I'm sorry, did someone hold a gun to your head and force you to give a damn? You don't have to read the posts if you don't want to. I just read the latest article over on Anandtech, and the price of the 6950 1GB makes it look very appealing. Good to see competition is so furious in this price bracket. I suppose it only makes sense, but thank God we don't get price fixing etc. I swore not to upgrade until we hit a new node, but I am having a hard time resisting some of these cards. Won't get any easier when the prices calm down.
A 100-120mhz core overclock is really nothing all that special, you also have to factor in the fact that ATI's current line up do not benefit nearly as much as Nvidias cards from overclocking. A 560ti with just a mere 50mhz overclock on the core will benefit as much if not more than a 100mhz core overclock on a hd 6870. This is mainly due to the way the cards are designed.
you would in FP16 lightning intense games, which is almost any nowadays, that's why they buffed up 570 and 580gtx with it, now it can do 2x more compared to 470 or 480gtx. and 560gtx-ti has another 2x compared to 460gtx or to 570, 580gtx, in total 8Texels/clock by FP16 and also by INT8 i think, not sure though. and last difference is higher texture units count 64 vs 54 by 460gtx. So overall you should see a difference but nothing major, probably around 30-40% faster, that's what around 10-20fps on avg sometimes more or less if its very cpu intense game. Or you can look at it like so a oc'ed 460gtx to ~950mhz = stock 560gtx-ti or maybe a little slower.. and a stock 560gtx -ti = stock 470gtx
just great,i have my new 560 but only a demon numbered driver? I aint pissin off my good buddie using this driver,nv can take a sword in the face for all i care.
I buy for value+perf. I just bought a 5850 for 125, could of had a 5870 for 150. And yes, i did choose to save £25, its still money in my pocket.
The FP16 tweaks were already present in GF104 (hence it was already four per clock), so there is no improvement in that regard for the 560.
Have no fear god and his buddies are on my side heard alittle voice in my head it said "check the disk check the disk" 266.44 ok np thanks gigabyte AMEN BROTHERS can not verify if voltage is working cus my battery is dead in my multi meter....if someone wants to do this pm me i will show you volt read point. tomorrow i will get 23a 12v battery working voltage adjustment according to ab thuo. max 1.15v
and how are you so sure about that? Just so you know I wouldn't have said that FP16 has 8 if I wasn't sure. :nerd: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...9-nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti-1gb-review-2.html im pretty sure he's talking about FP16 here in bold or did i miss something? :nerd:
Seriously? The chart you posted tells you that the tweak was implemented for GF104, after GF100. But just to confirm: Sauce: Nvidia GeForce GTX 560 Ti Review: GF114 Rises, GF100 Rides Off
You're confusing things there Hunter. The improvement made to the GTX580 and GTX570 over their predecessors was each unit can filter a floating-point 16-bit (FP16) texture in one clock cycle, as opposed to two. This feature is already present in the GF104 core and that means it's also present in the "GF114" core. So no, the GTX560 didn't see any improvements to it's FP16. What you see being talked about in bold is the amount of texture units in the core. The GF104 has half as many SM units as the GF100 and GF110 cores, as does the GF114. To compensate for that they increased the amount of CUDA cores by 50% in GF104 to 48 over 32 and they increased the number of special function units and texture units to 8 over 4 in GF100 and GF110. That's what's being talked about, not the FP16.
lol.. yea i know what's with the chart, nvm all is good. :nerd: yea i know about that i know that too, guess i mixed that texture unit increase with this texel per cycle.. anyway yea it would be to good to be truec1::nerd:
Seems better than my GTX470 in everything with less (but faster) memory and fewer stream processors. Really good product tbh. I don't run my GTX470 oc'ed though so got more juice left for this year's games if need be.
Thanks for this great review. But I'm not so sure about the product itself... These cards (2x 560) cost significantly more than 580. 560's also cost more than 6950, even 2GB versions, at least over here. What worries me is that cards get more and more expensive. 560 is around price of 8 series a few years ago. Maybe... maybe if I could get these sweet Gigabyte versions and they worked well without a free slot in between, perhaps it would be worth it.
Might be a regional thing. In Swe MSI 560 Ti with twin frozr ii is 229 Euro where any 6950 with stock fan solution ( crap ) is atleast 245-265 euro and the MSI version is 273 euro. Tweaktown wich has the best reviews ( no offence to g3d ) has the card inbetween 6950 ( oced ) and 6970 ( not oced ) at a better price with better fan solutions.
Yeah, must be an issue in Poland, as here even the 900mhz Overclocked card is £200, while the cheapest 6950 is £230, the same prices as the 1ghz clocked 560. What it comes down to in my opinion is just personal preference brand wise. At stock speeds the 6950 is a little faster, while the 560 is a little cheaper, one has the potential to be unlocked to a 6970, while the other has the potential to be overclocked to near GTX570 levels.
