you are now using unrealistic settings in a gaming situation.
The added ram can be helpful in multi-gpu / eyefinity settings. We can go back to the gtx4602gb release threads which came out before Cayman, and the mob mentality there, was the memory was as useful as titz on a bull.

 

[happy medium]

Frankly I am a sucker for VRAM but Happy does have a point. Its hard to see the benefits of 2GB on a single 6950 card at resolution/ settings that allow ~ 60fps. And I really don't see the point of 2GB if I have to crank resolution or settings to play at a choppy 30fps.

Thank you,

I never understood why people always said dont buy a 5870 2gb card but always recommended a 6950 2gb card.

I think you dont need more than 1gb of memory till you reach a 6970/gtx570 level of performance. Thats why Nvidia uses 1.25gb on the gtx570,
ANy more would be a waste

 

[Grooveriding]

interesting cause i am about to link showing you that the 1gb 6950 version beats out the 2gb 6950 in crysis 4xaa 2560x1600

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_6950_1_GB/11.html

And neither are playable!!!!

the extra 1 gig does almost nothing, look at it!!!!! Marketeers!!!

What settings are those ? Medium ? High ? Very High ?

I know first hand 1GB is not enough, calm yourself.

 

[Grooveriding]

This is Warhead which is less demanding than Crysis. GTX580 is the only card for those settings.

Does crossfire use video memory? WHy does the 5870 and 6870 tank but single cards work?

Because they only have 1GB of memory...

And those are Gamer settings with enthusiasts shaders. I know all about VRAM and how it effects your settings at high resolutions, what experience do you have with it ?

 

[happy medium]

Because they only have 1GB of memory...

but the 1.25gb on the gtx570 was enough.
OK.

BUt none of them are playable anyway.:thumbsdown:

 

[3DVagabond]

Still waiting.........stop spinning and prove me wrong. Dont change the rules, back your claim.

I'm not changing any rules. You are just trying to make your argument by creating a limited situation where your position is valid.

I say 2gb on a 6950 is worthless without crossfire.
You say..........?

Now you want to buffer the conditions. Don't worry, I wasn't going to bring up you using 2gig cards. I already knew what your response would be to that.

2gb is a marketing tool that makes people think a 6950 2gb card is just as fast as a gx560ti 448 core and actually never uses more than 1gb of memory[/b] before running out of fps unless its run in crossfire.?

Hows that?

You might be starting to get it. You at least mentioned marketing, finally. Then you go and make a false claim that you hope will sneak by though. It doesn't make anyone think that the 6950 2gig is as fast. It either is or it isn't. If it is, then people will see value in the additional vram and buy the 6950 instead. Just like most people opt for the 6950 2gig over the 1gig version now.

 

[Grooveriding]

but the 1.25gb on the gtx570 was enough.
OK.

BUt none of them are playable anyway.:thumbsdown:

That's an irrelevant argument that you're using to dodge the point. You very well may need two cards to run high resolutions, I'd say you definitely do.

Whether you need 1, 2, 3 or 1/2 a card for those conditions, they need over 1GB of memory.

There is a reason in all the BF3 Ultra 1080P+ reviews, even with nvidia performing better with the 4xMSAA setting, you hardly ever see a 1GB 560 being benched, and when you do; it's slower than the 2GB 6950.

That is a good indication of where we are at going forward, that we are starting to see new game engines that are bottlenecked by 1GB even at 1080P on maximum settings.

But this is not related to the thread. There is a neutered GTX 570 coming out tomorrow for not much cheaper than a 570. Great, colour me not excited. Hasn't been an exciting video card released since the 5870, the 5970 and 6990 were interesting for raising the bar on the fastest card, the 6970 and 580 were disappointing and just a mild refresh of their predecessors and the 590 released to little fanfare and fell into turd status rapidly.

I'll care about another video card launch when it is a high-end 28nm card.

 

[happy medium]

SInce the point was proven that a 6950 2gb card is worthless with 2gb of memory (vs 1gb) unless its crossfired, I rest my case.

SO please to all you members/readers, remember, a card weaker performance than a gtx580/overclocked 6970 has no use for more than 1.25gb of memory unless crossfired.

Mark this thread in saves.

We are not talking about marketing , ect ect ect ect. why , who ...

I want the proof and the benchmarks from a good review site.

 

[3DVagabond]

SInce the point was proven that a 6950 2gb card is worthless with 2gb of memory (vs 1gb) unless its crossfired, I rest my case.

SO please to all you members/readers, remember, a card weaker performance than a gtx580/overclocked 6970 has no use for more than 1.25gb of memory unless crossfired.

Mark this thread in saves.

LOL You have proven nothing. You have been trying to engage people in a debate applying your position to a very limited situation. No one took the bait though.