Value In SLI? GTX 260 Core 216 Vs. GTX 280

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
And man,I don't know what's wrong with these tomshardware pages.
They know of hardware, but their website really sucks!

Too many ads, and in firefox the commentbox works more not then it does; and I can't enjoy this page when disabling flash and java!

Why can't they just make this webpage non-java compatible, and get rid of all these moving annoying banners? And just stick with the passive banners?
Of all the commercial banners I hate the most are the ones that popup in the middle of the screen; often not even directing to a computer or hardware related page, and the banners that just flip over the text!
those are the most annoying!
Only for those I wish not to visit this site; and especially not click those banners.
 



It's an unfortuate artifact of using the "wrong games" for the SBM that Crysis was the only game to benefit. I'd expect to see similar gains in other gpu-handicapped FPS titles like Far Cry 2.
 
My Strategy at this point: Forget about the games I would love to play now and wait until a single mainstream card can handle Crysis at full rez with AA enabled @ or above 60fps. Gaming doesn't pay the bills for me and waiting for such an occurence will ensure I don't get screwed $-wise. Sacrifices oftentimes reward you with equal or greater payback. 'Course I'm still sitting @ home with a Pentium 4 @ 1.8G and a FX-5200 card playing SC: BW and Fallout 1 & 2.
 
[citation][nom]BrueBix[/nom]My Strategy at this point: Forget about the games I would love to play now and wait until a single mainstream card can handle Crysis at full rez with AA enabled @ or above 60fps. Gaming doesn't pay the bills for me and waiting for such an occurence will ensure I don't get screwed $-wise. Sacrifices oftentimes reward you with equal or greater payback. 'Course I'm still sitting @ home with a Pentium 4 @ 1.8G and a FX-5200 card playing SC: BW and Fallout 1 & 2.[/citation]
You can't find a mainstream system that can play SC: BW and Fallout 1 at full resolution and all eye candies?
 
I would like to see this test performed with 3x2GB RAM and a 64-bit OS. Putting together a system this high-end and using anything less is unrealistic in my opinion.

Other than that, good test, interesting results.
 
3 cards also produce more heat to the system, also they overclock less cause of the heat and the chance of having a poor overclocking card increases to 50% over 2way sli + u re gonna have less compatibility than 2 cards. But i think u should have included more games in the test. Games in the bench are old. I also think that in World In Conflict the victory is for the 3way-sli, anyone with this cards is going to activate 4x AA and there 3way is 5% + faster.
The more variables u include in the ecuation the more accurate the result is gonna be.
I would love to see gtx 260, gtx 260 core 216, gtx 280 + new gtx 285 and 295 in 2 way, 3 way and quad sli. It has been a long time since we dont have a review like that, since gtx 280/260 launch.
 
[citation][nom]Pei-chen[/nom]A 4870 X2 costs around $500. A GTX 280 $330. $500 x 2 = $1000 > $330 x 2 = $660 so what extra funds are you talking about?[/citation]

Sorry it was poorly worded. I meant the extra funds required for the 4870 X2 crossfire could relocated from other components.
 
[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]Which win matters in game play? You could have 100 games that play at 90FPS on a cheaper setup or 100FPS on the more expensive one, and the difference would be inconsequential since both of them play smoothly. Same goes for comparing RTS games, which don't need to be perfectly smooth, and FPS games, were any lag gets you fragged. It's always the FPS games that fall below 40FPS that take precidence.[/citation]

Which win matters? When 1 setup out perfoms the other in everything except 1 extremely nvidia optimized game then I would say that the setup that loses in Crysis is the winner. While you are very right in that the difference between the 2 setups can only be now seen in Crysis, the important word is NOW. You want the setup that will perform the best in years to come. No one is going to spend $2500 and not think of the future. The inherent better performance, easier and more reliable driver support, and less heat makes the dual SLI setup far superior in future titles.
 
I would also like to know why you're using a 32-bit OS instead of 64-bit. Seems kind of a no-brainer to just go ahead and use 64-bit, doesn't it?
 
[citation][nom]seboj[/nom]I would also like to know why you're using a 32-bit OS instead of 64-bit. Seems kind of a no-brainer to just go ahead and use 64-bit, doesn't it?[/citation]

They used a 32-bit in the SBM, so they are recreating it here as well.
 
[citation][nom]Lurker87[/nom]They used a 32-bit in the SBM, so they are recreating it here as well.[/citation]

I know that - it was more of an overall question, for all their testing situations.
 
[citation][nom]seboj[/nom]I know that - it was more of an overall question, for all their testing situations.[/citation]

The same point was brought up ad nauseum in the SBM. It was because they couldn't get some of the benchmark programs to work on the 64-bit OS, IIRC. Many had the same problem with toms not going 64-bit, just for benchmarking, but it was their call, in the end.
 
If I was forced to choose between these two setups I would choose three GTX260s over two GTX280s.
This is because as a gamer, I always tune my graphics so that I am getting the best Performance to visuals ratio, which for me is around 60FPS avarage for any game. When looking through the results, It seems where the framerates land in that sweetspot of playability and performance, the GTX 260s win.
For Example if I go through the results and take the best playable Frame Rates and compare them directly: (GTX260s results shown first).

Crysis 1680x1050 no AA = 66.9 vs 52.1 = +28.4%
Unreal 2560x1600 4x AA = 115.5 vs 97.9 = +18.0%
SupCom 1680x1050 no AA = 55.3 vs 63.2 = -12.5%
W.I.C. 2560x1600 4x AA = 66 vs 58 = +13.8%

It would seem that looking at it from this perspective in specifically the gaming benchmarks, the three GTX 260s are on avarage 12% faster.

I would also like to see unreal with a higher level of AA, as from the trend I'm seeing, I find it likley the GTX260s would gain a further lead over the GTX 280s. (Although it could be argued the 260s would hit a memory limit if you cranked the AA too high, but it may be the case the frame rates would then be unplayable)

Anyway, I'd sooner buy just a pair of GTX260 216s, as looking at SLI vs TRI SLI comparisons on other sites, the returns from the extra card is not justifiable for the added cost (note that a more expencive mobo would be required for tri sli too).
 
I think this comparison is fundamentally flawed. However, I could be basing this on some wrong thinking so bear with me. Please let me know if I'm mistaken.

I believe that the motherboard used, the EVGA 132-BL-E758-A1 LGA, is the reason these results are so close.

The PCI-E slots on this mobo run at 1 x PCIe x16, 1 x PCIe x8/x16, and 1 x PCIe x8. I believe this means the 1st slot runs at x16, the 2nd slot can run at 16x or 8x, and the third slot runs at 8x.

The third slot cannot run at 16x.

If in Tri-SLI, on an interface that has a maximum bandwidth of 8x, I believe all 3 cards may be throttled down to 8x.

So what I think is happening, is we have 3 gtx260's running at 8x. VS. 2 gtx280's running at 16x. This is hamstringing the bandwidth of the 260's and they're not actually performing as they could.

AT BEST, we have 3 gtx260's running at 16x 16x 8x VS. 2 gtx280's at 16x 16x.
In this best-case scenario, the 3rd gtx260 is still only at half bandwidth, so it's true possible performance gain can not be realized.

I would propose that this same contest is run on the ASUS P6T6 WS Revolution LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel Motherboard.

This motherboard is capable of running 3 PCI-E 2.0 interfaces at true 16x speeds. I would put my money on the 3 gtx260's consistently over the 2 gtx280's on this motherboard, that will actually let them run flat out.

-Donald
 
you guys really need to keep the colors that you choose for each set-up the same in the graphs through out the article. It makes it very confusing to read and interpolate the data easily
 
To be honest I'm not exactly excited about either result. One high end videocard would be enough performance to max out any game except for Crysis and still get decent fps.

With the money saved on going with one high end card you will have enough to buy the next generation high end card that will beat your now aged SLI/Crossfire setup anyways.
 
you rly need to fix the light gray text for the good of my old eye's! just something that I have not seen maybe do a comparision on tri 4870's see how it fiars 😛
 
[citation][nom]seboj[/nom]I would also like to know why you're using a 32-bit OS instead of 64-bit. Seems kind of a no-brainer to just go ahead and use 64-bit, doesn't it?[/citation]

Just an FYI, all testing in the Tom's Hardware US lab is being transitioned to 64-bit Vista. We hear your feedback and are responding accordingly.

Just an interesting aside, though--Windows XP x32 remains the favorite for overclocking. We even received the heads-up from AMD not to expect Phenom II to overclock as aggressively under a 64-bit OS. Remember that when our Phenom II vs. i7 overclocking comparison launches.

Just something to keep in mind for the enthusiasts clamoring for a native 64-bit environment with 32-bit tests 😉

*duck*
 
[citation][nom]ginbong46[/nom]I would choose 280 SLI over 260 TRI SLI anyday even if it was cheaper than the 280 SLI. 1 less card to deal with and less chance for driver problems.285 SLI is looking interesting[/citation]
Definetly so would I. Two cards mean they'd work in any c2d nvidia system and not only in a completely new platform with still unknown quirks, and also most quality power supplies may have enough juice to power two 280s or three 260s but won't nessecarily actually carry enough connectors to power the last of the three 260s

Anyway, on the bottom line I'd very likely go for two 4870 x2's instead. I'm very much inclined to picking nvidia cards for their better drivers, but I just can't ignore the potential of the ati cards.
 
A cuda benchmark would have been nice too for application like TEMPGenc Xpress or Folding to know power calculation between 3 Sli and 2.
 
Far as I remember, cuda doesn't support sli? they'd treat it like 2 or 3 individual gpu's - so the performance would simply be a matter of multiplying the performance of one gpu.
 
One thing I don't see mentioned with regards to 32bit or 64bit is the affect the amount of video memory would have on usable memory. I would think SLI on 32bit (i.e. 3 x 512mb cards) would cut into the amount of available memory (due to memory addressing limitations) and thus have an overall reduction in the performance of OS. I have not SLI'd so maybe this is not an issue, but I would not think this limitation has been overcome has it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom