On The Bench: EVGA GeForce GTX 460 FTW

Test System And Benchmarks

We’re including a number of cards in our benchmarks. From AMD, we have the Radeon HD 6850 and 6870. From Nvidia, the GeForce GTX 460 and 470, in addition to EVGA’s factory overclocked GTX460 FTW, of course.

As described in our Radeon HD 6800 launch article, the majority of GeForce GTX 460 cards on the market are at least slightly overclocked beyond the reference specification. To make sure the benchmarks reflect what's available for purchase, we averaged out the clocks for the seven cheapest models we could find for a fair representation of the GeForce GTX 460 playing field. As a result, we are benchmarking the GeForce GTX 460 1 GB at 708/1416 MHz core/shader speeds for our tests, a 33 MHz increase over the original reference core clock. This increase is so low that, frankly, it will probably have no measurable impact on our results. It does seem like the fair thing to do, though. The memory runs at the reference 900 MHz GDDR5 clock, as even overclocked models tend to leave memory at reference speeds.

It's also worth noting that most Radeon HD 6870s currently available ship at reference clock rates. There are a handful of 13 and 20 MHz speed bumps, and a couple of 40 MHz increases that command higher prices. However, for the folks ready to hit the comments section with, "Sure, compare overclocked Nvidia hardware to stock AMD cards," bear in mind that this is representative of today's retail landscape.


Test System
CPU
Intel Core i7-920 (Nehalem), 2.67 GHz, QPI-4200, 8 MB Cache
Overclocked to 3.61 GHz @ 172 MHz BCLK
Motherboard
Gigabyte X58A-UD3R
Intel X58, BIOS version FA
Networking
Onboard Gigabit LAN controller
Memory
Mushkin PC3-10700H
  3 x 2048 MB, DDR3-1376, CL 10-10-10-25-1T
Graphics
HIS Radeon HD 6870
1 GB GDDR5
MSI N6870
Radeon HD 6870, 1 GB GDDR5
HIS Radeon HD 6850
1 GB GDDR5
Radeon HD 6850 Reference
1 GB GDDR5
EVGA GeForce GTX 460 FTW Edition
GeForce GTX 460, 1 GB GDDR5
850/1700/1000 MHz core/shader/memory clocks
(also representing typical GeForce GTX 460 1 GB @ 708/1416/900 MHz core/shader/memory clocks)
Galaxy GeForce GTX 470
1280 MB GDDR5
(all clock rates have been set to reference specifications for the purpose of benchmarking)
Hard Drive
Western Digital Caviar WD50 00AAJS-00YFA,
500 GB, 7200 RPM, 8 MB cache, SATA 3Gb/s
Power
Thermaltake Toughpower 1200 W
1200 W, ATX 12V 2.2, EPS 12v 2.91
Software and Drivers
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
DirectX versionDirectX 11
Graphics Drivers
AMD Catalyst 10.10 Beta, Nvidia GeForce Driver 260.89 WHQL
Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
82 comments
    Your comment
  • Heh, "FTW". Still, EVGA's done a pretty impressive job here. Still a standby till the Geforce GTX 560 comes, but this is pretty darn good heading into winter
    1
  • Why not use the 10.12 beta drivers from AMD ?

    The current test used a 10.10 Beta driver which was more problematic then the 10.9 AMD drivers. Makes no sense to me.
    2
  • Typically I think factory overclocked cards are a waste of cash, but this seems like a pretty good value. I am very happy with my GTX 470, but if I could do it over I would of snatched up that GTX 460! The 470 is just so loud and hot. But it's whatever. The 460 didn't come out until 3 months after I bought the 470.
    2
  • If I to choose I will recommend the EVGA’s GTX460 FTW.
    -4
  • Quote:
    It'd be nice if Nvidia released a card sporting GF104 GPU and all eight streaming multiprocessors enabled, just to see what it can do.

    Bombard the the HD 6950? Maybe at a lesser price? Keeping my fingers crossed for the GTX 560 :D
    0
  • GTX550= GTX460maxcore @ 850mhz :O
    -2
  • macer1Why not use the 10.12 beta drivers from AMD ? The current test used a 10.10 Beta driver which was more problematic then the 10.9 AMD drivers. Makes no sense to me.

    Because articles take time to write esp when you need to benchmark things.
    1
  • Well, this doesn't sound too good for AMD. A fully enable GTX 460, which will probably launch as GX560 will probably come close enough, if not equal to the Radeon 6950.
    -2
  • Really?? A bumper sticker??? hahah... wow..
    2
  • RandomactsReally?? A bumper sticker??? hahah... wow..

    They didn't have enough fun tricking me into putting lame stickers on my expensive case when i was young so now they want me to put lame stickers on my car.
    2
  • I own 2 GTX470's and if i had seen this GTX460 FTW edition available i would have snatched them up in a heartbeat!

    My 470's are a force to be reckoned with but they're also incredibly loud on hot days (Which i can do Nothing about, even with Air conditioning) and according to these power figures suck up so much more power on average.

    I still think i made the right choice though, it isn't like i notice the sound when i'm playing games anyway.

    And WHY don't ratings work?! Seriously someone has to know..
    3
  • joytech22I own 2 GTX470's and if i had seen this GTX460 FTW edition available i would have snatched them up in a heartbeat!My 470's are a force to be reckoned with but they're also incredibly loud on hot days (Which i can do Nothing about, even with Air conditioning) and according to these power figures suck up so much more power on average.I still think i made the right choice though, it isn't like i notice the sound when i'm playing games anyway.And WHY don't ratings work?! Seriously someone has to know..

    Lolz your post almost exactly replicated touchdowntexas13's post right above.
    But anyways, that's always the punishment for early adoption. Of course, these cards here are already close to the end of their lifecycle (when the Geforce 500 series is fully unveiled)
    0
  • Does anyone really have so much trouble saying "hmmm look at the stock card overclocked benchmarks and that's what the 460 FTW looks like" that it justifies 10 pages just for this?
    -1
  • joytech22I own 2 GTX470's and if i had seen this GTX460 FTW edition available i would have snatched them up in a heartbeat!My 470's are a force to be reckoned with but they're also incredibly loud on hot days (Which i can do Nothing about, even with Air conditioning) and according to these power figures suck up so much more power on average.I still think i made the right choice though, it isn't like i notice the sound when i'm playing games anyway.And WHY don't ratings work?! Seriously someone has to know..


    Someone in development broke the ratings system. A bug report has been filed, and we're all eagerly awaiting the fix so that, once again, you guys can vote them up or down!
    4
  • Thanks for the review, but why weren't the graps sorted from highest to lowest and highlight the card being reviewed?
    2
  • cangeliniSomeone in development broke the ratings system.


    Haha! oh well stuff happens, thanks for the explanation.
    1
  • There is no point in buying these, you can overclock and overvolt pretty much any videocard, and you can get a better performing cooler for a lot less.
    0
  • You should have mentioned that almost all of the advantage over the Radeons came from the Civ 5 map benchmark.
    0
  • BullCatYou should have mentioned that almost all of the advantage over the Radeons came from the Civ 5 map benchmark.


    But the fps are so high that the difference is negligible. Most users playing the game run moniters at 60Hz. The real kicker would be to throw in Eyefinity and 3D Vision/Surround and see the impact of that. Still most users don't use those technologies either.
    0
  • 6870 draws only half the power of a GTX470 ! :O
    2