NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 1024 MB

[erocker]

Originally Posted by hardcore_gamer

Only one SLI finger.GTX560 is meant to replace GTX470 which can be tri or even quad sli'ed

GTX 560 is the GTX 460 replacement. GTX 570 is the GTX 470 replacement.

[smartidiot89]

Originally Posted by hardcore_gamer

Only one SLI finger.GTX560 is meant to replace GTX470 which can be tri or even quad sli'ed

Seems Nvidia are only gonna allow Tri and Quad-SLI on their top-end GPU's. Makes sense really, but abit sad...

[newtekie1]

At first I was like "Wowz this card is really great! It outperfomrs my GTX470, I need to get one!" Then I saw the default clock speed and was like "Meh, no wonder it is better."

I think it would be interesting to see a GTX560 and GTX460 go head to head at the same clock speed. I'm interested in how much of this "improvement" is actual improvement and how much of it is just "ZOMG lets jack up the reference clock speed and make it totally awesome-sause!"

[iLLz]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

At first I was like "Wowz this card is really great! It outperfomrs my GTX470, I need to get one!" Then I saw the default clock speed and was like "Meh, no wonder it is better."

I think it would be interesting to see a GTX560 and GTX460 go head to head at the same clock speed. I'm interested in how much of this "improvement" is actual improvement and how much of it is just "ZOMG lets jack up the reference clock speed and make it totally awesome-sause!"

Well, I am sure there will be at least some improvement since they went with a fully unlocked 460 core. (384SM vs 336SM)

[Cheeseball]

Considering that GF114 is a fully working GF104 chip, running at a high core clock is pretty impressive.

Encoding and compiling tasks should be way faster than the GTX 460 768MB.

[Changnoi]

I wonder if they'll release the GTS550 on this core like they released the GTS450 on the GF104 core. That would be a good thing only if it comes with more shaders enabled; otherwise it will be pretty lukewarm like every other card with half its shaders disabled (GTS450, 9600GSO).

This GTX560 is pretty cool, but it's just a tad too expensive to really kick the HD6950 in the balls. Especially since the HD6950 can be flashed to a 6970 so easily . If this card cost $200 it would be THE card to have. It may get there soon as board partners duke it out between them offering rebates and the occasional sale.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by Changnoi

I wonder if they'll release the GTS550 on this core like they released the GTS450 on the GF104 core. That would be a good thing only if it comes with more shaders enabled; otherwise it will be pretty lukewarm like every other card with half its shaders disabled (GTS450, 9600GSO).

This GTX560 is pretty cool, but it's just a tad too expensive to really kick the HD6950 in the balls. Especially since the HD6950 can be flashed to a 6970 so easily . If this card cost $200 it would be THE card to have. It may get there soon as board partners duke it out between them offering rebates and the occasional sale.

This and the GTX460 both use the GF114. The GTS450 use GF104, but it already has all the shaders enabled in the GTS450, if they made a GTS550 based on GF104 it would likely have the memory bus fully enabled to 192-bit.

And the 9600GSO/8800GS was hardly luke warm, it was one of the best bang for the buck cards of its time.

And the times of flashing a HD6950 to HD6870 is ending quickly. From what I've seen the stock on the shelves are the last of the cards that can unlock, new shipments aren't going to be able to unlock anymore(in fact W1z just reviewed a card that couldn't unlock).

[wolf]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

This and the GTX460 both use the GF114.

the GTX460 uses GF104 and the 560 uses GF114, essentially the same specs, but just like GF100 to 110, it has been secret sauced a bit. and we see all the sp's enabled.

Originally Posted by newtekie1

The GTS450 use GF106, but it already has all the shaders enabled in the GTS450, if they made a GTS550 based on GF106 it would likely have the memory bus fully enabled to 192-bit.

corrected and yeah, it will probably be called GF116 and still have 192 sp's but use the full 192-bit bus and 24 ROPS, likely giving it in excess of GTX260 performance given the right clocks, and better power consumption.

and on a fantastic note we see the Gigabyte SOC model falling basically par with a GTX570/480/HD6970 while pulling 195 watt, thats a feat in its own imo, great card.

[Melvis]

Nice card, performs well, temps are finally good, but still cant beat my 4870X2, unless Sli.

Wont be upgrading anytime soon.

[hardcore_gamer]

Originally Posted by erocker

GTX 560 is the GTX 460 replacement. GTX 570 is the GTX 470 replacement.

TH says that its the 470 replacement.

"Up until today, the company had one card left employing its original Fermi-based GPU: GeForce GTX 470. The 470 filled an important gap in Nvidia’s portfolio at $259 (between the $200 GTX 460 and $349 GTX 570).GF100 says its final farewell today, just under a year after its original introduction. It’s being replaced by the GeForce GTX 560 Ti."

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by wolf

the GTX460 uses GF104 and the 560 uses GF114, essentially the same specs, but just like GF100 to 110, it has been secret sauced a bit. and we see all the sp's enabled.

Yeah, your right, except I meant they both use GF104, I typod. They didn't change anything between GF104 and GF114, they just called it GF114 with GTX560 to prevent all the raging fanboys from starting that renaming bullshit. I would bet they didn't do a think to change the core between GF104 and GF114 other than maybe a stepping change to improve yeilds or something.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Yeah, your right, except I meant they both use GF104, I typod. They didn't change anything between GF104 and GF114, they just called it GF114 with GTX560 to prevent all the raging fanboys from starting that renaming bullshit. I would bet they didn't do a think to change the core between GF104 and GF114 other than maybe a stepping change to improve yeilds or something.

stepping is what I'd put it down to, close to Nvidia's own words is "transistor level enhancements to reduce electrical leakage", which from what I've seen purely enables higher clocks at lower voltages, which is all they really needed (combined with all 384 sp's) to have another midrange winner on their hands.

I'd be tempted by a Gigabyte SOC GTX560 if my 460 wasnt so damn good @ 900mhz core

[hardcore_gamer]

Originally Posted by Melvis

Nice card, performs well, temps are finally good, but still cant beat my 4870X2, unless Sli.

Wont be upgrading anytime soon.

I have the same card. I'm waiting for the 6990.That will be a worthy upgrade

[HellZaQ]

Green and black...it's good fusion

[Cruc1al]

Originally Posted by Melvis

Nice card, performs well, temps are finally good, but still cant beat my 4870X2, unless Sli.

Wont be upgrading anytime soon.

Eh? No one runs 560 at stock clocks. Pick any of the factory OC'ed cards and you already have at least 5% better averages than 4870x2, and considerably more stable FPS. Most well cooled 560 will however OC near or around GTX 570 performance which is 10-15% better than 4870x2.

Nevertheless even if there wasn't any performance advantage, the upgrade is worth it just for the vastly reduced noise, temperature and power consumption (compared to stock 4870x2 cooler).

[Melvis]

Originally Posted by Cruc1al

Eh? No one runs 560 at stock clocks. Pick any of the factory OC'ed cards and you already have at least 5% better averages than 4870x2, and considerably more stable FPS. Most well cooled 560 will however OC near or around GTX 570 performance which is 10-15% better than 4870x2.

Nevertheless even if there wasn't any performance advantage, the upgrade is worth it just for the vastly reduced noise, temperature and power consumption (compared to stock 4870x2 cooler).

You could say the same thing with the 4870X2, overclock it abit and bla bla bla

Im not going to spend $300 on a new card just to get a possible 5% increase in performance (OC) Temps arnt that bad with my 4870X2 80c max in summer, noise and power consumption yes but when you own a card like this you dont realy care. Again not worth the $300 just to cover those few things. The 4870X2 can play anything without any problems, until then im sticking with it.

[jzintar]

Originally Posted by puma99dk|

not bad clocks for a ref card maybe with uncapped voltage u can hit higher clockers but still 943/1240/1885mhz ain't that bad 0.0

but i would like to see the MSI Twin Frozr II version how it will do in oc ^^;

Just built a new system with the MSi Twin Frozr II version yesterday. It overclocks and cools extremely well.

Running at 1GHz/1.2GHz/2GHz/1.075V @ 73c max temp under burn-in stress test (idle 36c)

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/23rss/

Notice that its a 14% overclock across the board on top of the already overclocked reference values

[cdawall]

Originally Posted by hardcore_gamer

TH says that its the 470 replacement.

"Up until today, the company had one card left employing its original Fermi-based GPU: GeForce GTX 470. The 470 filled an important gap in Nvidia’s portfolio at $259 (between the $200 GTX 460 and $349 GTX 570).GF100 says its final farewell today, just under a year after its original introduction. It’s being replaced by the GeForce GTX 560 Ti."

pretty shitty replacement it cost the same and when you oc them both the 470 beats the 560

[jzintar]

Originally Posted by cdawall

pretty shitty replacement it cost the same and when you oc them both the 470 beats the 560

No idea where you are getting your information from, but 470's typiclly run 20-40 more than a 560. And looking at 3DMARK11 benchmarks as an example you have a reference 470 @ P4351 with a reference 560 @ P4311. So you get the same performance at slightly less cost and with better heat and power figures. And typical 560's overclock much further than similar 470's.

As an example my 560 runs at 1GHz and scores P5048 with 3DMARK11. That's better than a 6950 and almost up to 570 numbers (P5300). Heck I have been able to clock a good bit higher, but I like to keep my temps in the low 70's.

[cdawall]

Originally Posted by jzintar

No idea where you are getting your information from, but 470's typiclly run 20-40 more than a 560. And looking at 3DMARK11 benchmarks as an example you have a reference 470 @ P4351 with a reference 560 @ P4311. So you get the same performance at slightly less cost and with better heat and power figures. And typical 560's overclock much further than similar 470's.

As an example my 560 runs at 1GHz and scores P5048 with 3DMARK11. That's better than a 6950 and almost up to 570 numbers (P5300). Heck I have been able to clock a good bit higher, but I like to keep my temps in the low 70's.

and my 470 was $190 off of newegg. it runs a 800mhz core on the stock HSF and can still go higher at those clocks P54xx is pretty common in 3d11. cheapest 560 i could find was $30 more than my card.

[jzintar]

Originally Posted by cdawall

and my 470 was $190 off of newegg. it runs a 800mhz core on the stock HSF and can still go higher at those clocks P54xx is pretty common in 3d11. cheapest 560 i could find was $30 more than my card.

No idea what specific card you got, or what deal you came upon on Newegg, but go look at prices now and compare vendors pricing for 560 vs 470 cards and you will see 470's run more. As an example of an apples to apples comparison the Twin Frozr II 470 vs same model 560 is a 40 dollar increase in price. Same for pretty much all other vendors. As always on newegg, you can catch some good deals if you are patient keep checking. I got two free games with my card valued at 59 total for the two. Factor that in and you could say my 560 was only 189.

As to the 3DMARK11 numbers, they only become a true way to compare when the same base system is used to test each card.

Here is an excellent example for the MSi Twin Frozr II showing head to head numbers, that were dead on to what I saw on my system after purchasing:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/msi-n5...r-ii-review/20

So same performance as 470 with better cooling, power usage, and higher overclock for a bit less money = win in my book.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by jzintar

No idea what specific card you got, or what deal you came upon on Newegg, but go look at prices now and compare vendors pricing for 560 vs 470 cards and you will see 470's run more. As an example of an apples to apples comparison the Twin Frozr II 470 vs same model 560 is a 40 dollar increase in price. Same for pretty much all other vendors. As always on newegg, you can catch some good deals if you are patient keep checking. I got two free games with my card valued at 59 total for the two. Factor that in and you could say my 560 was only 189.

While it did replace the GTX470 in price, it really replaced the GTX460 in the lineup.

Originally Posted by jzintar

As to the 3DMARK11 numbers, they only become a true way to compare when the same base system is used to test each card.

Here is an excellent example for the MSi Twin Frozr II showing head to head numbers, that were dead on to what I saw on my system after purchasing:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/msi-n5...r-ii-review/20

So same performance as 470 with better cooling, power usage, and higher overclock for a bit less money = win in my book.

I've already gone over this, nVidia was extremely conservative with the clock speeds on the first Fermi cards. However, once you overclock a GTX470, an overclocked GTX560 can't beat it because the GTX470 is just a stronger card at heart. Yes, if you buy a GTX560 you get GTX470 performance with weaker cooling, less power usage, and a higher clock speed, but you also get a card that is very close to its maximum already that doesn't overclock very well at all. If you guy a GTX470 you get GTX560 performance with better cooling, slightly higher power usage, and once overclocker higher performance than you could ever get from a GTX560.

[cdawall]

Originally Posted by jzintar

No idea what specific card you got, or what deal you came upon on Newegg, but go look at prices now and compare vendors pricing for 560 vs 470 cards and you will see 470's run more. As an example of an apples to apples comparison the Twin Frozr II 470 vs same model 560 is a 40 dollar increase in price. Same for pretty much all other vendors. As always on newegg, you can catch some good deals if you are patient keep checking. I got two free games with my card valued at 59 total for the two. Factor that in and you could say my 560 was only 189.

As to the 3DMARK11 numbers, they only become a true way to compare when the same base system is used to test each card.

Here is an excellent example for the MSi Twin Frozr II showing head to head numbers, that were dead on to what I saw on my system after purchasing:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/msi-n5...r-ii-review/20

So same performance as 470 with better cooling, power usage, and higher overclock for a bit less money = win in my book.

Recertified: PNY RVCGGTX470XXB GeForce GTX 470 (Fe...
Recertified: EVGA 012-P3-1470-RX GeForce GTX 470 (...

Originally Posted by newtekie1

While it did replace the GTX470 in price, it really replaced the GTX460 in the lineup.



I've already gone over this, nVidia was extremely conservative with the clock speeds on the first Fermi cards. However, once you overclock a GTX470, an overclocked GTX560 can't beat it because the GTX470 is just a stronger card at heart. Yes, if you buy a GTX560 you get GTX470 performance with weaker cooling, less power usage, and a higher clock speed, but you also get a card that is very close to its maximum already that doesn't overclock very well at all. If you guy a GTX470 you get GTX560 performance with better cooling, slightly higher power usage, and once overclocker higher performance than you could ever get from a GTX560.

i was wondering if you would point out that the 560 did not have as good of a cooler...

[jzintar]

i was wondering if you would point out that the 560 did not have as good of a cooler...[/QUOTE]

The 560, well at least the MSi one, has a phenomenal cooler. And they overclock extremely well, again at least the MSi one does with its non-reference cooler. Overclocked to 1GHz and running at on average 68c when gaming is excellent. Even when I ran extended Furmark stress tests it only maxed at 73c.

[cdawall]

Originally Posted by jzintar

The 560, well at least the MSi one, has a phenomenal cooler. And they overclock extremely well, again at least the MSi one does with its non-reference cooler. Overclocked to 1GHz and running at on average 68c when gaming is excellent. Even when I ran extended Furmark stress tests it only maxed at 73c.

same cooler on a GTX470

MSI N470GTX Twin Frozr II GeForce GTX 470 (Fermi) ...