XFX GeForce GTX 260 PCI Express x16 2.0 896 MB $389.99 @ FxVideoCards

Lol wondered how long it would take for people to make these true comments. Good deal though if you have money to spend mindlessly.
But then again, if you do spend mindlessly, it wouldnt matter to you if you save or not.
 
i think some people forget that there are a lot of people out there with sli mobos. if you want to run dual gpus, it MAY be cheaper for them to nab a GTX 260. especially if you "traded up" to a GTX 260 already from a 9800gtx.
 
actually... aren't these cards raw power? i thought they outperformed the 4870's (albeit by a small margin)... it was just that they cost so much more. hardocp review... the 260 doesnt get the highest fps, but does do a little btter on the minimum fps. it can also run with more details, and extras than the 4870 ie. more distance, and 2x AA on AoC; higher minimum and max fps on crysis

i think if you can find a good price, the gtx60 is still a good option. it's probably louder, and uses more energy, etc. etc. etc., but it really is the faster card. just... not the best price/performance wise.

I'm about ready to build my quad 4850 setup anyhow...
 
xkon said:
actually... aren't these cards raw power? i thought they outperformed the 4870's (albeit by a small margin)... it was just that they cost so much more. hardocp review... the 260 doesnt get the highest fps, but does do a little btter on the minimum fps. it can also run with more details, and extras than the 4870 ie. more distance, and 2x AA on AoC; higher minimum and max fps on crysis

i think if you can find a good price, the gtx60 is still a good option. it's probably louder, and uses more energy, etc. etc. etc., but it really is the faster card. just... not the best price/performance wise.

I'm about ready to build my quad 4850 setup anyhow...
Click to expand...
that depends on how you run your test, but on an avg, esp with AA (there something you don't here about ATI very much) the 4870 beats it. AOC was not one of them but if your read most of the other reviews it trades blows but tends to win more then it loses. to add insult to injury the GTX is loud and hot and a hundred dollars more then the 4870. and the 4870 still has a nice margin that they can drop the price down latter (when the memory gets a little cheaper).

In all reality the real competition for the 4870 is the GTX280 not the GTX260 because the 4870 severely out classes the GTX260 when you consider all things. The 4870 can only nip at the GTX280 heels and a lot of people want the fastest single card / GPU they can get and that is the GTX280. Myself it isn't worth the money but I am a cheap bastard anyways
 
xkon said:
actually... aren't these cards raw power? i thought they outperformed the 4870's (albeit by a small margin)... it was just that they cost so much more. hardocp review...
Click to expand...


No, that's the GTX 280, and even then, the HD 4870 offers approximately 90% of its' performance, for 50% of its' price, and even beats it in a few scenarios.

The GTX 260 on the other hand is overpriced and underperforms compared to the HD 4870.

These cards should be selling for $249, because even at the $299 price point, they would lose in the price/performance ratio versus the 4870.

NV can't afford to do that however unless they want to go in the red this quarter.
They just need to suck it up and take a hit over the next x quarters -- they did this to themselves, not ATI.
Complacency, it's a hell of a thing.
 
I'd wait on this. I would not at all be surprised to see these cards going for ~200$ with in a few weeks.
 
Hamidxa said:
No, that's the GTX 280, and even then, the HD 4870 offers approximately 90% of its' performance, for 50% of its' price, and even beats it in a few scenarios.

The GTX 260 on the other hand is overpriced and underperforms compared to the HD 4870.

These cards should be selling for $249, because even at the $299 price point, they would lose in the price/performance ratio versus the 4870.

NV can't afford to do that however unless they want to go in the red this quarter.
They just need to suck it up and take a hit over the next x quarters -- they did this to themselves, not ATI.
Complacency, it's a hell of a thing.
Click to expand...

I'm no nvidia fanboy, I have usually bought ATI in the past but I think you need to read up on the benchmarks more. In most situations the 280 is quite a bit faster than the 4870. However I agree it is far better in the price/performance category.
 
Hamidxa said:
No, that's the GTX 280, and even then, the HD 4870 offers approximately 90% of its' performance, for 50% of its' price, and even beats it in a few scenarios.
Click to expand...

You forgot to mention that the 260 beats the 4870 in a few scenarios.
 
Hamidxa said:
No, that's the GTX 280, and even then, the HD 4870 offers approximately 90% of its' performance, for 50% of its' price, and even beats it in a few scenarios.

The GTX 260 on the other hand is overpriced and underperforms compared to the HD 4870.

These cards should be selling for $249, because even at the $299 price point, they would lose in the price/performance ratio versus the 4870.

NV can't afford to do that however unless they want to go in the red this quarter.
They just need to suck it up and take a hit over the next x quarters -- they did this to themselves, not ATI.
Complacency, it's a hell of a thing.
Click to expand...

did ya click on the links? hardocp.com's review of the 4870 compared it directly with the 260gtx. most tests the 4870 got higher fps, but the minimum fps went to the gtx 260. the gtx 260 can also play with higher settings in many games. price performance wise the 260 aint the best right now, but if you're in the market for one the deal is darn good.
ps. i am not a fan boy. i go either way. most times i have cards from nvidia and ati, it just depends on what my needs are.
 
with the 260 for 100$ more than the 4870... who in they right mind would buy it

only the hardest of the Nvidiots could make any attempt to suggest this card is worth buying
 
What are you people smoking? The HD 4870 is clearly faster than the GTX 260. The reason the GTX 260 appears faster in the [H]ard review is because they used Catalyst 8.6. The newer Catalyst 8.7 driver gave a significant performance boost.

According to websites that used Catalyst 8.7, the HD 4850 is about 7% slower than the GTX 260 and the HD 4870 is about 16% faster than the GTX 260 on average. So the GTX 260 is actually closer in performance to the HD 4850, which can be found for $150.

I want to see the [H] revisit the HD 4870 with Catalyst 8.7 and compare it to the GTX 280. Most websites are showing that the GTX 280 is only about 5% faster!
 
while an argument can be made for the 280 since it is the fastest card until the 4870x2 comes out.... none can be made for the 260
 
if the driver makes that much of a difference then what I would like to see is H redo there test. but H test often differ from other sites do their testing in real game play. I put more faith in there evaluations then the "canned" benchmarks.

I have to agree here that true competition for the 4870 is the GTX 280, the 260 is just not worth considering when comparing it.
 
Agreed. H needs to stop using outdated drivers in their reviews. They used force 177.26 for their 280 review. Every other site used 177.34. Same with the 4870 review. H used Cat 8.6, others used 8.7.

There is a performance difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top