Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

9800 GX2 or GTX 260 Core 216

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 3, 2008 2:05:41 PM

hey all, as some of you know by reading some of my posts over time you know that i have a xps 630i with a gtx 260 core 216, i have just built my first pc last month. i was browsing around newegg like i always do often and i saw a 9800gx2 for $220. thats a good deal, it may be recertified but i just purchased a 9800gtx recertified and its been great so im not afraid to go that route again. the question arises would i see a increase in performance over my gtx 260 core 216 in my xps 630i? i ask this because if i order this 9800gx2 and replace the gtx 260 core 216, i would put the core 216 into my homebuilt system i definitely know i would get a performance increase over the current 9800gtx thats in it now. so its like upgrading 2 pc's for the price of one. but only if the 9800gx2 will give similar/better performance than what i have now in my xps 630i. the specs for it are:

dell xps 630i case thats big as hell
3GB ram
Q9300 oc'ed from 2.5GHz to 2.7GHz
750watt psu
250GB HDD

also is the gx2 easily overclocked? i would really like to get this gx2 while i can get it cheap but if it doesnt perform on par to what i have now i wont bother and think about buying another core 216 for my other pc. thanks for any help/info and recomendations.
November 3, 2008 2:15:01 PM

yes you would probably see a perfomance increase, BUT a lot of people complain about driver issues with the gx2, as in no new drivers, drivers dont work right, dont fix issues, and it probably wont overclock a whole lot. sli'ing the core 216 is supposed to be the most powerfull/cheapest way to go.

a few benchmarks to wade through: http://www.overclock.net/nvidia/277311-geforce-9-series...
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3408&p=1
November 3, 2008 2:18:04 PM

Go for the core 216. It really is the bees knees and the gx2 will only shine with high resolutons like 2560x1600 so don't bother.

Core 216!
Related resources
November 3, 2008 3:18:36 PM

you could get the non 216 core 260 GTX, save atleast 50$ and oc to outperform even the OCed 260 GTX 216.

The GX2 has the higher performance, but it suffers from MicroS, and X2 cards tend to have a low min frame rate problem. I had 1 9800 Gx2 and later got quad. The experience was really nice, I got a huge improvement, but it has min frame rate problems. In CSS I would drop down to 20 fps....stuff like that, the GX2 was a pain in the bum to be honest, and now they are having driver problems with all the new games from what I read....far cry 2, warhead...etc.

The GX2 will outperform the 280 GTX even, but when AA is cranked up @ high resolutions the GX2 falls face first.

if your paying for a 260 GTX 216, your much better off getting the 4870 1 gig. The 260 GTX 216 is just a piece of crap to be honest. It doesn't yield as much as the 4870 1 gig revision (actually just ram, but lets be fair). Atleast the 4870 gains a mostly constant 1-5 frames at low resolution, and like 10-15 @ high 1920...2560x1600 etc. Plus DX 10.1 is a bonus.

My verdict, you an either grab a 260 GTX (old) for around 200$.

If your planningto pay alittle extra, go either for the 4870 1 gig, or the 9800 GX2. The 260 GTX 216 is just another way to say:

"Hey, mine is .5 of a mm bigger then urs, the woman will feel it trust me...it will cost you and extra 50-100$ for .5mm though:D "
November 3, 2008 4:25:38 PM

well i already have the core 216 installed, ive had it for about a month and a half. what im trying to get at is will i see a decrease from my current gtx260 core216 if i get the 9800gx2? if i dont decrease in performance and i gain a little like some suggest, i will get the gx2 and replace my current gtx260 core216 in my 1st rig from my sig, then take the gtx260 core216 and replace the 9800gtx thats in my 2nd rig from my sig. i know gtx260 core216>9800gtx but does 9800gx2(>=)gtx260 core216?

im kinda trying to upgrade both my pc's gpu's in a "cost-effective" way
November 3, 2008 4:28:33 PM

yes the GX2 beats the 260 GTX, its the 2nd fastest card ont he market, except for games that are either buggy or don't like SLI, then the GX2 turns into a slower 8800 GTS:) 
a c 236 U Graphics card
November 3, 2008 4:34:45 PM

On balance, I think the GTX260-216 and the 9800GX2 are about a wash. The highs on the 9800GX2 may be higher, but the lows are lower. I would not change. If you want to spend a few bucks, upgrade from 3gb to 4gb.
November 3, 2008 4:36:36 PM

I would have to go with geofelt, your not going to get enough to justify the money spend....unless you go for the 4870 X2 or the 280 GTX (just because of min frame rate).

spend your money on essentials that can help ur overall computer experience.
a b U Graphics card
November 3, 2008 4:37:57 PM

In the 6 months i've owned a GX2, I STILL have not encountered an occurance of microstuttering. One on one, a GX2 matches a 280 in most instances. Even in games that hate SLI, the GX2 can usually hold its own, and NVIDIA's been good at keeping its drivers up to date recently.

When it was released, you could complain alot about shoddy performance on lots of games, but most of those issues have long been resolved.
November 3, 2008 4:46:24 PM

I had quad sli 9800 GX2s:) 

The GX2 suffers from min frame rate problems. In none sli games (meaning no scaling or very little if buggy) the 9800 GX2 performs between the 8800 GT and the 8800 GTS 512.

Since it only uses 1 GPU, and the GPU is between those cards.

So you can't say that a single 8800 GTS 512 underclocked can hold it's own even against a 4850...the 9800 GTX+ even has problems doing that:) 

Although the GX2 is the 2nd strongest cards over all for lower resolutions, when AA is increased and resolution is increased, the cards 260 GTX, 4870 1 gig, 280 GTX and even the 8800 GTX/Ultra will come out on top, whether it scales or not.

Also I would like to point out, there were many cases, where the GX2 would get 6 fps on 2560x1600 (can't remember the games) and the 9800 GTX+ sli would get around 15-16, which is basically a 300% increase. I kno it doesn't make sense but it happens do to drivers:) 

I think the safest route is either the cheapest route where you upgrade your pc with other things, or the most exp, you suck it up and grab a top end card...280 GTX 4870 X2 or even the 4870 1 gig holds its own.
November 3, 2008 5:00:52 PM

well i think at a resolution of 1386x768 (my hdtv is 720p) a GX2 wouldnt have micro stuttering or low fps problems. its a pretty low resolution. i do think it should be a higher resolution though i mean its a 26 inch screen but it has such low res. ill try the GX2 and see. its only $220 and i return it in 30 days if i have issues. this decision made with all info that you guys provided thats why ill "test" it.

btw what is micro stuttering? what does it do/look like when its happening?
November 3, 2008 5:06:24 PM

Its basically a fluctuation in the frames. You'll see really see most noticeably when the frames suddenly decide to just drop on you, which can give you less of a gaming experience. It can also produce tears in the image, depending at what type of sli or Crossfire your running.

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1032646751&post...

Usually to prevent it, well you can't fully prevent it, but you can hide it by like Jaydee said in another thread by lowering your settings so that both cards can go at an equal pace which yields higher frames (most likable being 70+) and hiding the MicroS from human eyes. You can also try increasing the Max pre rendered frames from it's default 3 to anything higher (it lowers your AVG frames though), or you can buy a single card solution which single solutions produce 1 frame at a time, and send it off whole, instead 1/2 + 1/2.\


Sorry 1 more thing you can try is, V-Sync. It lowers your frames low enough to generally minimize Microstuttering. Which is basically only a feeling that its minimized. Its actually the same, only difference is that the decrease in frames is smaller going from 30-26 than going from 50-26 (which is also alot more noticeable). So with V-Sync enabled the graphic card (well the software) will try to lower the frame avg to highest low frame possible to give you the best and most unnoticeable visual performance:) 
November 3, 2008 5:12:19 PM

Let me kno if that made little or any sense:p 
November 3, 2008 5:19:41 PM

it makes total sense to me, i always game with v-sync and triple buffering. right now with my oc'ed gtx260-216 i have v-sync and tb. it seems pointless to oc a gpu just to limit it by v-sync though. but we do it anyway. so i use v-sync and tb with the GX2 just like gtx260-216 now. if i notice any problems ill get a refund for the GX2 and just buy a gtx260 for my other pc. but i wanted to try this path first. thanks for all your help liquid, your like pc guru of the forums.
November 3, 2008 5:22:44 PM

Why thank You sir:) 
November 4, 2008 2:18:56 PM

the Gtx 260 , the 9800 gx2 has really bad driver support for some games . .
!