NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216: Competition for the 4870

65 Comments

View All Comments

• helldrell666 - Tuesday, September 16, 2008 - link

  this is a overclocked new 260gtx cuz the stock one has the same clock and shader frequency of the original 260gtx.
  you should have included a 4870 top or a xoc 4870 in this test.

• strikeback03 - Wednesday, September 17, 2008 - link

  If you had actually read the article, you would see in multiple places that they ran it at both stock clocks and overclocked (as received) and showed both results.
  
  After all the complaining the AMD fanbois did when they showed a 9600GSO in the 4670 article, why would they bring in a new AMD overclocked card and hear the same thing from the NVIDIA fanbois?

• toyota - Tuesday, September 16, 2008 - link

  what are you talking about? those are the same clocks as the standard GTX260.

• Staples - Tuesday, September 16, 2008 - link

  The ridiculous amount of power draw for an idle card has been going on too long. I have a 4850 and my system consumes 30w more than it did beofre with a 7950GT. Most people do not pay attention to this number but I sure do. I am glad to see that NVIDIA has done more than just bumped up the chips inside this, there is significantly less power draw when it is idle.
  
  And here is hoping that ATI can actually come out with some better drivers this month. The 8.8 cause all kinds of trouble with a 780G chipset (in Vista 32) and a 4850 (in XP). Amazing but I have to run 8.7 on both computers because the 8.8 drivers are really problematic.

• Vidmo - Wednesday, September 17, 2008 - link

  Power Savings??? Where? 160-200 watts for sitting there? Give me a break. These GPUs are a massive waste of power. ATI/nVidia should be ashamed of themselves.

• MrSpadge - Wednesday, September 17, 2008 - link

  Take a calm look at the power consumptions of actual cards, e.g. here:
  http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/zot...">http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/zot...
  
  You'll see that the 4870 draws 65 W at idle (seems power play doesn't work there either). Assuming 80% power supply efficiency that means a draw of 81 W at the wall. Therefore ATs system draws 122.5 W without the GPU and the NVs consume about 36 W from the wall and 29 W for the cards themselves. That's way better than previous generation NV cards, which consumed 40 - 60 W at idle. That's what the previous poster meant by "power savings".
  
  (seems like power mixer is not working for XBits NV cards, whereas for ATs it works)
  
  MrS

• bespoke - Tuesday, September 16, 2008 - link

  I know you were reviewing the chip and not really the EVGA product, but looking at the product images on newegg, I see all the GTX 260s look exactly the same, so the fan noise of this card should be fairly representative for other GTX 260 Core 216s. (Wow, that name is a mouthful.)

• piroroadkill - Tuesday, September 16, 2008 - link

  Why didn't they just call it the Geforce GTX 270

• cabul - Thursday, May 21, 2009 - link

  I read somewhere else recently that it is because the 260 and the 260 Core 216 can still be SLIed together. If they called it anything other than a 260, they felt that consumers would be confused.
  
  It makes perfect sense to me now.

• gaiden2k5 - Tuesday, September 16, 2008 - link

  or GTX 265 since it's a variant of the 260 card