OC3D Review Nvidia GTX560 Ti

[Rastalovich]

Even if they do the gtx 560 ti beats it also and you can get a msi freezer version of the card or a gigabyte oc to 900mhz already for £200 so they have to drop the 6950 to what £180 to make it competitive which in turn they have to drop the 6870 to even lower which I don't see happening.

nVidia products have historically (although it's taken as competing for price with competitors) dropped $30-$40 off the price of a new product after a month or so of being on the shelf. We shouldn't see this card as being any different.

 

[Qubo420]

Damn, sexy card.

 

[tinytomlogan]

nVidia products have historically (although it's taken as competing for price with competitors) dropped $30-$40 off the price of a new product after a month or so of being on the shelf. We shouldn't see this card as being any different.

Hey Rasta how nice is it for you to see an OC3D review where its pretty much all good things we are saying about Nvidia

 

[Deceit]

Good video review on these has made me decide I really need one

. Have to get up some cash somehow and buy one when are in stock.

 

[WarFox101]

Tom I'm sure you will be doing a sli 560 video in the future. Right? I so want to see how this card scales.

 

[AMD_PBz]

Good video review on these has made me decide I really need one

. Have to get up some cash somehow and buy one when are in stock.

Depending on where you are they should be in stock in some variant, also if you "really" need one you "really" need to be folding with it

 

[TMaksimov]

Those who just bought a 570 must be feeling pretty ill right now

 

[AMD_PBz]

Those who just bought a 570 must be feeling pretty ill right now

I'm glad I waited

 

[TMaksimov]

I'm not glad I got those noisy DirectCUs.. you should hear them while folding.. heck you probably do from over the pond, dude. If you were wondering what it was.. it's no Jumbo, instead it's my 460s folding. But, hey, a couple of months down the line a better card will come out, then a better one, then a better one. That's just how things go

Oh and by the way! Tom, if you really want somebody with a Sabertooth to test these cards I could give them a go

 

[alicarve]

I'm not glad I got those noisy DirectCUs.. you should hear them while folding.. heck you probably do from over the pond, dude. If you were wondering what it was.. it's no Jumbo, instead it's my 460s folding. But, hey, a couple of months down the line a better card will come out, then a better one, then a better one. That's just how things go

my directcus are not loud lol put it on set fan speed when folding its what i do, mine only really get loud above 70% fan

 

[TMaksimov]

my directcus are not loud lol put it on set fan speed when folding its what i do, mine only really get loud above 70% fan

You have the 1gig version, no? I've got the 768s as they were the cheapest 460s around. I didn't know why at that point but then I very quickly understood

 

[Bungral]

Not in the slightest...

As mentioned on the last page.. I only paid £70 quid more for my GTX 570 which for the extra 7 - 10 FPS in some of the harsher games can make a big difference.

That said, if I had to buy one now at over £300, then it might be a different story.

Yes the 560 can overclock near to the 570, but then the 570 overclocks up to 900 core with a lil voltage tweak and pulls ahead again.

Those who just bought a 570 must be feeling pretty ill right now

 

[zak4994]

Hey Rasta how nice is it for you to see an OC3D review where its pretty much all good things we are saying about Nvidia

You're never going to stop tormenting him are you? lol

 

[AMD_PBz]

From a Folding Standpoint I have to concur with the fan it is bloody loud next to the whisper silent cylcone albeit on the older 925 wu's the 768 TOP would clock like crazy and beg for more! the 560 Twin Frozr Should be fun to see when It Arrives Friday in the Mail

 

[oneseraph]

A lot of people are convincing me that the 6950 1GB is king of this range. I forgot that was coming out today also (hadn't heard much about it).

http://www.anandtech...he-250-market/1

It's like $10 more than the 560 and overclocks seem to be even more beneficial to it than the 560.

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/500728 P5268 560 -but that's at 1050MHz. I don't feel like many 560s are going to be going much past that.

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/404347 P5690 6950 2GB (probably unlocked and overclocked, but still.)

there's not much 560 data to go on right now, and not much 6950 1GB data to go on, but from the 3dmark results search, 6950 results go way beyond anything the 560 results are showing.

So yeah, :[

Somewhat the opposite of what the review concluded with, but that's how it's looking. I know people will still buy Nvidia for things like PhysX though. I would/it's influenced me.

Yeah, I have to admit I am a little confused as well. The results Here show the GTX 560 ti preforming almost as well as a Radeon 6970. That said, the results I see everywhere else I have looked show the Radeon 6950 2 GB crushing the GTX 560 ti in almost every discipline and almost every game. Don't get me wrong, I am in no way questioning the veracity of the testing done here on overclock3D. I am only pointing out that the result I have seen here are not consistent with the results I have seen at more than a half a dozen other sites.

GTX 560 ti 3DMark 11 performance Preset overall score

GPU 3851

3DMarks 4180

metro 2033 High quality settings 4xAA 2560x1600 20 fps

Aliens Vs. Predator (DX11) 4xAA 1920x1080 32.6 fps

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (DX11) 8xAA 2560x1600 37.3

F1 2010 (DX11) ultra settings 8xAA 1920x1080 50.3 fps

F1 2010 (DX11) ultra settings 8xAA 2560x1600 31.3 fps

Radeon HD 6050 3DMark 11 performance Preset overall score

GPU 4877

3DMarks 4483

metro 2033 High quality settings 4xAA 2560x1600 29.3 fps

Aliens Vs. Predator (DX11) 4xAA 1920x1080 37.2 fps

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (DX11) 8xAA 2560x1600 42.5

F1 2010 (DX11) ultra settings 8xAA 1920x1080 63.9

F1 2010 (DX11) ultra settings 8xAA 2560x1600 44.1

Deltas

3DMark 11 performance Preset overall score

GPU 6950 21.1% Faster

3DMarks 6950 6.8% Faster

metro 2033 High quality settings 4xAA 2560x1600 6950 31.8% Faster

Aliens Vs. Predator (DX11) 4xAA 1920x1080 6950 12.4% Faster

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (DX11) 8xAA 6950 12.3% Faster

F1 2010 (DX11) ultra settings 8xAA 6950 21.3% Faster

F1 2010 (DX11) ultra settings 8xAA 6950 29.1% Faster

Overall Radeon 6950 19.25% Faster

With all that said, it should be said that overclocking the GTX 560 ti to 1GHz will close the lions share of that 19.25% performance difference. If we are going to overclock the GTX 560 ti then we must do the same with the Radeon 6950. The 6950 can be bios modded and overclocked into a fully functional 6970. That gives a delta improvement of approximately 18% leaving the overclocked GTX560 ti trailing by very significant margins.

The expected retail price of the GTX 560 ti here in the USA is $250.00. The real price is likely to be about $10.00 more. The Radeon 6950 reference boards can be found for $280.00. that is a $30.00 difference in price or a 10.8% difference in price. So the bottom line is, if you do not overclock you get 19.25% more performance for a 10.8% price increase. If you do overclock you get a < 18% increase in performance for a 10.8% increase in price.

Don't get me wrong the GTX 560 ti is an amazing card especially when overclocked. At it's absolute price point it is virtually untouchable. The same can be said for the Radeon 6950 its just that at it's price point it holds the absolute value for dollar crown. As much progress as Nvidia have made in the last year "and they have made tremendous progress". Nvidia still hasn't figured out how to beat AMD at the value for dollar game. Now, if they were to lower the prices of they're 5xx series video cards across the board. Then the green team would be truly tempting. Maybe they will do just that over the next few weeks. This kind of competition is always good for us consumers.

 

[murphy7801]

Snip

So fan of AMD ?

 

[TMaksimov]

*******

Nobody here would test at such retarded resolutions and 8xAA with a mid-range card, mate.. At 1080p 560>6970 as well.

 

[murphy7801]

Nobody here would test at such retarded resolutions and 8xAA with a mid-range card, mate.. At 1080p 560>6970 as well.

Makes me wonder I do see flotting around youtube alot tests on cards on super unrealistic test resolutions I mean if you can afford that large of a displays why are you buying mid range cards maybe less on 3 monitors and more on the system might be a better plan.

 

[oneseraph]

So fan of AMD ?

Not really, I have owned both Nvidia and ATI/AMD video cards, chip-sets, ect.. My motto could be "to hell with dogma give me metrics". At the end of the day, we pay these companies for performance. There are many ways to measure performance, The standard I tend to be most interested in as a consumer is performance per Dollar. Example for quite a while now Intel has had a lock on high performance CPU's, AMD hasn't been able to touch them in pure throughput. That said, in the case of i7 970 vs t1090, the i7 970 is a whopping 30% faster in highly threaded apps than the t1090 at the same clock. Wow that is a huge performance lead, right? Well the short answer is no. For the price of a basic system using a i7 970 you can build 2 basic systems using the t1090. That means that for the same investment the t1090 produces at least 50% more compute power. The new sandy bridge procs have turned that around so that they are the better value. So what I am trying to say (and not doing a very good job) is there are two performance metrics to consider.

1. Absolute performance

2. Performance per dollar

The first can be important in environments that have specialized requirements. Rarely found at the consumer level.

The second is with very few exception, the metric by which consumers try to make buying decisions. Even enthusiasts want to get good value form there purchases.

I am not trying to preach or sound put-offish. Hope I haven't sounded like a jack-nozzle. Well I think I might be a fanboy.

I am a fanboy of value, I don't care what label is on the package. Give me great performance at a reasonable price and I will be loyal, until your competition gives me better value.

 

[murphy7801]

Not really, I have owned both Nvidia and ATI/AMD video cards, chip-sets, ect.. My motto could be "to hell with dogma give me metrics". At the end of the day, we pay these companies for performance. There are many ways to measure performance, The standard I tend to be most interested in as a consumer is performance per Dollar. Example for quite a while now Intel has had a lock on high performance CPU's, AMD hasn't been able to touch them in pure throughput. That said, in the case of i7 970 vs t1090, the i7 970 is a whopping 30% faster in highly threaded apps than the t1090 at the same clock. Wow that is a huge performance lead, right? Well the short answer is no. For the price of a basic system using a i7 970 you can build 2 basic systems using the t1090. That means that for the same investment the t1090 produces at least 50% more compute power. The new sandy bridge procs have turned that around so that they are the better value. So what I am trying to say (and not doing a very good job) is there are two performance metrics to consider.

1. Absolute performance

2. Performance per dollar

The first can be important in environments that have specialized requirements. Rarely found at the consumer level.

The second is with very few exception, the metric by which consumers try to make buying decisions. Even enthusiasts want to get good value form there purchases.

I am not trying to preach or sound put-offish. Hope I haven't sounded like a jack-nozzle. Well I think I might be a fanboy.

I am a fanboy of value, I don't care what label is on the package. Give me great performance at a reasonable price and I will be loyal, until your competition gives me better value.

It was just personal curiosity don't think to much on the question. Though Do you have multi monitor ?