Zotac GTX 260²
Introduction
Published: 20th January 2009 | Source: Zotac | Price: £222.39 |
Introduction
The current graphics market leaves consumers with quite a lot to think about. There seems to be no end of cards placed in the £100-£200 price bracket, which seems to be where all the action is. All this makes it incredibly difficult to know which card to buy, and today we will be looking at the upper end of this scale, hoping to resolve a few things.Zotac are a fairly new name 'on the scene', and as such we have never reviewed a Zotac product before. Here is a little bit more about the company:
ZOTAC International (MCO) Limited was established in 2006 with a mission to deliver superb quality of NVIDIA graphic solutions to the industry. It has strong backup from parent group, PC Partner Ltd. Headquartered in Hong Kong, factory in Mainland China and regional sales offices in Europe, Asia Pacific and North America. The support ZOTAC provides is currently the largest of its kind around the world.
With 40 SMT lines, 6,000 workers and 100,000 square-feet meter, ZOTAC features a full array of state-of-the-art facilities and machineries. In addition, ZOTAC has over 130 R&D professionals in Hong Kong, China and warranty and service center in strategic countries to enable effective and efficient worldwide as well as localized sales and marketing supports.
With 40 SMT lines, 6,000 workers and 100,000 square-feet meter, ZOTAC features a full array of state-of-the-art facilities and machineries. In addition, ZOTAC has over 130 R&D professionals in Hong Kong, China and warranty and service center in strategic countries to enable effective and efficient worldwide as well as localized sales and marketing supports.
As you can see, they clearly mean business. Whilst they may be the new kids on the block, they're certainly not small or feeble, with a vast range of staff and a large headquarters.
So, what about the card itself? Today we will be looking at the ZOTAC GeForce GTX 260² card, which uses the newer 216 'Core' Nvidia GPU technology. Here are the full specifications:
Bus Type: PCI Express 2.0 (Backwards compatible with PCI Express)
Memory: 896MB GDDR3
Core Clock: 576MHz
Shader Clock: 1242MHz
Memory Data Rate: 1998MHz
Processor Cores: 216
Shader Model: 4.0
Texture Fill Rate: 36.9 Billion/sec.
Memory Interface: 448-bit
Memory Bandwidth: 111.9GB/sec.
Display Connectors: 2 Dual-Link DVI-I, HDTV + TV Out
Card Dimensions: 266.7mm x 95.3mm x 38.1mm
Warranty: 2 Year
Memory: 896MB GDDR3
Core Clock: 576MHz
Shader Clock: 1242MHz
Memory Data Rate: 1998MHz
Processor Cores: 216
Shader Model: 4.0
Texture Fill Rate: 36.9 Billion/sec.
Memory Interface: 448-bit
Memory Bandwidth: 111.9GB/sec.
Display Connectors: 2 Dual-Link DVI-I, HDTV + TV Out
Card Dimensions: 266.7mm x 95.3mm x 38.1mm
Warranty: 2 Year
Although the card isn't pre-overclocked, it does come with a 2 year warranty as opposed to the standard one year. Now lets take a look at the card itself...
Most Recent Comments
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='meh'
Nice read =)
Any particular reason for the exclusion of cost-per-frame? |
If there are any in particular you would like to know I can rustle up a graph.Quote
I think this is exactly where the cost per frame comes into play. The choice between a midrange and highend card based on price isn't hard anyway, but here it's starting to be tough.
Nice review btw :')Quote
Nice review btw :')Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='monkey7'
I think this is exactly where the cost per frame comes into play. The choice between a midrange and highend card based on price isn't hard anyway, but here it's starting to be tough.
Nice review btw :') |
You've got a point there 
Quote
QuoteI found it amusing that you open the article explaining the 4870 battered the 260 so you had to overclock it, then produced a ton of graphs that showed hardly a battering at all, even at stock. 4fps in Crysis and the difference between loads, and really loads, in Grid aren't exactly a watertight case for OC'ing the 260 lol. It was nice to see the results that you could achieve with overclocking though. Headroom is always good to have.
I'm still unconvinced by the benefits of the whole Cuda/Physx stuff. Certainly unbalances the Vantage-Mark though, which I'm sure is exactly what Nvidia wanted.Quote
I'm still unconvinced by the benefits of the whole Cuda/Physx stuff. Certainly unbalances the Vantage-Mark though, which I'm sure is exactly what Nvidia wanted.Quote
Why is C3PO on the card and box???? 
Quote
Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='VonBlade'
I found it amusing that you open the article explaining the 4870 battered the 260 so you had to overclock it, then produced a ton of graphs that showed hardly a battering at all, even at stock. 4fps in Crysis and the difference between loads, and really loads, in Grid aren't exactly a watertight case for OC'ing the 260 lol. It was nice to see the results that you could achieve with overclocking though. Headroom is always good to have.
I'm still unconvinced by the benefits of the whole Cuda/Physx stuff. Certainly unbalances the Vantage-Mark though, which I'm sure is exactly what Nvidia wanted. |
Even so, on a level playing field with both cards overclocked, the 260 came out on top, and thats what the article was aimed at..Quote
At 2560x1600 with 4xAA in Crysis is painfull to watch tbh - slideshow heaven so 4fps is indeed quite alot under certain conditions lol
Quote
QuoteQuote:
|
Originally Posted by name='Luigi'
Considering they are both at the same price point, 4fps in crysis is quite a lot, that could be 10% of your frame rate, possibly more.
Even so, on a level playing field with both cards overclocked, the 260 came out on top, and thats what the article was aimed at.. |
I was trying to suggest that the only tests the 4870 came out on top over the standard 260 is the Crysis and Grid tests. Therefore to use battering as an adjective was a little over the top especially as the 260 won in the other tests even at stock. Once the 260 had been overclocked it totally blew the 4870 away, so that isn't strictly a level playing field, despite the fiscal equality.
By no means am I complaining, or anything of the sort. It's purely a lighthearted little something that made me smile. No defense necessary
QuoteIf u think something needs asking about or debating about a review or opinion, u should feel free to bring it up.
Personally I wanna know what the fudge monitor w3bbo is using !Quote
Personally I wanna know what the fudge monitor w3bbo is using !Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='VonBlade'
Perhaps I wasn't clear. It's a common problem I have. Either that or I've misread your reply which is equally common.
I was trying to suggest that the only tests the 4870 came out on top over the standard 260 is the Crysis and Grid tests. Therefore to use battering as an adjective was a little over the top especially as the 260 won in the other tests even at stock. Once the 260 had been overclocked it totally blew the 4870 away, so that isn't strictly a level playing field, despite the fiscal equality. By no means am I complaining, or anything of the sort. It's purely a lighthearted little something that made me smile. No defense necessary |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='Rastalovich'
If u think something needs asking about or debating about a review or opinion, u should feel free to bring it up.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='w3bbo'
At 2560x1600 with 4xAA in Crysis is painfull to watch tbh - slideshow heaven so 4fps is indeed quite alot under certain conditions lol
|
QuoteQuote:
|
Originally Posted by name='Rastalovich'
If u think something needs asking about or debating about a review or opinion, u should feel free to bring it up.
Personally I wanna know what the fudge monitor w3bbo is using ! |
QuoteQuote:
|
Originally Posted by name='Trollgaard'
Agreed. But in that case I would go down on the resolution instead of getting those 4 ekstra fps. If I was playing that is. 4fps is alot if you want to admire pixelart
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='w3bbo'
I tend to drop the AA in preference to res.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='w3bbo'
Dell 3007 WFP-HC m8.
|
It is a very nice screen and certainly the pride of my setup. I guess when you get a screen of that size and quality there is little need to upgrade again so while it's expensive at first, it's more of an investment for the longterm. When you consider I do a major upgrade of high end GPU's and CPU's every 6 months or so, it actually works out rather cheap!Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by name='w3bbo'
It is a very nice screen and certainly the pride of my setup. I guess when you get a screen of that size and quality there is little need to upgrade again so while it's expensive at first, it's more of an investment for the longterm. When you consider I do a major upgrade of high end GPU's and CPU's every 6 months or so, it actually works out rather cheap!
|
6months? takes me a year to save up for something and by then its out of date :PQuoteI find knowing when to buy and when to sell helps damage limitation. It also helps snapping up bargains (280GTX for £150 4 months ago anybody? ) using them and then selling on for a profit near the end of it's 'life'.Quote
. It also helps snapping up bargains (280GTX for £150 4 months ago anybody? ) using them and then selling on for a profit near the end of it's 'life'.QuoteQuote:
|
Originally Posted by name='w3bbo'
I find knowing when to buy and when to sell helps damage limitation
. It also helps snapping up bargains (280GTX for £150 4 months ago anybody? ) using them and then selling on for a profit near the end of it's 'life'. |
No, 2nd hand.Quote
Annoying... I can't find it in any Norwegian stores... Just the 3008wfp which has got the new design on the foot. I like the old version better. Too square for me. But I'm seriously considering to blow off some money on the 2408wfp. I have no need for 30" at the moment.Quote
CSS Valid
http://www.overclock3d.net/gfx/artic...110031969s.jpg
Read on here.Quote