Cleeve,
I didn't say nobody buys reference period.
I said nobody in their right
mind would buy a reference GTX 460 1GB if that's the model they were contemplating
atm. It does make it a bit confusing for people though - look at a typical seller
and often the only models they offer are oc'd editions, or as I posted way back the
cheapest 460 is often an oc'd model (typically a 725 core or similar).
I agree about prices encroaching upon the next tier of cards, but in this case? I'm
not so sure. The SSC's 850 core clock is higher than the cheapest GTX 560, while
the cheapest 560 with an 850 core clock is the ASUS DirectCU II which here is 16 UKP
more (14%) than the SSC. ie. _real_ products muddle the picture compared to
reference cards. I'd just be intrigued to know how an SSC compares to a 560 with an
850 core (on paper they look like virtually the same product to me), or a 'standard'
560 with an 810 core. The 560s tend to have slightly quicker RAM, but the core clock
is more important.
Yes, beyond the 150 UKP mark then a 560 is more logical, so now there are a whole
load of 460 options which make no sense anymore, including the original FTW (it's
the SSC that still looks good). The KFA2 560 with a 905 core clock looks quite good
at 159 UKP.
Ah don't ya just love obsolescence.
Anyway, my point is, comparing an SSC to typical 560s with an 810 core (similar
price point), I don't think the latter would be the better model given the specs
of each.
Or to put it another way, back when the 250 came out, and the 9800GT, there was
a lot of huff & puff about the original 8800GT just being rereleased multiple
times in different ways. To me it looks like this is happening again, but nobody
seems to be bothered this time round.
An 'older' 460 at 139 UKP (which includes Mafia II free btw
should not be
quicker than a 'newer' 560 at 145 UKP, but I suspect it would be. Seems like
newer models (sic) are being released without any significant extra performance,
or possibly even slower.
Ian.