Curse

Wrath Of Dragons · Oct 03, 2008, 03:26 PM // 15:26

Recently, NVidia came out with a new version of their GTX260 Graphics card, and this update managed to put the card right alongside ATI's 4870 1gb.

Both cost about $300, and wind up being an excellent choice for someone looking for a card that will play any game out right now, with frames to spare.

An overview of the review:
GTX 260 (new version, called GTX260 Core 216)
Slightly faster on average, lower power consumption, runs cooler.
Seems to choke up a little once you go past 4x AA, Only Directx10.0, no DirectX 10.1 (At the time, DX 10.1 seems to be an irrelevant upgrade, but maybe you have something that uses it)
Link

ATI
Better performance on AA over 4x then the 260. DirectX 10.1
Runs really hot, higher power consumption, both idle and under load.
Link

Anyways, I saw this article, and thought some of you in the market for a new card might wanna take a look.

And, yes, before you ask, these can run GW on max graphics.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2331445,00.asp

Evil Genius · Oct 04, 2008, 12:27 AM // 00:27

Good summary of both cards. I would like to point out the original GTX260 and 4870 512MB are probably better deals: after rebates the GTX260 is ~$220 and the 4870 ~$240. Obviously this depends on the games and resolutions you play.

Quote:

(new version, called GTX260 Core 216)

EVGA's new version is called the Core 216, but other nVidia partners have named their cards differently: there is no official name for the GTX260 with 216 shaders. Zotac's is the "2" (squared), BFG has the "Maxcore" and Gigabyte seems to have just put a "B" into their technical sounding name.

Quote:

Slightly faster on average

I don't think so: the review you linked to suggests so, but Andandtech's review says otherwise.

Elder III · Oct 04, 2008, 03:00 AM // 03:00

AMD & ATI
NVIDIA & INTEL

when unable to decide between the two, stick with that old adage... at the very least it solves the problem of deciding for you.

I Dont Do Coke · Oct 04, 2008, 05:20 AM // 05:20

I went ATI & Intel though... I can Crossfire on an Intel chipset. =]

Lord Sojar · Oct 04, 2008, 06:43 AM // 06:43

Yes, you can do Crossfire on an Intel chipset. However, AMD synergizes best with ATi. Their chipset logic is some of the best in the industry. Don't discount AMD quite yet... especially with Shanghai right around the corner.

By the way Wrath. Good post, but I must point out a few things:

The GTX260 revB (Gigabyte is actually the closest to the official name) can outperform the 4870 512MB in most tests on a correctly configured platform. However, the 4870 1GB edition can outperform the GTX260 revB in about 65% of lab tests. I will say this though... when running the RevB 260 through our failure rate lab test, it scored one of the highest of any chip ever made. TSMCs primary logic is amazing, and our doping procedure is really perfected on it.

Quaker · Oct 04, 2008, 09:45 PM // 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief

I will say this though... when running the RevB 260 through our failure rate lab test, it scored one of the highest of any chip ever made.

You mean it has the highest failure rate?

For me, that article and the various tests, just verify what I often tell people - the differences between equivalent cards is usually quite small and changes from test to test and review to review. It's not usually worth the mental stress to get overly concerned about each little detail.

Elder III · Oct 05, 2008, 02:41 AM // 02:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaker

You mean it has the highest failure rate?

For me, that article and the various tests, just verify what I often tell people - the differences between equivalent cards is usually quite small and changes from test to test and review to review. It's not usually worth the mental stress to get overly concerned about each little detail.

Amen to that! When it gets down to the wire like that, just pick one and be done with it, go with the one that lightens your pocket book the least, or the one that has a prettier packaging, whatever, just pick one - you will be happy as a pig in the mud with the performance from either.

Quaker · Oct 06, 2008, 03:33 PM // 15:33

As a side note, I just tried the Crysis demo yesterday. Very impressive! Great graphics - it feels like you are actually creeping through the bushes.
With my Q6600 quad core and an HD4870, at 1680x1050, it was running at an average of 30-35fps, dipping to around 20fps (and a tag laggy) in some more intense areas. I actually expected less fps, so I was happy.

Btw, everything was set to "high" except AA (which is the setting the game set as recommended.)