t33lo

Distinguished
Jul 15, 2005
405
0
18,780
I am strongly considering three different GTX 260's and don't really mind overclocking any of them.

EVGA 896-P3-1255-AR GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 896MB 448-bit GDDR3
EVGA 896-P3-1257-AR GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Superclocked Edition 896MB 448-bit GDDR3
EVGA 896-P3-1258-AR GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 SSC Edition 896MB 448-bit GDDR3


Is the regular one the same as the Superclocked edtion which is simply a factory overclock (something I could do myself with RivaTuner?) Does the same go for the SSC edition as well? Money really isn't an issue, but if I can overclock it myself and get the exact same results, whats the point of spending more $$$. Thanks!



EDIT: In addition, how would any of these three compare to the 4890 which is at about the same price point? I've always been an Nvidia guy, but it seems the 4890 is better except for no PhysX, lower bus rate (256 compared to 448) but higher clocks and 800 stream processors compared to 216? Is it really 800? Are ATI drivers any good?
 

t33lo

Distinguished
Jul 15, 2005
405
0
18,780



True, good point. What is it about the 4890 that makes it look so great on paper, but when comparing it in actual testing, it doesn't do THAT much better than the GTX 260. You would think with the extra memory, core and memory clock speeds as well as 800 stream processors, it would dust the 260, but its FPS only about 3-5FPS better in most cases that I have seen. Any explanation for this?
 

Iarwain

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2009
20
0
18,510


You're looking at incorrect benchmarks if this is what you're seeing. In some Nvidia favored games, very few, this may be the case, but the 4890 is slightly (very slightly) faster than even the GTX 275. Comparing the stream processors on each card would also be a fallacy, because they simply do not work the same between ATI and Nvidia, different design.

If you look here:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-4890-review-test/12

You can see that even in a traditionally Nvidia favored game, Crysis, the 4890 beats it. But if you move to the other benches, HAWX, Fallout 3, Brothers in Arms, you will see that the 4890 wins by 10-20%. Now, when you're looking at FPS it's easy to be misled by strictly FPS numbers. For instance, while a game may only perform 5 FPS better, this could be a difference of 20% and could be the difference between playable and unplayable settings. Further, when you move to the price and note that you can get a 4890 for the same price as a 260 with an aftermarket cooler on it, the 4890 becomes even more attractive.

And OP, to your questions:

The 4890 is faster, as I just illustrated.
It comes in at a similar price point, slightly higher, 20 USD in most cases if you compare the cheapest 4890 to the cheapest GTX 260.
ATI's drivers are just fine, anyone who tells you otherwise is someone who hasn't used them. Both companies have driver problems, every hardware manufacturer has occasional problems, it's the nature of the game.
Don't compare archeitecture like that. How many stream processors an ATI has vs Nvidia means absolutely nothing, they don't do the same things.
The Bus bandwidth is also meaningless, because the GTX 260 does not use GDDR5 as the 4890 does.