Official GTX560 Review Thread (updated with 17 reviews at this time)

[AtenRa]

ok got it,

the OC model is the ASUS DC II TOP, so not the one in the link i gave over at newegg.

http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=2oRA7x6MYEwAq4mL&templete=2

 

[Wreckage]

I'll just leave this here.

That was just plain useless.

If you are truly worried about a small difference in wattage. You should be using a laptop, otherwise you are just a hypocrite.

From the majority of reviews, this card is just plain better than the 6950 and with a decent overclock is a better deal than a 6970.

 

[Skurge]

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_560_Ti_Direct_Cu_II/31.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_560_Ti/30.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_560_Ti/31.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GTX_560_Ti_Sonic/31.html

4 cards, non could go over 950 on "stock volts". If you look carefully, each one of those cards have different voltages. So in a sense there really is no such thing as stock volts on a factory overclocked card.

Now, lets look at a 6950.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/HD_6950_Twin_Frozr_II/31.html

It has much more headroom then any of those 560s. This is without touching the voltage. That 6950 ends up faster than those 560s.
Even so, with increased voltage that would take it to 945mhz. It still uses much less power than a 570.

So this myth about most 560s reaching 1ghz is false. Also shows just how specially binned the gigabyte card is.

 

[MentalIlness]

That was just plain useless.

If you are truly worried about a small difference in wattage. You should be using a laptop, otherwise you are just a hypocrite.

From the majority of reviews, this card is just plain better than the 6950 and with a decent overclock is a better deal than a 6970.

Would it be useless because it is in favor of the AMD 6950 ? And if someone is a hypocrite for worrying about "small" differences in wattage, then there is around ....Oh I would say.....12 hypocrites in this thread ?

<----You sir, get a triple one.

 

[SolMiester]

Certainly alot of passion in here over these 2 cards (560v6950), i certainly think its funny AMD had to drop the price of the 6870 and re-align the 6950 as the 560 competitor.
There doesnt appear to be much between these cards at all really on most of the games until you come to DX11 cards where compute of tess clearly shows the 560 well ahead.

While AMD's 3 monitor support in cool, a single 6950 is IMHO not enough to support eyefinity at decent frame rate.
The 560 has the extras of 3D, CUDA and PhyX and while many may waffle over their value, I would buy the 560 over the 6950 due to the usable extras, brand customisations and an eye on future game titles, of which the 560 is better prepared.

 

[badb0y]

That was just plain useless.

If you are truly worried about a small difference in wattage. You should be using a laptop, otherwise you are just a hypocrite.

From the majority of reviews, this card is just plain better than the 6950 and with a decent overclock is a better deal than a 6970.

Except 6970s can OC too and 6950s can Oc too and since we are on the subject yes GTX 570s OC too. Also GTX 580 OC too .

Certainly alot of passion in here over these 2 cards (560v6950), i certainly think its funny AMD had to drop the price of the 6870 and re-align the 6950 as the 560 competitor.
There doesnt appear to be much between these cards at all really on most of the games until you come to DX11 cards where compute of tess clearly shows the 560 well ahead.

While AMD's 3 monitor support in cool, a single 6950 is IMHO not enough to support eyefinity at decent frame rate.
The 560 has the extras of 3D, CUDA and PhyX and while many may waffle over their value, I would buy the 560 over the 6950 due to the usable extras, brand customisations and an eye on future game titles, of which the 560 is better prepared.

Run GTX 560 in 3D and then come back to me. HD 6950 can handle 3 monitors better than a GTX 560 will do 3D. CUDA doesn't benefit everyone and PhysX...really ?
Did you find it funny when the GTX 470 had a price drop on the day the HD 6870 was released? You know it's not something AMD does specifically right?

 

[MentalIlness]

Except 6970s can OC too and 6950s can Oc too and since we are on the subject yes GTX 570s OC too. Also GTX 580 OC too .

Run GTX 560 in 3D and then come back to me.

Indeed. I have X1800XL / 7600GT CO / BFG 7900 GTX / 9800 GTX as well as a few other cards here. And they "all" overclock as well.

 

[SolMiester]

Except 6970s can OC too and 6950s can Oc too and since we are on the subject yes GTX 570s OC too. Also GTX 580 OC too .

Run GTX 560 in 3D and then come back to me. HD 6950 can handle 3 monitors better than a GTX 560 will do 3D. CUDA doesn't benefit everyone and PhysX...really ?

LOL, as I said, many will waffle on the value of function that AMD do not have, correct me if I am wrong, but you only need a 120mhx LCD for 3D, not 3 screens....

 

[badb0y]

LOL, as I said, many will waffle on the value of function that AMD do not have, correct me if I am wrong, but you only need a 120mhx LCD for 3D, not 3 screens....

What are you talking about? Did you not comprehend what I said? Run a game with 3D on a single GTX 560 then come back and talk to me about not being "enough to run the feature." Also I didn't mention 3D surround anywhere. I just said 3D reading comprehension fail.

I believe AMD does have 3D. Just because they don't sell you the glasses doesn't mean the card can't do 3D.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Certainly alot of passion in here over these 2 cards (560v6950), i certainly think its funny AMD had to drop the price of the 6870 and re-align the 6950 as the 560 competitor.

I dont see why it is funny - it just shows a competitive product. It is like when NVIDIA dropped the GTX460/470 price vs the 6850/70.

And that is what the GTX560 is - a solid competitive product. And so are the 6870 and 6950.

Of course when you compare these new chips, GF110/114 and even the GF104 to the initial GF100, there were huge improvements. In that regard, Barts is less impressive when compared to Cypress and Cayman is less impressive when compared to Cypress and especially Barts, than the GF114/110/104 are compared to GF100.

 

[SolMiester]

Did you find it funny when the GTX 470 had a price drop on the day the HD 6870 was released? You know it's not something AMD does specifically right?

You keep ninja editing.......Yes the 470 did price drop, however NV didnt have to re-align the competitor card.
AMD undervalued the Ti performance, had to rush 1Gb models out the door and then drop prices of 68 & 69 models as NV squeezed them on price (thanks NV)....the 6970 is still too expensive.

 

[SolMiester]

What are you talking about? Did you not comprehend what I said? Run a game with 3D on a single GTX 560 then come back and talk to me about not being "enough to run the feature." Also I didn't mention 3D surround anywhere. I just said 3D reading comprehension fail.

LOL, I didnt mention 3D surround either, I simply said your feature required 3 LCD compared to 1, and therefore is more overhead than the larger res!

I dont have a 560, they arent here yet.....Are you saying that running 3D is a bigger overhead than 3 times the res?

 

[badb0y]

You keep ninja editing.......Yes the 470 did price drop, however NV didnt have to re-align the competitor card.
AMD undervalued the Ti performance, had to rush 1Gb models out the door and then drop prices of 68 & 69 models as NV squeezed them on price (thanks NV)....the 6970 is still too expensive.

You don't make any sense. they price dropped the GTX 470 to compete with the AMD 6870. Unless you buy an OC'ed GTX 460 1 GB the 6870 beats the GTX 460 1 Gb hence why the price drop on GTX 470 occurred.

And yes thanks Nvidia for being competitive better prices for all of us.

 

[badb0y]

LOL, I didnt mention 3D surround either, I simply said your feature required 3 LCD compared to 1, and therefore is more overhead than the larger res!

I dont have a 560, they arent here yet.....Are you saying that running 3D is a bigger overhead than 3 times the res?

I am 99% sure that 3D cuts your FPS in half since you have to render the same frame twice or something like that I will look it up and get back to you.

 

[Wreckage]

Except 6970s can OC too

At $100 more I would hope so.

Run GTX 560 in 3D and then come back to me. HD 6950 can handle 3 monitors better than a GTX 560 will do 3D. CUDA doesn't benefit everyone and PhysX...really ?

Run 3 monitors at full resolution with one card, nah don't think so. Since some of these cards struggle with just one monitor and all eyecandy turned on. Otherwsie yeah Matrox did that how long ago? :biggrin:

Did you find it funny when the GTX 470 had a price drop on the day the HD 6870 was released? You know it's not something AMD does specifically right?

NVIDIA dropping the price on it's last gen card seems status quo to me.

I am 99&#37; sure that 3D cuts your FPS in half since you have to render the same frame twice or something like that I will look it up and get back to you.

Wouldn't running 3 screens cut your performance by 1/3

 

[happy medium]

Any reviews on the 2gb gtx560?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-099-_-Product

 

[SolMiester]

Wouldn't running 3 screens cut your performance by 1/3

You would also need the more expensive 2Gb model, if you can get playable FR with the 6950!

 

[Squirtmonster]

Legit Reviews
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1533/1/


Missed one, Happy..

 

[Stoneburner]

Wouldn't running 3 screens cut your performance by 1/3

Wouldn't the resolution be determinative?

 

[badb0y]

At $100 more I would hope so.

Yea but no one makes the GTX 570 or GTX 580 sound like jesus so what's so special about a HD 6950 or a GTX 560 OCing?

Run 3 monitors at full resolution with one card, nah don't think so. Since some of these cards struggle with just one monitor and all eyecandy turned on. Otherwsie yeah Matrox did that how long ago? :biggrin:

Except there are many people gaming on a HD 6850 for triple monitor gaming. I hate putting him in the spotlight but blastingcap uses a single HD 6850 for eyefinity so I think a HD 6950 is fine.

NVIDIA dropping the price on it's last gen card seems status quo to me.

Yeap totally status quo on the day the HD 6870 comes out, must be coincidence?

Wouldn't running 3 screens cut your performance by 1/3

I wasn't arguing that a single AMD card performs stellar with triple monitors, I was arguing the fact that Mr. SolMiester says that eyefinity is not considered a feature because a single card cannot perform well yet he considers 3D Vision a feature for GTX 5xx series even though there is a performance hit when enabling 3D.

You would also need the more expensive 2Gb model, if you can get playable FR with the 6950!

Yea, you would need to pay a wopping 20$-30$ more! Oh NOES!

 

[Obsy]

Don't forget that you also need to pony up for these if you want 3D: http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_3D_VisionKit_us.html

 

[Skurge]

LOL, I didnt mention 3D surround either, I simply said your feature required 3 LCD compared to 1, and therefore is more overhead than the larger res!

I dont have a 560, they arent here yet.....Are you saying that running 3D is a bigger overhead than 3 times the res?

Well, with AMD cards, you can have both!

Still 3D is more demanding than eyefinity. Also I could 3 monitors for the price of 1 120hz monitor.

Another thing. 560s are horrific in surround. Forget about 3d surround.
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/revie...d-sli-performance-bad-company-2-surround.html
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/revie...-sli-performance-crysis-warhead-surround.html
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/revie...iew-and-sli-performance-f1-2010-surround.html

It doesnt do any better than a single 6950/6970. For a $500 setup, that is pretty poor.

 

[MentalIlness]

Don't forget that you also need to pony up for these if you want 3D: http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_3D_VisionKit_us.html

:thumbsup: :biggrin:

 

[fuseshock]

Why isn't the ASUS ENGTX560 Ti DCII TOP up for sale yet?

 

[Ihmemies]

Seeing 2GB vs 1GB 560 reviews would be interesting.