GTX 260 step-up, should I do it?

[AMDDDA]

Alright, here's my specs:

9800 GTX+ reg edition
Stock clocked core 2 quad Q6600
3 gigs CAS 6 DDR2-800
465 GB SATA 7200 RPM drive.


Should I step up to the GTX 260 for 40$? Or no?

I am stuck here guys, help meh out .

[NickN]

NO

not worth it


if you intend to go to the 200 series the 280 is the only choice... the 260 is made from a FAILED chip being tested for the 280 core bin and is NOT better than a 8800GTX Ultra in FSX

sorry, but your 9800GTX is not better than a 768MB 8800 Ultra in FSX either

the GTX 280 on the 177.92 beta driver is the ONLY card that will beat a 8800GTX Ultra in FSX and it will rule in other games as well although in Crysis the 4780x2 will kill the 280 with high AA quality enabled

[a1]

What nick said.


The newer cards don't seem to be as good of value and quality as the 8800 series. If you can pick up a 8800 GTX or even a GT it would do you good.

[AMDDDA]

NO

not worth it


if you intend to go to the 200 series the 280 is the only choice... the 260 is made from a FAILED chip being tested for the 280 core bin and is NOT better than a 8800GTX Ultra in FSX

sorry, but your 9800GTX is not better than a 768MB 8800 Ultra in FSX either

the GTX 280 on the 177.92 beta driver is the ONLY card that will beat a 8800GTX Ultra in FSX and it will rule in other games as well although in Crysis the 4780x2 will kill the 280 with high AA quality enabled

Nick, I don't play at high enough resolutions where the amount of memory matters, and I also overclock it like a beast, 820/2034/1200, stock is 740/1836/1100, and I get great performance.

Looks like I won't step up.

Also, I didn't have an option to buy the ultra, I paid for this out of my pocket and it took me all summer to get, and I deem that it's worth it. With a soft overclock on the CPU, I am getting 35 FPS on 16xS AA, max sliders ('cept traffic, I don't use traffic).  ;). Also, I can run crysis on high at my resolution with 30 FPS, DX9 of course. I think it's better than an 8800 GTX/Ultra, especially for me, where the heat from an  ultra would ruin the comp, like the old 8600 GTS I had was hitting 90 Degrees C, this never breaks 70.

[stevehookem]

I have the 260 and it does run slower than the 8800. However, I am using the step-up program to go to the 280 as soon as they are back in stock. The difference is only $100!

[AMDDDA]

What nick said.


The newer cards don't seem to be as good of value and quality as the 8800 series. If you can pick up a 8800 GTX or even a GT it would do you good.

Erm, The 9800 GTX+ blows the 8800 GT apart in a lot of games, and in FSX it's definately better than the 8800 GT as well.

I am also lookin' to get a software overclocking tool that can use the PLL I have, right now I'm stuck with BSELing, and I can't change the multipliers.

[GabethePilot]

Tom's Hardware - Benchmark Mass Effect



To say the 260 is a "failed chip" is laughable - yes it's somewhat slower than the 280 but then so is a E6600 compared to a E6700 - only the "best" chips are used for "faster" - and more expensive - components.

Moreover, the 280 has a variety of different parameters such as the bandwidth and number of pipes blah, blah, blah......and it's 50% more expensive as a result.

(See the link above to Tom's benchmarks and see how the "difference" between the 9800GTX, the GTX260 and the "amazing" 8800ULtra is less than 10%. In fact at 19x12 with high AA and AF - as I play it...it is less than 7% !)

If you know anything about statistics - I would argue that given the inherent variability of FSX in terms of frame-rates and the fact that only 1 sample is used - these (10% at best) differences, probably don't exist.

And anyway, EVEN IF the difference was statistically significant - do you really think that less than 10% warrants the 260 being branded a failure ?

And, as for the guy who wants to upgrade to a 280 from a 260 - don't - it really isn't worth the increase you will get. Spend the difference on faster RAM/SD drive/CPU...anything other than a card which will yield around a 5% improvement - at best.

If your frame-rates are less with a 260 than a 8800GT/GTS, then you are playing at a low resolution - where there is no difference between any of the cards...try cranking up to and beyond 16x10 with high levels of filtering and you will notice the difference. (Alternatively, your drivers maybe dodgy etc.) Look at the benchmarks and scroll down to see the effects of resolution and filtering.  For example with a GTS 320MB....it is as good as 260 until you add high filtering at high resolutions  -  then the GTS drops to half the performance of the 260!

As for the "amazing" Ultra - yes...it beats (if you believe the numbers) the 200-series by 3-10%...in FSX...but in only 12 out of the other 40 tests, does it beat the others!

Not bad for a "failed" chipset ! ?

As soon as an optimised driver is released - which it will one day - the Ultra will be relegated to it's proper "prehistoric" position in the charts.

And anyway, you can't buy it anymore so it's a rather moot point...no ?

[NickN]

As I said the 260 Core was branded a 260 because it FAILED the binning tests to be a 280



and toms hardware is a lying sack-o **** and has been since the day he got caught fixing numbers for kickbacks. They left out the original 384bit 8800 cards in their initial FSX hardware list numbers and favored the newer Nv products (and still do),, go figure


The 280 will MATCH the 8800GTX Ultra in FSX and with driver upgrades has been shown to overcome the Ultra in heavy weather and higher res clouds but thats as far as that card goes in FSX

The 260 wont, period. His 9800 will run MSFS exactly the same as that 260, no difference



the 280 does better in other games however in high AA it is crushed by the 4870 x2 in games the x2 is working correctly (FSX is not one of them) which is why they were forced to drop the price on their GTX 2 series

FSX is a RAW horsepower game, meaning it responds to higher clocks, higher texture maps and higher memory bandwidth WITH higher memory buss ability. Crysis and other modern games are SHADER horsepower which means they respond to more cores and higher shader ability and functions

I don

[AMDDDA]

Also, I got some good water cooling for my 9800 (well, it's on the way from newegg right now) and it is ramping up some great memory and core speeds, so I'm happy for now .

My Mobo is almost on the way to the graveyard, I'm trying to get it to blow up on me so I can get a new one, so I've been doing some hardcore BSELing on my Q6600, nothing yet though :S.

And Nick, I see your point, and I only play FSX and Crysis, but the 9800 can do what I want on Crysis (all high, x1050, 2x AA).