NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti: second-generation Fermi for the $250 mainstream
172 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Jaehead;27681865]overclock that q6600 and you'll be set
even without overclock you'll be fine I think[/QUOTE]
Not true. Even the high end LGA 775 cpus will bottleneck a card from the GTX 500 or HD 6000 series. The architecture simply isn't near as good as new cpus like Nehalem and sandy bridge. Overclocking won't fix it either. That's why a 2GHZ sandy bridge quad is better then a 4GHZ P4. Although it won't be a serious bottleneck it would be noticeable and you could lose 20+ fps compared to a similar build using a newer cpu.
TBH I'd grab the 6950 and flash it to a 6970(Note I despise ATi so this is a pretty serious statement)
are you really telling me that an 2500K with a GTX 560 will get 20 more frames than a q6600 @ 3.4 with a GTX 560?
No game today is [i]that[/i] CPU dependent.
[QUOTE=CaptainQuirk;27657181]Fuck shit shitting fuck nuts. I just paid for a 6850 a few days ago. If I would have known I could have gone for a nicer card I would have waited.[/QUOTE]
Benchmarks show the GTX 560 performs on par but usually around 6% worse then the 6950 at resolutions meeting or exceeding the Full HD standard. Also if you really want the 560 lots of retailers will refund you if it has only been a few days.
[url]http://www.techspot.com/review/359-nvidia-geforce-gtx-560ti/[/url]
[editline]27th January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jaehead;27682534]are you really telling me that an 2500K with a GTX 560 will get 20 more frames than a q6600 @ 3.4 with a GTX 560?
I don't think any game today is [i]that[/i] CPU dependent.[/QUOTE]
Anything using unreal 3 is. Also take a look at Bad company 2 cpu scaling.
[IMG]http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/255/bench/CPU_01.png[/IMG]
And for the record that 2.4GHZ i7 will be faster then his 3.4GHZ Q6600. Games nowadays have actually become more cpu dependent because consoles tend to have higher level cpus then gpus.
Bad Company 2 doesn't use more than 4 threads
and of course if it's 4 threads clocked that low it's going to lose a lot of frames
this could be pretty cool. I might get it as one of my upgrades. use my 8800GTS as a physx card. of course I'll need a beefier power supply for that.
I'll do power supply and processor at the same time probably, then video card eventually. but by then the 6xx series will be out
[QUOTE=Jaehead;27682665]Bad Company 2 doesn't use more than 4 threads
and of course if it's 4 threads clocked that low it's going to lose a lot of frames[/QUOTE]
As I explained. There's a reason a quad core P4 gets beaten by a core 2 quad. It's all architechture. Look at how the 2500K can surpass the i7-970 even with the 970 having hyperthreading enabled for programs like photoshop or sony vegas. So if the 2.4GHZ i7 will outperform a 3.4GHZ C2Q in BC2 then we must infer that the C2Q could have a bottleneck lowering the framerate by up to 40 fps.
EDIT: Yawn I've got exams so I'm going to bed. No more arguing tonight :P
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;27682692]this could be pretty cool. I might get it as one of my upgrades. use my 8800GTS as a physx card. of course I'll need a beefier power supply for that.
I'll do power supply and processor at the same time probably, then video card eventually. but by then the 6xx series will be out[/QUOTE]
8800GTS may be a bit too much as a PhysX Processor.
I found the 8600GTS to be the sweet spot. It's size, heat and power consumption plus the processing power is perfect to serve the purpose
I'm not talking about Pentium 4?
Of course Pentium 4s will get raped by any Core2 or i series CPU
and no, a 2500K [i]cannot[/i] surpass i7s in terms of rendering power
[QUOTE=garrynohome;27682702]As I explained. There's a reason a quad core P4 gets beaten by a core 2 quad. It's all architechture. Look at how the 2500K can surpass the i7-970 even with the 970 having hyperthreading enabled for programs like photoshop or sony vegas. So if the 2.4GHZ i7 will outperform a 3.4GHZ C2Q in BC2 then we must infer that the [b]C2Q could have a bottleneck lowering the framerate by up to 40 fps.[/b][/QUOTE]
wait what?
there's no way that you would lose that many frames what are you on
I used to use a GTS250 as a PhysX processor, and it made little differences comparing to the 8600 GTS, except for more power usage.
[editline]26th January 2011[/editline]
argh automerge ninja
[QUOTE=Jaehead;27682753]I'm not talking about Pentium 4?
Of course Pentium 4s will get raped by any Core2 or i series CPU
and no, a 2500K [i]cannot[/i] surpass i7s in terms of rendering power
wait what?
there's no way that you would lose that many frames what are you on[/QUOTE]
Ok are you even reading? First of all the 2500K can surpass the 970 in terms of rendering power in certain cases.
[url]http://www.techspot.com/review/353-intel-sandy-bridge-corei5-2500k-corei7-2600k/[/url]
Now I'm going to capitalize this because you aren't reading it correctly. IF A 2.4GHZ I7 > A 3.4GHZ C2Q AND A 2.4GHZ I7 LOSES 40FPS COMPARED TO A 4GHZ ONE THEN WE CAN INFER THAT A C2Q CAN LOSE UP TO 40FPS. This is because if the i7 lost 40fps at a low clock rate but at that clock rate it is still faster then the C2Q.
I hate when I see "Oh that's a shitty card" type deals, because here I am playing Source Engine games on mid and getting 40 FPS with my shitty HD4200 and AMD Phenom.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;27682747]8800GTS may be a bit too much as a PhysX Processor.
I found the 8600GTS to be the sweet spot. It's size, heat and power consumption plus the processing power is perfect to serve the purpose[/QUOTE]
but I don't have an 8600GTS
[QUOTE=Fycix;27682878]I hate when I see "Oh that's a shitty card" type deals, because here I am playing Source Engine games on mid and getting 40 FPS with my shitty HD4200 and AMD Phenom.[/QUOTE]
Honestly is a card like the 560 required to run basic source engine games?
Also does 40fps look smooth to you? When my games dip below 60fps(I do NOT RUN an fps monitor, I can see it) I go insane. But most people tell me I'm just a strange case.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;27682897]but I don't have an 8600GTS[/QUOTE]
I was recommending you to sell the 8800 GTS if you can find a cheap 8600 GTS or something like that
For instance:
[url]http://cgi.ebay.com/BFG-Geforce-8600-Gt-OC-ZEROtherm-GX815-Cooler-/120674370853?pt=PCC_Video_TV_Cards&hash=item1c18c0c525[/url]
Only $19.99 + <$10 shipping if you live in the States
I'm fine as long as I'm above 20 fps.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;27682944]I was recommending you to sell the 8800 GTS if you can find a cheap 8600 GTS or something like that
For instance:
[url]http://cgi.ebay.com/BFG-Geforce-8600-Gt-OC-ZEROtherm-GX815-Cooler-/120674370853?pt=PCC_Video_TV_Cards&hash=item1c18c0c525[/url]
Only $19.99 + <$10 shipping if you live in the States[/QUOTE]
Damn. If you need a cheap physX card that's like pocket change for the performance boost. If only games would start support physX more.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;27682944]I was recommending you to sell the 8800 GTS if you can find a cheap 8600 GTS or something like that
For instance:
[url]http://cgi.ebay.com/BFG-Geforce-8600-Gt-OC-ZEROtherm-GX815-Cooler-/120674370853?pt=PCC_Video_TV_Cards&hash=item1c18c0c525[/url]
Only $19.99 + <$10 shipping if you live in the States[/QUOTE]
now that's not a bad idea. I could make some pretty good cash selling this card and my power supply when it comes to it
[QUOTE=garrynohome;27682974]Damn. If you need a cheap physX card that's like pocket change for the performance boost. If only games would start support physX more.[/QUOTE]
Indeed, even if you are using an nVidia card as the primary GPU, having an additional PhysX processor will significantly boost your framerate in games that supports PhysX.
[editline]26th January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;27683005]now that's not a bad idea. I could make some pretty good cash selling this card and my power supply when it comes to it[/QUOTE]
Well you better buy it fast, listing's ending on less than 20 hours and there is only one left
I could probably get away without upgrading the power supply if I completely remove this video card. it's one of the 320 MB cards that eat up a ton of power.
In my experience, the 8600 GTS can even run without the 6 pin molex connector plugged in because it's very power efficient.
I get 40 FPS less than my friend during hordes in L4D.
I have a Q9400 @ 3.6 GHz with a GTX 570, he has an i7 920 @ 4 GHz and a GTX 470. He's even running a larger resolution (2048x1152) than me but the same (max, 16xQ CSAA) settings, including transparency anti aliasing set to 4x SSAA.
I'm only complaining because I run at 120 Hz so anything below 120 is quite noticeable. That 40 FPS is the difference between 100 FPS and 60 FPS (or 120 and 80), worst case scenario, where 60 looks plain terrible compared to 100 and up.
[highlight]MSI Has released the 560 Twin Frozr II (Think the 460 hawk)[/highlight]
[url=http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti-review-msi-n560gtx-ti-twin-frozr-ii-oc/10960.html]Review HERE.[/url]
[editline]27th January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Odellus;27683169]I get 40 FPS less than my friend during hordes in L4D.
I have a Q9400 @ 3.6 GHz with a GTX 570, he has an i7 920 @ 4 GHz and a GTX 470. He's even running a larger resolution (2048x1152) than me but the same (max, 16xQ CSAA) settings, including transparency anti aliasing set to 4x SSAA.
I'm only complaining because I run at 120 Hz so anything below 120 is quite noticeable. That 40 FPS is the difference between 100 FPS and 60 FPS (or 120 and 80), worst case scenario, where 60 looks plain terrible compared to 100 and up.[/QUOTE]
Sandy bridge is out, get that.
the twin frozr 560 has been out since launch
[editline]27th January 2011[/editline]
and there was more to the 460 hawk than the cooler
[QUOTE=PunchedInFac;27685681][highlight]MSI Has released the 560 Twin Frozr II (Think the 460 hawk)[/highlight]
[url=http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti-review-msi-n560gtx-ti-twin-frozr-ii-oc/10960.html]Review HERE.[/url]
[editline]27th January 2011[/editline]
Sandy bridge is out, get that.[/QUOTE]
Can't afford.
I would be annoyed that I just bought a GTX 460 for a PC that I can't even build yet because I'm waiting for parts, but it was only $160 and the 560 is retailing for $300 here.
Looks like a nice card regardless, but not quite the sweet spot of performance:price at least in Aus.
Totally getting this. Just hope that my Q9550 @3.4 GHz will be able to carry it.
Looks like good midrange type of card.
[QUOTE=Blackbird88;27687205]Looks like good midrange type of card.[/QUOTE]
you have pretty high standards if you think this is midrange, that's more like the 450/5770
I'll most likely be getting one of these and a PSU. (Currently running a 9400GT) :suicide:
[QUOTE=PunchedInFac;27685681][highlight]MSI Has released the 560 Twin Frozr II (Think the 460 hawk)[/highlight]
[url=http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti-review-msi-n560gtx-ti-twin-frozr-ii-oc/10960.html]Review HERE.[/url]
[editline]27th January 2011[/editline]
Sandy bridge is out, get that.[/QUOTE]
I still wish they would get their heads out of their asses and release a Cyclone version. Twin Frozr II is nice and all, but I just love the quietness and coolness of the Cyclone.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.