GTX260 55nm Preview/Review

[onethreehill]

Test of 3D performance VS Radeon HD4870

Actually, 3D performance is not our focus in this review, because the structure and frequency are the same as before. The only change is processing, which hardly affects the performance. We have compared GTX260 with GTX260 (216SP, 65nm), and the difference is very little. So we choose 1GB Radeon HD4870 for comparison. Sapphire Radeon HD4870 is priced at about $265.

To even things up, we disabled PhysX acceleration in 3DMark Vantage. GTX260-55nm outperforms by 4.46% in average. Its performance is best in COD4: Moderm Warfare, 16% faster than Radeon HD4870. While in Left 4 Dead, Radeon HD4870 1GB outperforms by 9%.

In 25 benchmarks, GTX260-55nm is superior in 17. The two parts are even in 2 (within 1%), and Radeon HD4870 1GB does better in 6 tests.

http://en.expreview.com/2008/12/27/t...ce-gtx260.html
http://www.expreview.com/review/2008...681d10994.html


Updated: EVGA GTX 260 Core 216 55nm Superclocked Edition Video Card Review
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...rd-review.html

[Budwise]

no temperature or power usage improvements. I hope this review is wrong..

[spicypixel]

If its true simply:
LOL

[trinibwoy]

Yeah, there's nothing else to say.

[highoctane]

Wow, thats,,,,well umm,,,,not looking very exciting if that's all there is to be expected.

Guess we'll have to wait for a more detailed review.

[Mad1723]

no temperature or power usage improvements. I hope this review is wrong..

of course not, but it has the same performance than the GTX280 in many games, so for lower power consumption, I guess it's a good step in the good direction.

[Leeghoofd]

Let's hope they clock better on the shaders then the current 65nm models

[highoctane]

You would think if these numbers where right they could have released an X2 variant already.

[safan80]

great all the wait for nothing.

[RPGWiZaRD]

Of course NV wanted a cheaper card to produce with the tough competition but they even went as far as cutting back on the cooling solution and power consumption hasn't even gotten lower, more like slightly higher? This card should be like 20~30 bucks cheaper than current GTX260 Core-216 but knowing NV it will be like 20 bucks expensier even. No thanks. For NVIDIA's sake I hope this was a flawed card that got tested.

[eva2000]

Yeah looks like nvidia just wanted a cheaper cost'd product for them to sell

[Rattle]

i have a 55nm 216 evga on the way

[Starscream]

ya the 55nm cooler is a lils maller and has 1 less heatpipe but i rly expected a lower power consumption

[eric66]

load numbers of 4870 seems to be incorrect radeon draws less in load

[Mr.BSEL]

load numbers of 4870 seems to be incorrect radeon draws less in load

That's probably true but on Furmark, the power consumption of the 4870 skyrockets for some reason.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...mpared/?page=2

[YukonTrooper]

LOL! Power consumption is more? Maybe they mixed up cards on the graph?

[JohnJohn]

Sure something is wrong with the review, otherwise they wouldn´t release an X2 version

[Blacky]

I don't know something is fishy about that review... how can Power Consumption & Temps are higher than previous model, I guess ill wait for guru3d or anandtech for review.

[Blkout]

Something doesn't add up there, power consumption should be noticeably lower under idle and load unless the 55nm part they tested was an overclocked version. I can understand temps not going down as they wouldn't change too much anyway and if the cooler is not as efficient as the previous 65nm cooler that would explain the temps staying about the same. You have to remember that the engineers that design the stock cooling solutions aren't interested in achieving the lowest possible temps, only keeping the temps in the proper operating range, which is just what the stock cooler does. It costs more to build a better cooler and that's what the aftermarket is for, and the Nvidia engineers know this. I'm not ruling out these test results as they are likely within some margin of error, only saying the power consumption looks suspect. I'll wait for more credible sites to post their results. Judging by the fact the top of the line EVGA SSC 55nm 260/216 has slightly higher clocks than the previous 65nm FTW 260/216, I'd say it's probably a testament to the cooler operation of the 55nm part since overclocking potential is very likely to be better than the 65nm part.

[maratus]

Ouch, new PCB design (VRM) makes FC waterblocks obsolete

[paulhamm]

There is a report from the much maligned Charlie D. at the Inq stating that the b2 stepping of the gt200 55nm was not very good. Looks like the report was accurate.
Article was back in November Nvidia 270/290 in deep trouble the Inq is not connecting directly atm for me so google link.

That leaves power and speed. Unfortunately, the shrink is a mess and not working out well at all, so neither of those features panned out. Where does that leave us? With a shrunken GT200 that doesn't really perform any better or worse than the current part, but gives NV a little better breathing room. That is the current best case.

[Carfax]

If this is true, I hope the GTX 285 doesn't suffer the same fate..

Thats the card I'll be stepping up to in January.

[Blkout]

Ouch, new PCB design (VRM) makes FC waterblocks obsolete

Only until a new design is released. Nothing new there.

[Blkout]

There is a report from the much maligned Charlie D. at the Inq stating that the b2 stepping of the gt200 55nm was not very good. Looks like the report was accurate.
Article was back in November Nvidia 270/290 in deep trouble the Inq is not connecting directly atm for me so google link.

Any new stepping is going to be better than the previous stepping. Don't believe everything you read. New steppings are always superior because technology advances so frequently.

[largon]

Any new stepping is going to be better than the previous stepping. Don't believe everything you read. New steppings are always superior because technology advances so frequently.

Kinda like "G200-103-B2" is faster & more efficient than "G200-103-A2"?
Oh, wait?


G200-103-B2 = 55nm
G200-103-A2 = 65nm