New 216SP GTX260 benched

it looks ok but the 4870 still kicks its ass in some of them. it also doesn't have that much better. It sure wouldn't be worth getting it if you already have a 192sp GTX260
I would think it would give a ppd boost in F@H

From what I can see from that, about an average of 4% performance across the board......pretty weak IMO, add to that, with these few extra SP's tis likely that the average overclock will be slightly lower than the current offering so TBH......probably no improvement at all.......I am actually releived by that being a 260 owner!

minor improvement

p_o_s_pc said:

it looks ok but the 4870 still kicks its ass in some of them. it also doesn't have that much better. It sure wouldn't be worth getting it if you already have a 192sp GTX260

Click to expand...

It does, but in many of them, the 260 just about manages to keep up, I bought my 260 rather than the 4870 for only 2 reasons.....firstly, I wanted the extra GDDR although I acknowledge that the 4870 does perfectly well at high res on the 512MB and secondly because at the time (3 weeks ago) in the UK, I couldnt get a single 4870 as cheap as I paid for my 260........I actually think, strange as it may sound, the the 4850, 4870, 260 and 280 (as well as the x2 of course) are all excellent cards and all deserve serious consideration depending on budget.

Well depending on how it OC's, I may step-up to it, if it's released soon enough and the price difference is slim-to-nil.

Kursah said:

Well depending on how it OC's, I may step-up to it, if it's released soon enough and the price difference is slim-to-nil.

Click to expand...

Same idea I'm having. Tho get the feeling this will be released just after my 90 day step-up is over.

Not much difference, I think nvidia is trying to beat the 4870.

Fastmix said:

Not much difference, I think nvidia is trying to beat the 4870.

Click to expand...

Can ya blame them? If they want to create more competition, I'm sure ATI will return fire...which is cool to an extent...but too many cards of the same generation gets old quickly lol.

The EVGA GTX 260 "FTW" Edition @666 Mhz will keep me happy. Should be here Friday. I didn't want to wait for a revised version, and with my CPU and resolution it would be an unnoticeable difference anyway.

Most of those results between the old and new 260 are within margin of error when AA/AF is used. And, the 4870 does better during the AA/AF tests while the new 260 does better without AA. LOL at them using percentages. I guess those %s would fool your average noob:
4.42% = 1 FPS
Anything less then 4.42% is less then 1 FPS.

Jeffredo said:

The EVGA GTX 260 "FTW" Edition @666 Mhz will keep me happy. Should be here Friday. I didn't want to wait for a revised version, and with my CPU and resolution it would be an unnoticeable difference anyway.

Click to expand...

Please dont tell me you spent more on a FTW edition

Both me and Kursah have saved ourselves money buy buying the vanilla stock clocked EVGA cards and running them at FTW speeds ourselves.

what a dissapointment !

EastCoasthandle said:

Most of those results between the old and new 260 are within margin of error when AA/AF is used. And, the 4870 does better during the AA/AF tests while the new 260 does better without AA. LOL at them using percentages. I guess those %s would fool your average noob:
4.42% = 1 FPS
Anything less then 4.42% is less then 1 FPS.

Click to expand...

In fact is all the contrary. The noob is the one that would say "Pff, 2 fps difference" without caring about the baseline, when in fact that sometimes means it is much faster i.e 15-17 or almost negligible when above 60 fps.
If you look closely the percentage values are consistent and similar enough to indicate that it's not because they are within the margin of error, the difference DOES exist and is consistent. That's something that is verifiable on all the benchmarks around the net. Today 1 fps is NOT within the margin of error. The margin is pretty close to a pair of decimals nowadays.

Also AA is set to 8x and we all know what happens with 8xAA on Nvidia cards. At 4xAA the GTX260 216 is probably quite faster.

DarkMatter said:

In fact is all the contrary. The noob is the one that would say "Pff, 2 fps difference" without caring about the baseline, when in fact that sometimes means it is much faster i.e 15-17 or almost negligible when above 60 fps.
If you look closely the percentage values are consistent and similar enough to indicate that it's not because they are within the margin of error, the difference DOES exist and is consistent. That's something that is verifiable on all the benchmarks around the net. Today 1 fps is NOT within the margin of error. The margin is pretty close to a pair of decimals nowadays.

Also AA is set to 8x and we all know what happens with 8xAA on Nvidia cards. At 4xAA the GTX260 216 is probably quite faster.

Click to expand...

LOL, using a percent to demonstrate 1 FPS increase is absurd. Showing the actual difference in FPS between cards would have been more clear. Simple to those who are not easily offended by the results of the new 260 so far

As far as 8xAA goes, it's what they used. I can only assume they did it to see if the new 260 offered better performance when more AA was used. So far, none of the results show 2 FPS or better between the old and new 260. To me, those results are simply within the margin of error and doesn't demonstrate any real advantage for current 260 owners.

alexp999 said:

Please dont tell me you spent more on a FTW edition

Both me and Kursah have saved ourselves money buy buying the vanilla stock clocked EVGA cards and running them at FTW speeds ourselves.

Click to expand...

I certainly did. $50 to be exact. I said before, I went through all that rigamarole with my X850 Pro flashing it to a X850 XT. It worked, but I'd rather not do it again. I tried OC'ing my 8800 GTX and it could barely do anything above stock - just not a good chip I suppose and there's no guarantee you'll get a good one. I would rather have EVGA cull the best chips, take care of the BIOS and OC and then warranty it for me. $289.99 after the $40 rebate is fine by me - happy with the deal and can't wait to get it.

I know, saying you'd rather not tinker and OC in these forums is sacrilege.

This looks like one of those things:
"I have the 216SP gtx 260. They only made a few of these way back in 2008."

alexp999 said:

Please dont tell me you spent more on a FTW edition

Both me and Kursah have saved ourselves money buy buying the vanilla stock clocked EVGA cards and running them at FTW speeds ourselves.

Click to expand...

Same here!

Jeffredo said:

I certainly did. $50 to be exact. I said before, I went through all that rigamarole with my X850 Pro flashing it to a X850 XT. It worked, but I'd rather not do it again. I tried OC'ing my 8800 GTX and it could barely do anything above stock - just not a good chip I suppose and there's no guarantee you'll get a good one. I would rather have EVGA cull the best chips, take care of the BIOS and OC and then warranty it for me. $289.99 after the $40 rebate is fine by me - happy with the deal and can't wait to get it.

I know, saying you'd rather not tinker and OC in these forums is sacrilege.

Click to expand...

I think his point is....these days, more often than not....they are not the best chips and some of the best overclockers (without modding) seem to be on Vanilla cards. If you dont overclock however, that $50 is probablly money well spent, if you do overclock and you can bench above 770 on the core with high shader speed, it probably is still money well spent.

of course, everything in the hardware game is pot luck to a certain extent.

oli_ramsay said:

http://www.hkepc.com/?id=1684&page=2&fs=idn#view

Click to expand...

What happened to the review? I get transfered to the first page of the website when I click that link now.

Lol. About as impressive as the move from 2900xt to 3870. Not much of a performance increase.

Not an improvement for power lol. =P

alexp999 said:

Please dont tell me you spent more on a FTW edition

Both me and Kursah have saved ourselves money buy buying the vanilla stock clocked EVGA cards and running them at FTW speeds ourselves.

Click to expand...

LoL! I was gonna say something, glad you got it covered...with the GTX series, seems there's no point to get the pre-oc'ed versions at least with the 260's as I've experienced. Just looking into the bioses of pre-oc'd cards shows only clock increases, no voltage increases, etc. I wonder if the 216SP GTX260 will need 1.18v or if it will be stable and ocable on 1.12v...

Time will tell...hopefully these come out sooner than later...I'd probably step-up to it just for the extra power...and with the "big bang II" crap coming out soon there may be more to be had out of the GTX200 series...who knows...

EastCoasthandle said:

LOL, using a percent to demonstrate 1 FPS increase is absurd. Showing the actual difference in FPS between cards would have been more clear. Simple to those who are not easily offended by the results of the new 260 so far

As far as 8xAA goes, it's what they used. I can only assume they did it to see if the new 260 offered better performance when more AA was used. So far, none of the results show 2 FPS or better between the old and new 260. To me, those results are simply within the margin of error and doesn't demonstrate any real advantage for current 260 owners.

Click to expand...

Actual fps were shown. Difference in fps is misleading. As I said 1-2 fps when the baseline is 15 is "a lot", around 7-13%. You will find a hard time OKing most HD48xx cards so much, foe example.
On the other hand 1-2 fps when you are at 100fps is close to nothing. In the review with more than 30 different result pairs, fps's were low, thus the percentages were around 4-6%, always in favor of the new card (not in one of the pairs the old GTX260 won) AND they were consistent across the whole table.

- if there's one fps of difference AND sometimes it's in favor of one of the cards and other times in favor of the other = margin of error

- on the other hand if the difference is always in favor of one of the cards and the percentual difference across all the results is consistent = actual performance difference.

Nowadays graphics cards performance is very consistent across all ranges of fps (from very low up to very high), until a severe bottleneck is found. What I mean is that a 5% difference when on low fps, effectively means the card will have that same difference on high fps situations. You can see that on any review. With a little margin of error, and some few exceptions, the "rule" works almost always.

EDIT: BTW, no one is offended, and anyone with 2 neurons wasn't expecting much more of the new card. See, number of SP/TMU being the only difference, only a difference of 12% was expected in the best case scenario, AKA ROP demanding free scenarios. Link doesn't work now, but when AA was dissabled there were up to 8-9% differences. With 8xAA and high res, the difference was almost always above 3%. You can't ask for more.

Kursah said:

LoL! I was gonna say something, glad you got it covered...with the GTX series, seems there's no point to get the pre-oc'ed versions at least with the 260's as I've experienced. Just looking into the bioses of pre-oc'd cards shows only clock increases, no voltage increases, etc. I wonder if the 216SP GTX260 will need 1.18v or if it will be stable and ocable on 1.12v...

Click to expand...

There is a point. I don't want to bloody well do it myself this time. I made that clear in the thread I started regarding that card (that you replied to). No one needs to remind me of the perceived err of my ways because there is none. I'm happy with my purchase and its a good deal for me. That's all that counts. I'll leave you tinkering/fiddling.

Jeffredo said:

There is a point. I don't want to bloody well do it myself this time. I made that clear in the thread I started regarding that card (that you replied to). No one needs to remind me of the perceived err of my ways because there is none. I'm happy with my purchase and its a good deal for me. That's all that counts. I'll leave you tinkering/fiddling.

Click to expand...

Well if that's the case, I don't blame ya...I was on a tighter budget that didn't inlcude the pre-oc'd versions of these cards...my last one a Palit 9600GT was pre-oc'd and did cost a little more, but it OC'd pretty well and had a nice aftermarket cooler on it.

All that matters is that you're happy with your build, it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks!