Where's the Love for the 260?

O

oozish

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
Messages
1,465
Seems everyone thinks the more expensive 280 is the way to go judging by the various polls, threads, & reviews out there; but it seems like the 260 is a very good value. Maybe because it's not as popular as the 4870, still I'm leaning toward the 260 but maybe I should just pony up and get the 280 after prices stabilize or after a revision.

Is this what people are thinking?
 
The GTX 280 is the way to go for everyone with 30'' monitors especially. Below that and especially 1600x1200, the GTX 260 offers the best bang for your buck, along with the HD 4870. So it pretty much depends on how big your monitor is and obviously, your budget.
Up to 1920x1200, the GTX 260 or HD 4870 are the sweet spot, with an edge for the HD 4870, because its AA performance is better. At 2560x1600, the GTX 280 just can't be beat. At least until the HD 4870 X2 shows up.
 
I've got a 24" monitor, 1920x1200 rez, but I like AA alot. I'm afraid that the 260 may not be enough to run newer games with AA; I guess that's the 'future proofing' insurance you get with the more expensive 280 huh? thanks for your feedback!
 
I dont know, I am running Devil May Cry 4 with everything maxed out on a 260 and it runs great...
 
oozish said:
I've got a 24" monitor, 1920x1200 rez, but I like AA alot. I'm afraid that the 260 may not be enough to run newer games with AA; I guess that's the 'future proofing' insurance you get with the more expensive 280 huh? thanks for your feedback!
Click to expand...

Actually it's plenty. I now can run AoC, Mass Effect, and World in Conflict @ 1920x1200 on my 24" Sammy balls to the wall. I can run WIC with 8xCSAA 16x Aniso with all settings at their highest and it's very very playable and looks gorgeous. This is in Vista HPx64 DirectX 10 mode too. At those settings WIC averages 36 fps. so a 260 is plenty for a 24". :D

And as you can see by my Sig they overclock quite nicely too.
 
Good info...hows the noise on these cards? Toms hardware really slammed them for being noisy:

noisy

Have recent cards fixed this problem or will we have to wait for after market cooling options? I'm also interested in the temps these 260's run at idle and load, any info is appreciated.
 
At the speeds I'm running right now, I may up the Core Speed to 700+ and see how she does. It idles @ 41 to 43, load never gets above high 50's to low 60's. I run the fan @ 100% and can't hear it over my other fans in my case. Of course noise is subjective so your mileage may vary but I love this card.:D
 
I just bought a eVGA 260 yesterday for $269 after MIR. That's some love right thar.

I bought this thing based on cost, negative heat problems with the 280 and the fact this thing can (with a good card) OC past stock 280 levels.

Why not!?!?!
 
I am thinking of getting 2 260s with a 750i SLI setup.


They are mad oc'ers and the second one will be my long term insurance along with some Folding at [H]ome power.
 
I would definitely go with either the 4870 or 260, probably the 4870 unless you can get the 260 for $20 or so cheaper, cause the 4870 wins out in most if not all benchmarks.
 
Brahmzy said:
I just bought a eVGA 260 yesterday for $269 after MIR. That's some love right thar.

I bought this thing based on cost, negative heat problems with the 280 and the fact this thing can (with a good card) OC past stock 280 levels.

Why not!?!?!
Click to expand...

for that price it was probably the better deal
 
The GTX 260 is squeezed between the 4870 and the GTX 280.
Most peoples find that the 4870 is a better alternative even if the price is the same.
The GTX 260 is not much faster than the previous generation and it is a relevant solution for those who already own a 8800GTX/9800GTX.
Only the GTX 280 offers a substancial performance increase over the last generation of cards.
 
I'm loving the way the price is dropping like rocks. a month to go before I plan to build and it might just make it into my price range by then.
 
RadXge said:
The GTX 260 is squeezed between the 4870 and the GTX 280.
Most peoples find that the 4870 is a better alternative even if the price is the same.
The GTX 260 is not much faster than the previous generation and it is a relevant solution for those who already own a 8800GTX/9800GTX.
Only the GTX 280 offers a substancial performance increase over the last generation of cards.
Click to expand...

I mostly disagree. Yeah the 4870 looks to be a killer card also priced well. However the 260 is quite a bit faster than my 8800 GTX was. Very very noticable improvements in all my gaming. Age of Conan, Mass Effect and World in Conflict with every slider maxed is both a beautiful thing to behold and something that the 8800 just could NOT do with Conan and World in Conflict.

As you can see in my sig I have quite a substantial overclock on my 260 and this is not a factory overclocked card. It is a plain ol vanilla 260. 700 Core 1509 Stream/Shaders 2400 Memory. Oddly enough almost every damn review I have seen on the GT200 series cards puts the 260 just a very small percent behind the 280 in almost all cases and even ahead of the 280 in performance if you are lucky enough to get one that overclocks like mad which I did.

Furthermore, I purchased my 260 directly from EVGA on launch day, payed full price and feel that even after the recent price drops it's still worth every single damn penny I payed for it ! No matter what anyone says the GT200 series card are killer performers.

Were they overpriced initialy ? sure, but so what. Top of the line cards have never been cheap, at least not since I've been buying them. And unlike all the crybaby whiners that claim nVidia overcharged them.:rolleyes: I say you want to play you gotta pay. Don't like the price don't buy the damn thing. Early adopters always pay more. I LOVE my 260 even though I paid 400 bucks for it. Am I crying about the price, trying to convince people that nVidia is better than ATI? no. I am just enjoying the shit out of this kickass video card. I won't buy an ATI card but if you want to go for it. Just don't try and force me to.

I'm glad for the video card market that ATI/AMD put out a couple of decent cards after some serious missteps. It's good for us consumers, it will help keep the market competitive.
 
I'm getting a 260 in a step-up in a couple of weeks. Its only $80 to step-up to the 260, while its $260 to step up to the 280. I don't think the little bit of extra performance is worth 3x the price. I game at 1920x1200 on at 24" Dell. I only play CoD4 too, so this card should do well.
 
slackerjack said:
I'm getting a 260 in a step-up in a couple of weeks. Its only $80 to step-up to the 260, while its $260 to step up to the 280. I don't think the little bit of extra performance is worth 3x the price. I game at 1920x1200 on at 24" Dell. I only play CoD4 too, so this card should do well.
Click to expand...

I'm in pretty much the same situation. Sending my 9800GTX to eVGA tomorrow. Process has been good so far, although a little slow for the payment stage (probably my bank's fault).

9800GTX ---> GTX 260 for $37. Cant complain about that! Thanks eVGA.
 
I love my GTX260. Not dissing the 4870 because it's a great card as well but I got my MSI GTX260 for $279 shipped AMIR, which can now be had for $249 plus shipping AMIR.

I just stepped up my spare 8800GT>GTX260 for $129. Total price I paid for this card (including the original price I paid for my 8800GT AMIR) is $260.

Crysis runs smooth now on high settings at 1600x1200

==============================================================
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 57.48s, Average FPS: 34.79
Min FPS: 26.33 at frame 1965, Max FPS: 45.28 at frame 991
Average Tri/Sec: -35790436, Tri/Frame: -1028655
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.89
!TimeDemo Run 1 Finished.
Play Time: 55.06s, Average FPS: 36.33
Min FPS: 26.10 at frame 1952, Max FPS: 45.35 at frame 1005
Average Tri/Sec: -36905932, Tri/Frame: -1015979
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.90
!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 54.97s, Average FPS: 36.38
Min FPS: 26.10 at frame 1952, Max FPS: 45.62 at frame 991
Average Tri/Sec: -36962692, Tri/Frame: -1015911
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.90
!TimeDemo Run 3 Finished.
Play Time: 55.06s, Average FPS: 36.33
Min FPS: 26.10 at frame 1952, Max FPS: 45.62 at frame 991
Average Tri/Sec: -36915796, Tri/Frame: -1016264
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.90
TimeDemo Play Ended, (4 Runs Performed)
==============================================================

3DMarrk06 score:

3DMark06 17560
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=7405252

I'll run Vantage once I get my free copy that comes from my step-up card.

I have fan profiles set so my max GPU temp running Fur is 61C. It's idling at 40C as I type this.
 
Ah, ok thanks. That's a great price, I'm near to biting; I just have to think that we'll see even more price shakedown once the 4870x2 is released so it's hard to go for it yet.
 
I think the most attractive thing about this $269 card is it's overclocking ability. I mean you can almost be guaranteed an OC that surpasses the stock 280's performance. In my mind, it's a no-brainer for $269.

Not to mention this thing just runs so much cooler than it's big brother!
 
Aix said:
Except you can't overclock 260's 192sp to 280's 240.
Click to expand...

In real-world reviews, framerates tell the story. There's multiple reviews about how OC'd 260's have surpassed stock 280's in all games as far as framerate goes. Isn't that all we care about anyway? I don't care about the logic behind it, I only care about the end result: FPS.
 
I heart my GTX260...way better than my 7800gt...Playing Crysis on Very High 1920x1200 with the natural Mod. Looks Awesome!
 
Brahmzy said:
I think the most attractive thing about this $269 card is it's overclocking ability. I mean you can almost be guaranteed an OC that surpasses the stock 280's performance. In my mind, it's a no-brainer for $269.

Not to mention this thing just runs so much cooler than it's big brother!
Click to expand...

Show me the reviews.

As someone who has both a GTX 260 and a 280 (and a HD4870!), I can tell you this is an exaggeration. It really depends on the game. The only well-known game where an OC'ed 260 has a good chance of beating a stock 280 performance is Crysis. In most other games it falls about 3-5% short of 280 performance.

I have found Team Fortress 2 to be more sensitive to the shader clock than anything else. Basically I cannot go past 1404 without artifacts in that game while in other games I can run 1512. So chances are your OC'ed card is really not as "stable" as you think.
 
superbooga said:
Show me the reviews.

As someone who has both a GTX 260 and a 280 (and a HD4870!), I can tell you this is an exaggeration. It really depends on the game. The only well-known game where an OC'ed 260 has a good chance of beating a stock 280 performance is Crysis. In most other games it falls about 3-5% short of 280 performance.

I have found Team Fortress 2 to be more sensitive to the shader clock than anything else. Basically I cannot go past 1404 without artifacts in that game while in other games I can run 1512. So chances are your card is really not as "stable" as you think.
Click to expand...

Your mileage may vary, but many ARE able to run their shaders high even in sensitive games just fine. Still, with 192 vs. 240 SP and a smaller amount of bandwidth + VRAM, an overclocked 260 won't catch an overclocked 280 by a longshot.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Your mileage may vary, but many ARE able to run their shaders high even in sensitive games just fine. Still, with 192 vs. 240 SP and a smaller amount of bandwidth + VRAM, an overclocked 260 won't catch an overclocked 280 by a longshot.
Click to expand...

I have tried a lot of games that people can consider "sensitive" but TF2 has consistently shows problems at lower speeds than the others. TF2 is a popular game but probably the last game people think of when stress testing. Maybe it's just a problem with the game or drivers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top