i doubt this means 560s run cool... but i welcome it as well as im unlikely to use the ref cooler anyways :D
and if they can oc to 1g with these cheap coolers, thats a good sign for overclocking :D
Printable View
i doubt this means 560s run cool... but i welcome it as well as im unlikely to use the ref cooler anyways :D
and if they can oc to 1g with these cheap coolers, thats a good sign for overclocking :D
We have to wait and see how cool/hot it will get, but if we are going to speculate based on current info (lack of it), then these "cheap" coolers are suggesting a cool 560, but we have to wait and see before taking the speculation to the next level.
Yeah, agree, 1GHz on a "cheap" cooler means this little OC-monster can fast turn to a big OC-monster with a "expensive" cooler + a bit more voltage.
Thanks again cold2010, always good links :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by cold2010
it's not indicate anything instead it cost them cheaper ... hé we are speaking about industry, they are not here for anything instead of do money .Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
we have no idea yet on how much have been push the clock speed for match the performance they AIM ( it's cost less to push a core instead of design a new one for match a performance aim ofc when it's possible ) ...
But i agree with the fact thoses card look to be nice overclocker for now ... i just want don't want to push hope before get the numbers.
if these really cost ~250€ and are almost as fast as a gtx570, i feel ripped off for buying a 570 :<
I'm afraid that's just the start, you may feel more ripped soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
The price-war hasn't started yet, but my local dealer has already a weekend-sale with 14% off on 570:
http://img.techpowerup.org/110123/Capture085.jpg
If you have plans to get rid of that thing, you better hurry, before the real war kicks inn.
well, i have yet to receive it... availability of the evga gtx570's is abysmal. ordered from 2 different shops and i'm waiting 2 weeks already... if i won't get it next week i'll cancel the order and just have a look how prices on these 560's are.
btw: ~2900 nok = 365 €, which is pretty expensive. the regular price of the golden sample in germany atm is ~310€. the cheapest 570 here costs 292 €. i really doubt the prices will fall even further.
I suggest you cancel it right away. It's delayed and you got a good excuse to get away cheap.
If you cancel those, you may find a good and cheap 560 next week. If you (for some strange reasons) still will have 570, then if you can look around, you may find good discount and sales-prices on 570.
EDIT:
2900 NOK is usually more like 290 €, because nVidia operates with a "special" European price, and that's not bases on $. Usually, my local dealers multiply the €-price by 10 to find the NOK-price for nVidia-products.
I don't know how 570-prices will develop in near future, but this round will possibly affect that too. It depends on how aggressively they will fight in this round, and I'm counting on a very aggressive nVidia.
I don't think it's a good idea to shop any GPU right now, I would wait and check the ground next week before buying anything.
Time to get rid of my HD6870 :)
It's going to be a very similar situation as 460-470. When overclocked to ca. 850mhz the 460 is roughly as fast as a stock 470. Here it will be the same, get the 560 close to 1GHz, then it will be similar to a stock 570. Which can be overclocked too. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
If somebody's main intrest is gaming in 19x12 or less, then IMO the GTX560 is the more economical choice. If it is computing too, then clearly 570. That is, if somebody only considers nVidia. Cause the HD6870 will be even more economical, if the anticipated price drop happens.
You do realize, it's not going to be faster by more than 10%, for a lot more watts, don't you? :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by imamage
Yeah! That's the spirit! Down with the Radeons! Down with Packers!
Thats a rhetorical claim, what constitutes allot more watts, 10% is based on what? Looking at the power consumption numbers of the 460 & 6870 I have a hard to believing there's going to be a big difference in power consumption relative to actual performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
I mentioned this back on pg.3, but its worth bringing up again for those (like myself) who have been hemming and hawing between the 560 and 570...
The 560 will have HD bitstreaming capabilities over HDMI where the 570/580 do not. This is a major feature for me. The fact that OCed 560s seem to be nipping right on the heels of a stock 570 is great news and makes this a easy decision for me. A MSRP of $249 (or less) would make me a happy camper. I game at 1920x1080, typically dont use more than 2x/4x AA on a 4+ Ghz i7.
translating: You do realize, that besides paying monthly for the extra performance you will also be free from ATI's driv3r hell, don't you? :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
omg! :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jodiuh
It's based on pure logic of product positioning. It has to beat the 6870 convincingly, so at least 5% faster and cannot get too close to the 570, so not more than 10% faster, since it would get within another 10% to the 570.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
Regarding power consumption, we will have to wait and see what does nVidia mean this time, when saying 180W. If it's total board power, like all cards except the X70 and X80 are being reported, then the perf/watt ratio of a 560 and 6870 can be quite close to each other.
Yes, because nVidia drivers have never ever given nobody hell. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by D4rkn3ss
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
Pure logic from benchmarks of the GTX 460 (overclocked) vs AMD's current mid range line up convincingly indicate that the GTX 560 will come out ahead of the 6870, and if overclocked to 1 Ghz+ will strongly rival the GTX 570 / 480 and AMD 6900 cards.
Product positioning is nowhere near as reliable a means of comparison as the chip's specification and benchmark numbers are.
That's exactly what I said above and have been claiming from the beginning. Thanks for confirming my estimates. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
The "product positioning" logic doesn't apply any longer. The 6950-1GB is a living proof of that, it's "positioned" right up to 6950-2GB's back. LOL. The 6950-2GB can also be unlocked right up to 6970's too. What kind of "product positioning" is that?
Now it's nVidia's turn to release a OCed-monster like 560 that can go right up 570's back, LOL.
Invalid arguments. First, you love to use the word "degrading" on the 1GB version, when in fact it's simply aimed at slightly different market, so they don't compete that hard as you think they do. Second, unlocking is not officially supported and a "do on your won risk" thing. Same like overclocking.
Two days (or three?) left, then the BS will stop. :rolleyes:
pfff please.. you can't even begin to compare.. not in a decade nor even with AMD/ATI only.. it's like a joke :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
It's easy to trough "Invalid arguments" and "BS" on others, but you need something better than that to prove your claims. I suggest we keep it civilized.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
It's degraded form 2GB to 1GB, what would you call it, an upgrade?
How does 6950-1GB aim to a different marked? I can't see it, Could you please explain this with constructive arguments?
It's a matter of order of introduction, as simple as that. If the 1GB came earlier and now the 2GB was introduced, would you call it an upgrade? I doubt it, I wouldn't either. Going further, the GTX570 came a month after the GTX580. Is it a "downgrade" too? No, it's aimed at a different market (sorted by price and performance as the main differentiating factors).Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
That one is even simpler, the 1GB is for 19x12 folks, the 2GB is for 25x16 and higher - the eyefinity folks. Yes, AMD can do triple monitors with just one card, so a 2GB card has bigger market than such card from nVidia. 2GB would also appeal to the OpenCL folks more than just 1GB. Sure, the 2GB can do 19x12 just fine too, but it's overkill, except for very few games currently.Quote:
How does 6950-1GB aim to a different marked? I can't see it, Could you please explain this with constructive arguments?
If the difference is only 20$/€, I can't see how buying an HD6950 1GB could be a smart choice over an HD6950 2GB...
[QUOTE]Sure, adding more memory IS an upgrade, adding more memory to your computer is considered an upgrade whether its used or not it is an upgrade.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
Absolutely the 570 is a downgraded 580, both gf110 cores but the 570 is gimped in shaders & memory so it is in fact a downgrade from a 580 and cheaper.Quote:
Going further, the GTX570 came a month after the GTX580. Is it a "downgrade" too? No, it's aimed at a different market (sorted by price and performance as the main differentiating factors).
GTX570 is a downgrade version of GTX580, indeed. But that's much cheaper too, and that's why it can aim to another marked.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
6950-1GB is a downgrade, but not as much, specially not the price. Most gamers will get the same performance with both, and you pay almost the same price too. It means. it is aiming to the same marked, but that marked doesn't exists in reality. Because nobody would buy 1GB just for the sake of $20 ,that's 0.07% price-difference compared to 2GB, but this can be unlocked to 6970. No sane person would buy 1GB then.
The 1GB is aiming to the same marked as 2GB, but that's actually a 6970 which you get for just $20 more in reality, so it means that's both same marked, and no marked for 1GB it in reality.