New GeForce GTX 260 to Feature 216 Shaders - Beats Radeon 4870

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The 260 was already a better card than the 4870, this just makes it a true slam dunk.

Better? Because it can do PhysX? The 4870 is definitely FASTER than a GTX260. And that is the most important criteria when comparing enthusiast caliber video cards.

PhysX and CUDA sure, but it's also better because it has more memory and overclocks better, thus giving it better performance.

http://www.hardocp.com/article...UzOSwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0

Overclocking is not the end all be all of videocards. I look at stock speed performance. That tells me something right there. Which is better out of the box. I think about if I plug it in, install drivers, and fire up a game it will do this. I'm personally not very interested in trying to get the most uber futuremark score by overclocking the card to the limit. A bit is fine and dandy, but I don't get a rise out of it in any way.

I used to think that way. "Gotta get this thing higher...lets play with memory timings" but now? Well, there's really no point. So you play Crysis at 50fps instead of 40fps. The game still plays fine. Also, lets not kid ourselves. After a certain point in many games that are still played but may be older (HL2, Quake4, Oblivion to name a few), there's not very much benefit from faster. When you start averaging over 100fps I call it good.

That's my story anyway.

 

[ginfest]

There are at least 4 posters in this thread who "shill" for the red-team in quite a few posts. Funny how those outraged by Keys don't ever noticed this? Now Keys is at least above-board with his affiliation, why don't some of you folks come clean instead of lurking in the weeds
Don't fool yourselves that everyone who read these forums believes your propaganda

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: ginfest
There are at least 4 posters in this thread who "shill" for the red-team in quite a few posts. Funny how those outraged by Keys don't ever noticed this? Now Keys is at least above-board with his affiliation, why don't some of you folks come clean instead of lurking in the weeds
Don't fool yourselves that everyone who read these forums believes your propaganda

Stop hiding in shadows and name them. I just see people who are discussing the point Nvidia is making with this new card.

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: ginfest
There are at least 4 posters in this thread who "shill" for the red-team in quite a few posts. Funny how those outraged by Keys don't ever noticed this? Now Keys is at least above-board with his affiliation, why don't some of you folks come clean instead of lurking in the weeds
Don't fool yourselves that everyone who read these forums believes your propaganda

Stop hiding in shadows and name them. I just see people who are discussing the point Nvidia is making with this new card.

Hell yeah! you provide the names we'll get the flaming torches and pitchforks!

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: WelshBloke

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: ginfest
There are at least 4 posters in this thread who "shill" for the red-team in quite a few posts. Funny how those outraged by Keys don't ever noticed this? Now Keys is at least above-board with his affiliation, why don't some of you folks come clean instead of lurking in the weeds
Don't fool yourselves that everyone who read these forums believes your propaganda

Stop hiding in shadows and name them. I just see people who are discussing the point Nvidia is making with this new card.

Hell yeah! you provide the names we'll get the flaming torches and pitchforks!

I didn't mean it like that. Maybe I worded it wrong.

I just mean, it's easy to start calling out people without naming them. If you're sure people are shills, then there's no reason to withhold.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The 260 was already a better card than the 4870, this just makes it a true slam dunk.

As for "price fixing" ATI was the only company that got in trouble for this, so the blame lies there I would think.

260 is the better card due to Physx support (IMO very important).

but performance-wise, 4870 is definately a tiny bit faster/better.

 

[SSChevy2001]

Why should we pay $50 more for enabling a extra 24 shaders? Not to mention that's it's going to be cheaper to make a 55nm.

Still want to know how Nv going to take the crown back

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: WelshBloke

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: ginfest
There are at least 4 posters in this thread who "shill" for the red-team in quite a few posts. Funny how those outraged by Keys don't ever noticed this? Now Keys is at least above-board with his affiliation, why don't some of you folks come clean instead of lurking in the weeds
Don't fool yourselves that everyone who read these forums believes your propaganda

Stop hiding in shadows and name them. I just see people who are discussing the point Nvidia is making with this new card.

Hell yeah! you provide the names we'll get the flaming torches and pitchforks!

I didn't mean it like that. Maybe I worded it wrong.

I just mean, it's easy to start calling out people without naming them. If you're sure people are shills, then there's no reason to withhold.

Yeah I agree with you, but you know whats going to happen if names start getting thrown around.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: WelshBloke

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The 260 was already a better card than the 4870, this just makes it a true slam dunk.

Better? Because it can do PhysX? The 4870 is definitely FASTER than a GTX260. And that is the most important criteria when comparing enthusiast caliber video cards.

PhysX and CUDA sure, but it's also better because it has more memory and overclocks better, thus giving it better performance.

http://www.hardocp.com/article...UzOSwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0

Why did you link to an overclocked GTX280 review?

GTX 260 640MHz vs GTX 260 575MHz vs 4870

There ya go. Stock 260 is about the same as the 4870 with the OC'd version stomping both. After taking overclocking, temps/cooling into consideration I'd definitely lean toward the 260 since those can directly translate into better performance if you're willing to overclock.

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: WelshBloke

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The 260 was already a better card than the 4870, this just makes it a true slam dunk.

Better? Because it can do PhysX? The 4870 is definitely FASTER than a GTX260. And that is the most important criteria when comparing enthusiast caliber video cards.

PhysX and CUDA sure, but it's also better because it has more memory and overclocks better, thus giving it better performance.

http://www.hardocp.com/article...UzOSwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0

Why did you link to an overclocked GTX280 review?

GTX 260 640MHz vs GTX 260 575MHz vs 4870

There ya go. Stock 260 is about the same as the 4870 with the OC'd version stomping both. After taking overclocking, temps/cooling into consideration I'd definitely lean toward the 260 since those can directly translate into better performance if you're willing to overclock.

That links not working for me but unless it says that an overclocked GTX280 is the same as a GTX260 I dont see how its relevant to my question.

 

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: ginfest
There are at least 4 posters in this thread who "shill" for the red-team in quite a few posts. Funny how those outraged by Keys don't ever noticed this? Now Keys is at least above-board with his affiliation, why don't some of you folks come clean instead of lurking in the weeds
Don't fool yourselves that everyone who read these forums believes your propaganda

I could say the same thing about the green-team.

 

[unr3al]

The last thing I consider when buying a graphics card is overclocking. Its not a CPU, therefore it has a lot more reasons why it could fail during overclocking, fail to overclock well, have a greatly shortened lifespan, or whatever. I prefer running a card at stock for as long as I can, overclocking as a last resort. And most buyers I've worked with prefer not overclocking anything, even if they have a Core2Duo CPU...

So if someone asked me which card is best between an HD4870 and a GTX260, I will say the HD4870. Unless they expressly ask about overclockability. Because by far most people don't overclock at all. They just want to know their card is going to beat that of their next-door neighbour, or whoever, who most likely doesn't overclock either.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: chizow

There ya go. Stock 260 is about the same as the 4870 with the OC'd version stomping both. After taking overclocking, temps/cooling into consideration I'd definitely lean toward the 260 since those can directly translate into better performance if you're willing to overclock.

Good link chizow!

The problem with the statement that GTX 260 is better is that there are particular games which perform better on the ATI card (GRID, Bioschock just to name a few) and some perform better on the NVidia card (mass Effect). But for the most part, neither card will provide a more playable environment. In other cases the extra ram of the GTX helps it secure a victory. While ATI card runs quieter, it emits more heat. While NV has PhysX, ATI has DX10.1. While NV has superior AF quality, ATi card has great 8AA performance - 1600x1200 8AA performance. Then you have the advantage of EVGA step up while none of the ATI partners offer this.

The point is, both cards have their advantages. It's pretty hard to claim that one is 'superior' to the other - it depends on the games one wants to play, current pricing and which of these advantages more important to the buyer.

For instance, right now you can get the Asus GTX 260 for $240 after MIR with Alone in the Dark, while the cheapest 4870 is $260. Also if you want lifetime warranty, VisionTek's card is $285 on Newegg but then it has to compete against XFX's 640mhz GTX 260 with COD4! In these cases, one would recommend the GTX 260 -- but last week the prices were different.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Agreed with the above.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

260 is the better card due to Physx support (IMO very important).

but performance-wise, 4870 is definately a tiny bit faster/better.

The combination of newer drivers, factory overclocking and more memory have put the GTX260 above the 4870 performance wise. Feature wise, CUDA has NVIDIA years ahead.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: chizow

There ya go. Stock 260 is about the same as the 4870 with the OC'd version stomping both. After taking overclocking, temps/cooling into consideration I'd definitely lean toward the 260 since those can directly translate into better performance if you're willing to overclock.

Good link chizow!

The problem with the statement that GTX 260 is better is that there are particular games which perform better on the ATI card (GRID, Bioschock just to name a few) and some perform better on the NVidia card (mass Effect). But for the most part, neither card will provide a more playable environment. In other cases the extra ram of the GTX helps it secure a victory. While ATI card runs quieter, it emits more heat. While NV has PhysX, ATI has DX10.1. While NV has superior AF quality, ATi card has great 8AA performance - 1600x1200 8AA performance. Then you have the advantage of EVGA step up while none of the ATI partners offer this.

The point is, both cards have their advantages. It's pretty hard to claim that one is 'superior' to the other - it depends on the games one wants to play, current pricing and which of these advantages more important to the buyer.

For instance, right now you can get the Asus GTX 260 for $240 after MIR with Alone in the Dark, while the cheapest 4870 is $260. Also if you want lifetime warranty, VisionTek's card is $285 on Newegg but then it has to compete against XFX's 640mhz GTX 260 with COD4! In these cases, one would recommend the GTX 260 -- but last week the prices were different.

And I don't disagree with any of that, which is why I've maintained that the 260 and 4870 were on par with each other after the price drop based on raw performance. The bolded portion does not contradict that at all. However, overclocking has always been an important consideration that can greatly impact performance, which is why I'd consider it above other peripheral advantages.

 

[Narynan]

And with the above coinsidered, thats why, even with a crossfire board, I finally decided to go with the 260. And I did have a 4850 CF setup that was a HELL of a lot faster, but CCC issues, heat issues, and everything else made me stepaway from it.

Maybe after I had to format in the next year or two, and a new generation of cards come out, I will coinsider an ATI card back in my machine, but damnit. It's not like I didn't try. And my OC'd 260 SMOKES a single 4850

 

[MarcVenice]

Chizow, I think there are even less people that OC their GPU then people that OC their CPU. I don't for one, it just seems riskier to me, I can't control thermals as good as I can with my CPU for example. My CPU is better protected against running to hot, and I can mess with the voltage, which has a specified save range. My GPU will start artifacting if it's running to hot, but it won't instantly artifact. My CPU on the other hand will most likely crash a game very fast if it isn't stable. And I've seen to many people damage their videocards by overclocking or having them run to hot, and I've rarely heard ppl destroying their CPU. GPU's are sometimes also a lot more expensive and an OC might boost your GPU's performance with 10%, a CPU OC could improve it's performance from 25 to 100%, risk/reward is a lot better.

My point being, not many ppl will consider overclockability of a videocard a selling point. I think russian made a good post, and price/performance should be the deciding factors.

 

[toslat]

Originally posted by: chizow
And I don't disagree with any of that, which is why I've maintained that the 260 and 4870 were on par with each other after the price drop based on raw performance. The bolded portion does not contradict that at all. However, overclocking has always been an important consideration that can greatly impact performance, which is why I'd consider it above other peripheral advantages.

and what happens when you overclock the 4870? Even with overclocking, the GTX260 still lost in HL2 which goes more towards Russ earlier point of game dependence.

Both cards are competitive and the edge would depend more on the games, and settings, under consideration.

 

[Keysplayr]

Some people o/c, some don't. Some consider it in their purchase decisions, some don't. Some cards o/c great, some don't.
Your mileage may vary. The GTX280 is a decent overclocker, well at least mine has handled 700MHz core 15xx shader without crashing, artifacting or overheating. Your GTX280 may not. Totally normal. I don't have a 260, but I've heard some o/c just as nicely, if not better than then some 280s.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: unr3al
The last thing I consider when buying a graphics card is overclocking. Its not a CPU, therefore it has a lot more reasons why it could fail during overclocking, fail to overclock well, have a greatly shortened lifespan, or whatever. I prefer running a card at stock for as long as I can, overclocking as a last resort. And most buyers I've worked with prefer not overclocking anything, even if they have a Core2Duo CPU...

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
Chizow, I think there are even less people that OC their GPU then people that OC their CPU. I don't for one, it just seems riskier to me, I can't control thermals as good as I can with my CPU for example. My CPU is better protected against running to hot, and I can mess with the voltage, which has a specified save range. My GPU will start artifacting if it's running to hot, but it won't instantly artifact. My CPU on the other hand will most likely crash a game very fast if it isn't stable. And I've seen to many people damage their videocards by overclocking or having them run to hot, and I've rarely heard ppl destroying their CPU. GPU's are sometimes also a lot more expensive and an OC might boost your GPU's performance with 10%, a CPU OC could improve it's performance from 25 to 100%, risk/reward is a lot better.

My point being, not many ppl will consider overclockability of a videocard a selling point. I think russian made a good post, and price/performance should be the deciding factors.

And once again, overclocking only enhances price/performance considerations. The reality of it is vendors will sell OC'd parts based on acceptable validation thresholds and charge you a premium for doing so. With a little faith in the system, that production standards are good and there's actually little difference between validated and non-validated parts, you can essentially obtain this extra performance for free. This is a fundamental concept of overclocking and for the most part, it holds true.

I can understand ATI/AMD users being a bit skittish with overclocking due to heat and warranty concerns and frankly, just not being very good at it, but for NV users OC'ing is encouraged and fully warrantied by many board partners.

Also Marc, I'm quite surprised you would draw the CPU to GPU overclocking comparison since I'm quite sure you stood here only a few months ago insisting CPU bottlenecks did not exist and only GPU speed mattered.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: toslat

Originally posted by: chizow
And I don't disagree with any of that, which is why I've maintained that the 260 and 4870 were on par with each other after the price drop based on raw performance. The bolded portion does not contradict that at all. However, overclocking has always been an important consideration that can greatly impact performance, which is why I'd consider it above other peripheral advantages.

and what happens when you overclock the 4870? Even with overclocking, the GTX260 still lost in HL2 which goes more towards Russ earlier point of game dependence.

Both cards are competitive and the edge would depend more on the games, and settings, under consideration.

Again, when comparing parts that are so close at stock its a given there may still be some titles where the 4870 outperforms an OC'd GTX 260, but those titles will certainly be fewer than compared to a stock GTX 260. I don't need to qualify it with every title or a % of titles its faster in if I've already said they on par at stock....just like I don't need to qualify any statement like GTX 280 is faster than 4870, even if the 4870 beats it in a few games/settings/resolutions......

 

[toslat]

Originally posted by: chizow
And once again, overclocking only enhances price/performance considerations. The reality of it is vendors will sell OC'd parts based on acceptable validation thresholds and charge you a premium for doing so. With a little faith in the system, that production standards are good and there's actually little difference between validated and non-validated parts, you can essentially obtain this extra performance for free. This is a fundamental concept of overclocking and for the most part, it holds true.

I can understand ATI/AMD users being a bit skittish with overclocking due to heat and warranty concerns and frankly, just not being very good at it, but for NV users OC'ing is encouraged and fully warrantied by many board partners.

Also Marc, I'm quite surprised you would draw the CPU to GPU overclocking comparison since I'm quite sure you stood here only a few months ago insisting CPU bottlenecks did not exist and only GPU speed mattered.

You sure know how to 'broaden' a topic. Can we please get back on topic (you and marc can create a new thread to discuss what overclocking GPUs has to do with system bottlenecks - am curious)

So do we have any corroborating sources? will the GTX 280 be upgraded too?
NV should move it along and release something (have given up on AMD and the 1GB 4870)

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: apoppin
BtW, my new HW - including a GTX280 arrives Tomorrow!
[see i knew not to get the 260 ]
i am hoping i can disable a TMU to approximate a 260; i couldn't do it the other way 'round]

Nice! What else are you replacing on your current rig? Will be interesting to see more 4870X2 vs. GTX 280 observations. Also keep in mind the GTX 260 will still be short in a few areas even if you're able to disable TPC units on the GTX 280 (I don't think NVstrap options are enabled on RT 2.10 for GT200 yet...). There's still 1 less 64-bit memory controller and 4 ROPs (and all the other transistors associated with that cluster) along with the 128MB of RAM. Another way you could approximate performance would be to adjust clockspeed.

everything!

Asus x48 P5e Deluxe [flash to rampage]
2x2GB PC 8500
e8500 [not going with QC until Neha]

i am off to work .. but i am SO looking forward to reviewing them .. tomorrow =)

whoa! You gonna do a 4870 X2 / GTX 280 comparison, or did you just decide to go for the GTX 280 instead?

no .. i already have a 512MB Sapphire 4870; it was insufficient for 19x12 imo. i got the VT 4870x2 on the Best Buy deal *and* i am also getting a BFG Tech [the one that overheats] GTX280 so i can review all three graphics cards [with maybe an oldie thrown in in - an 8800GTX; so you can get an idea what this gen is like over last]. i am *guessing* i can neuter my 280 > GT260+ [more or less, by disabling a TMU and underclocking] and get that kind of approximate comparison.

On top of all that, i am going to try and compare my 4870/512 with the 1GB version by disabling a core of my X2 to see what i get. It should be damn close to the 1GB version. AND .. i will also up grade my p35 crossfire mb to an ASUS x48 that will be flashed into rampage. Since 3.33Ghz is slow with my GPUs, i am hoping for 4.5Ghz [if i get e0] with my new e8500. Since my current ddr2 pc6400 only gets 900Mhz, i got 2x2GB PC8500 that should oc to 1200

so .. i got some major comparisons and reviews coming out of this HW i am getting tomorrow.
- i am *dying* to look at PhysX with the GTX280/8800gtx and also see about Foh and finally CUDA. The current tech reviews barely touch on what i am interested in
==========================================

Originally posted by: unr3al
I am always one for competition, but this is really stupid. Looking at the GTX260 and GTX280 prices here in SA, I don't think we could survive any more price hikes. At least the ATi pricing is in line with what people pay overseas. I mean, $450 for a GTX260 is the best I've seen, vs $375 for an HD4870. C'mon, thats $75! Where will that go when the new ones are released?! If, with the new cards, I have to pay a $125 premium just to have a card that (at stock) SOMETIMES beats the cheaper option, I'll be needing a shrink. Or some useful way to spend my surplus money... And knowing SA, I think it would be closer to a $150 difference. So what if it can be overclocked to equal a GTX280? For the price premium I could add another gig of RAM plus some decent aftermarket cooling solution for an HD4870 and get similar overclocking results!

i got my GTX280 from Newegg this week for $420. And i got my 4870x2 from Best Buy for $469 .. so you really need to look for deals in the USA

i can't speak for overseas, but it appear that video cards are much higher also in Europe and Australia; that is what my friends there tell me
... we have other issues in the USA .. but cheap HW

i seriously doubt you are going to get much over 820/1150 without burning up your 4870 even with good cooling .. they don't have much room after that

 

[toslat]

Originally posted by: chizow
Again, when comparing parts that are so close at stock its a given there may still be some titles where the 4870 outperforms an OC'd GTX 260, but those titles will certainly be fewer than compared to a stock GTX 260. I don't need to qualify it with every title or a % of titles its faster in if I've already said they on par at stock....just like I don't need to qualify any statement like GTX 280 is faster than 4870, even if the 4870 beats it in a few games/settings/resolutions......

If you look at the review you linked to, there were 5 games of which the OC GTX260 won 4. Two of those four also had the GTX260 beating the HD4870 (the other two were crysis and Quake 4). The question is how much help does the 10% overclock give in games that the stock GTX260 needs it.

You talked about overclocking headroom on the GTX260, but you could get a 5% GPU overclock on the 4870 (and likely more on the memory) which you failed to bring into consideration when making comparisons.

Anyways I don't want to derail the thread into a GTX260 vs 4870, so we 'll give it a rest