To upgrade, or not? GTX 260 Core 216 with awesome OC

Discussion in 'Videocards - NVIDIA GeForce' started by armaddon, Mar 6, 2011.

  1. armaddon

    armaddon New Member

    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    EVGA 260GTX Core 216
    First off, I tried browsing around for benchmarks on the 3dmark site, but all of the GTX 260 scores that I found with the CPU combo I'm getting were NOT using a Core 216, and definitely not overclocked, so I think I genuinely need some advice from the community :x

    So I just recently ordered (hasn't arrived yet) a new mobo/cpu/ram (AMD Phenom X4 955, 1333MHz DDR3, ASUS non-SLI mobo) since my Athlon X2 5000+ and 800MHz DDR2 had just become a bottleneck bigtime in every benchmark I've run - namely in the Final Fantasy XIV benchmark.. My higher-res benchmark scores were actually higher than my lower-res scores.

    I pretty much lucked out with the video card I have - my wife purchased an EVGA 260GTX Core 216 OC for me for x-mas little over a year ago, and I've been running it at 720MHz core/1552MHz shader/1230(2460)MHz memory during gaming ever since and it's held up like a champ - compare that to the reference speeds of 576Mhz core/1242MHz shader/999(1998)MHz memory!

    I know it's not a DirectX11 card, and that a 500 series would be better, but for someone on a budget that doesn't mind playing games on mid-to-upper settings at 40-50fps, is it really worth it right now? I'd be saving for a month or so before I could afford a new card, and I'm currently playing Bulletstorm on medium detail at *mostly tolerable* framerate on my old setup.


    TL;DR: For casual gaming at moderate/upper detail expecting moderate FPS, is it worth going from an aggressively overclocked GTX 260 Core 216 to a 400 or 500 series - without going SLI? Or would the performance on a Phenom X4 955 really be a substantial improvement worth many hundreds of dollars to someone on a budget? Should I just save my money for an SSD instead? Thanks!
     
  2. padishah

    padishah Active Member

    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    2X Pny 470gtx's
    stick with the 260 216 core i had two of these in sli and there performance was outstanding i upgraded to the 470's but in real gaming the 260's were basicly the same if not smoother performance the fermis seem to have issues with full gpu utilization at least mine do

    if your happy with them stick to the 260's until better dx 11 games come out i think thats were the fermis are going to shine the brightest
     
  3. Copey

    Copey Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,710
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    960 2GB
    I have been in the same boat as you recently, and after lots of reading around i decided it was between 2 choices, 460GTX & 560 Ti, and in the end decided on the 460 because i got a good deal, it overclocks very very well if you get a cool one and plays all the games max at the res i play, you have to find the card thats suits your resolution and budget need.
     
  4. CaliMnTSnaKe

    CaliMnTSnaKe Active Member

    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Nvidia GTX 260 700/1425
    What he said. good day
     

  5. Blacklac

    Blacklac Member Guru

    Messages:
    144
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 960 SSC 2GB
    I had a GTX260 core 216. It was a Sparkle Calibre, 666 core clock. Decent card. :). I just upgraded to a Gigabyte GTX560 SOC. My 3DMark06 went from roughly 17.5k to 19.4k, using a Q6700 @ 3.7Ghz.

    I only play BlackOps, rarely BC2 and I have played Crysis 2 demo, but no idea what my 260 fps was in Crysis 2, I didn't download fraps until I got my 560. Mostly I got to turn up the eye candy and still gain a couple fps afterwards.

    I'm glad I made the upgrade, but those are CPU intensive games. It wasn't a huge upgrade.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011
  6. armaddon

    armaddon New Member

    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    EVGA 260GTX Core 216
    Finally got all my components (stock fan on the phenom 955 is like a leaf-blower.. Quiet cooler now on order) and, comparing it to my friend's PC with identical setup but using an overclocked 460 SE, I can't even really tell much difference in most games (Bulletstorm plays pretty much the same). DX11 games like DA2 seem to play a hair better on his setup, but overall I'm glad I've decided to sit on it for now. I'm sure he'd edge me out in 3D Mark, but meh.. Upgrading from the Athlon X2 5000+ to the phenom X4 955 wasn't just night and day... It was like something above proclaimed "Let there be light!"

    And it was good.
     
  7. Sever

    Sever Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,826
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Galaxy 3GB 660TI
    stick with your current gpu. the amd 7000 series and nvidia 600 series are launching later this year. those cards will provide much more notable performance improvements.
     
  8. xtrm_gamer

    xtrm_gamer Member Guru

    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Sapphire 5970 OC
    GTX 260 is still a decent performing GPU. Hang on to it until DX11 becomes mainstream.

    Currently Crysis2 released on DX9, DX11 will be shipped as a patch!! That clearly says DX9 is still dominant. So wait for DX11 to become prominent and used widely.... your gpu is good for DX9 games....
     
  9. elite69

    elite69 Master Guru

    Messages:
    570
    Likes Received:
    27
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 1060 6GB
    stick with your gpu i have mine about one year and im hapy of course it may not be as faster as a 500 series but stil a very decent gpu i play al games medium to maximum and with new drivers i didnt belive in my eyes metro 2033 1920.1080p at high and i can stil play very smooth for a ancient card a swaped from 8800gt 512 and i notice big fps change
     
  10. A M D BugBear

    A M D BugBear Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,679
    Likes Received:
    477
    GPU:
    4 GTX 970-Quad Sli
    I had a gtx 216, great card but for the money now, 6850 all the way, flash i and get another 100 dollars performance for FREE, thats right FREE.

    FFXIV? bah, worse gpu requirement game ever made for the pc, Runs ALOT worse then crysis under similar settings. Crysis I can run 1920X1200 resolution, 8X + Wide Tent filter + Supersampling, Maxed out af, everything on very high or the highest I can get, about 70-100 fps or something like that.

    Now on ffxiv actual game, mauahaha, 1920X1200 resolution, 4Xmsaa(BIg difference compared to supersampling, supersampling offers almost perfect image quality but blurs the whole screen also supersampling does a HUGE impact on performance over msaa, HUGE!!!), Ambient occulusion off(BIG performance hit on this setting), and 2 settings that goes to 1-10, both on 9.. Not all the settings are maxed out, getting about upper 50's to low 60 fps, and thats with 3 gpus, not one.

    I even disabled Xfire to make sure if there was a performance difference cause 3 gpu usage dont mean ****, they all can split 30% or so each, going to 1 to 3 at sometimes there is no differences, but in ffxiv, going to 1 to 3 gpus, using fraps, BIG BIG difference. yup gained about triple the performance.

    So even using 3 gpus at theses settings, now finally pushing ffxiv @ only 4Xmsaa.

    Now If I had it on off and try to use 8Xaa + wide tent filter + supersampling, ambient occulusion on, They game wont even budge, I think I could be out of frame buffer here, but yes the game moves incredibly slow at this settings, 3 gpus.

    so yes, by far the worse gpu requirement pc game I ever owned or played, ffxiv, nothing comes close, talking about game here, not benchmarking.

    That groundwiz benchmark, if I put the shadow to 4096X4096, fps is like 1-2 LOL, but @ 2048X2048 alot better, here I think I am defint out of texture buffer, higher shadow quality and detail requires tremendous gpu power and frame buffer.
     

Share This Page