Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Video Card question (EVGA GTX 560 ti 448 cores)

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 10, 2011 8:23:22 AM

Ok, So I've been asking a few questions on here trying to figure out what to get for a new gaming computer that I will be building this holiday, and I finally chose to go with an i5 2500k, and a asrock p67 extreme4 mobo.

My last question is going to be this; is the EVGA gtx 560 ti (The classified one with 448 cores) good for gaming at 1080p.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Most reviews say it performs similar to the 570, but the 1280MB of vram is the only thing I'm worried about. My friend told me that you need 2gb or vram to game at 1080p, but I see alot of benchmarks that show very high frames in new games like battlefield 3 or skyrim.

tl;dr: So I guess my question is Would it be absolutely FINE to get this even though it has only 1280MB or vram, Or does that not matter for 1080p. (I will sli these but not anytime soon so just base it off of one card), also I do not intend on ever going higher than 1080p.
a c 153 U Graphics card
December 10, 2011 8:58:59 AM

Your friend is wrong, 1GB is plenty enough for 1920x1080. I'm still going strong with 768MB at 1920x1200, and I have Skyrim modded out like crazy.

If I were to get a 560 Ti 448 I would get the MSI because some reviews have made it clock like a beast. But that just something to think about.
m
0
l
a c 291 U Graphics card
December 10, 2011 9:02:55 AM

I have GTX 560 Ti non 448 core version overclocked with 1 GB of VRAM. I play all the newest games maxed out including Battlefield 3 (without AA, though) and Skyrim at 1080p. So yeah, even if some games may use more than 1 GB of VRAM, it won't cripple your performance too much.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 176 U Graphics card
December 10, 2011 9:04:23 AM

Agreed that you don't need 2GB. The 1.2GB is fine.

Something else to think about however, Nvidia isn't making these cards for long. If you want to SLI, buy two of them now. They are basically selling some defective chips which couldn't cut it as a GTX570.
m
0
l
December 10, 2011 9:14:40 AM

I did notice that now, but I saw somewhere that the 600 series is possible coming out somewhat soon, so maybe (Since one of these cards will be more than enough for now ), when I do eventually have to upgrade I can probably just replace this with something from the 600 series. I don't know just a thought...
m
0
l
a c 153 U Graphics card
December 10, 2011 9:26:20 AM

I wouldn't hold your breath, my guess is Q3 of next year at least.
m
0
l
December 10, 2011 9:57:49 AM

The gtx 560ti with GF 110 cost a little less than the superior 570 and the 6970. If you want the nvidia card then get the 570 or else the 6970 is the best to game at 1080 with max out settings and AA enabled
m
0
l
December 10, 2011 9:13:44 PM

The reference 570's are actually not superior. Yes, they are a little faster.

but they also don't come with the high quality PCB of the 560 448 that allows for much better overclocking.

And of course the non-reference cooling solution that comes with it. (especially ASUS and MSI)

On top of that I paid 10 euro less for my MSI GTX 560 448 TF3 than the reference GTX 570 from MSI - and I got Batman Arkham city for free, so in the end you are looking at a 40 Euro price difference for 1-2 minimum FPS less in a game but better material quality, better cooling, better overclocking potential.


I am playing at 1080p and the card is completely obliterating anything I threw at it so far (currently enjoying Arkham City. I must say physx is just a bonus but playing a game that supports it I am really glad choosing nvidia over AMD....)


As far as the evga Classified goes - that card was actually my first choice! Fastest GTX 560 448 out of the box. But supply was slow over here so I chose the MSI instead which was directly available :) 
m
0
l
a c 88 U Graphics card
December 10, 2011 9:16:56 PM

The 560ti 448 is a great performer , even in some benchmarks it beats the 570, the 1.2 vram will see you through as long as you don't go multi monitor or want to go 3D
m
0
l
a c 176 U Graphics card
December 10, 2011 10:13:05 PM

I've heard the PCB thing, but I still have yet to see one benchie of an OC'd 448 vs an OC'd GTX570. Only stock. Wonder why that is...
m
0
l
a c 153 U Graphics card
December 10, 2011 10:37:43 PM

4745454b said:
I've heard the PCB thing, but I still have yet to see one benchie of an OC'd 448 vs an OC'd GTX570. Only stock. Wonder why that is...


Overclock3D did OC 448 vs OC 570s.

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/msi_gtx...

OC 448 and OC 570 were literally neck in neck in everything, usually just a few tenths of an FPS off of each other.
m
0
l
a c 176 U Graphics card
December 10, 2011 10:49:38 PM

Good lord I hate that site. Hard to read and no order to the cards...

Any info on the GTX570? They say OC'd, but there isn't any info on the card that I could find. For all I know its only 20MHz on the core. (which if thats all an avg 570 can do thats fine. I'm just wondering here.)
m
0
l
a c 153 U Graphics card
December 10, 2011 10:57:53 PM

I'm not sure the exact settings but Tom always overclocks his card as high as he can in every review I've seen (while being 24/7 stable). Hes actually a great reviewer, I stick to his videos instead of the site, because as you said, it is very hard to read.
m
0
l
a c 176 U Graphics card
December 11, 2011 12:51:25 AM

Whew, so its not my eyes....
m
0
l
!