# GTX 560 Ti Debate



## WarpedHorizon (Nov 29, 2011)

Just the other day I was excited that I had decided what graphics card I was going to buy. Then today the new GTX 560 Ti 448 Core launched, and now I'm again unsure. I had decided on the MSI GTX 560 Ti Hawk, it meets my goals for noise, heat and overclockability. But the 448 core is a faster, especially when overclocked, and only $50 more. Only it's a limited edition, so in a year or so when I'm starting to think about adding SLI I probably won't be able to find one. As it stands, with a $250 graphics card my budget has a $210 surplus for an SSD and a (used) hard drive (), so the extra $50 spent on a graphics card still leaves me with $160 left for storage. Should I stick with the normal 560 Ti or take advantage of the 448 core versions better performance?
For reference my build is aimed at gaming and video editing on a tight budget, the components I have so far are: i5-2500k (Microcenter Black Friday deal), Asus P8Z68-V (another Microcenter deal), 8 gb Vengeance LP ram, 700 W OCZ Modstream power supply, a 23" HD Acer monitor (Newegg Black friday deal), and a free coolermaster case. Components I'm going to buy- Hyper 212 Evo, Windows 7, harddrive(s), and mouse/keyboard/speakers.


----------



## newtekie1 (Nov 29, 2011)

I say go for the GTX565...errr....um...GTX560 Ti 448.  The extra power and RAM should come in handy in the next year.

As for finding another for SLI in a year or so, either way you go, the card is going to be hard to find.  The GTX560 Ti will have been replaced by then, and pickings will be slim.


----------



## Jetster (Nov 29, 2011)

$300 for a 560 Ti did I read that right? Or is it $250 after the extra $50  Im gonna pass, especially if its a limited addition. There are better options


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Nov 29, 2011)

Jetster said:


> $300 for a 560 Ti did I read that right? Or is it $250 after the extra $50  Im gonna pass, especially if its a limited addition. There are better options



If so, spend $50 more and get an asus GTX 570 DCII card.


----------



## thebluebumblebee (Nov 29, 2011)

GTX 560 = OC'd GTX460 1GB with better power utilization
GTX 560 Ti = OC'd GTX 460 1GB on steroids with better power utilization
GTX 560 Ti 448 cores = OC'd GTX 470 with better power utilization

Don't you love what Nvidea does does with old parts?


----------



## newtekie1 (Nov 29, 2011)

thebluebumblebee said:


> GTX 560 = OC'd GTX460 1GB with better power utilization
> GTX 560 Ti = OC'd GTX 460 1GB on steroids with better power utilization
> GTX 560 Ti 448 cores = OC'd GTX 470 with better power utilization
> 
> Don't you love what Nvidea does does with old parts?



AMD does the same you know. At least nVidia is "updating" the cores and increase the clock speeds, AMD doesn't even bother to do that...


----------



## theJesus (Nov 29, 2011)

WarpedHorizon said:


> i5-2500k (Microcenter Black Friday deal), Asus P8Z68-V (another Microcenter deal), 8 gb Vengeance LP ram


omg, that's like all the same stuff I just bought 

I have a normal 560 Ti and I'm satisfied with it.  I looked at the benches and I don't think the extra performance from the new one is worth the $50.  Plus, it's a lot louder under load.


----------



## WarpedHorizon (Nov 29, 2011)

Jetster said:


> $300 for a 560 Ti did I read that right? Or is it $250 after the extra $50  Im gonna pass, especially if its a limited addition. There are better options


The "normal" 560 Ti is around $250-270, the 448 core ranges from $290-$320.
I'm not too worried about finding GTX 560 Ti's in the future, heck, you can still find GTX 460s places! So around this time next year I think there will still be some stock hanging around.


----------



## Jetster (Nov 30, 2011)

But for $280 you can get a 6950 2Gb


----------



## newtekie1 (Nov 30, 2011)

Jetster said:


> But for $280 you can get a 6950 2Gb



Yeah, you could, but the HD6950 2GB performs the same as the standard GTX560 Ti, and obviously worse than the GTX560 Ti 448...


----------



## John Doe (Nov 30, 2011)

newtekie1 said:


> Yeah, you could, but the HD6950 2GB performs the same as the standard GTX560 Ti, and obviously worse than the GTX560 Ti 448...



Except you can get this

MSI R6950 Twin Frozr III 1G/OC Radeon HD 6950 1GB ...

which is cheaper, comes with a solid cooler on top of high current inductors, unlockable...

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2428930&postcount=46

and make a guess from this chart. On it's performance once OC'ed beyond 6970 speeds. But I guess that's bit too much for your nVidia favoritism, eh?


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Dec 1, 2011)

I don't buy into "SLI next year, with last year's models".

SLI today, or next year sell the 560 and buy the latest card... which will give a similar performance for similar total investment (incl. resale value of old card) at much lower power consumption.


----------



## newtekie1 (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> Except you can get this
> 
> MSI R6950 Twin Frozr III 1G/OC Radeon HD 6950 1GB ...
> 
> ...




Yes, you are correct, it also isn't $280.  If he had said you can get an HD 6950 2GB for $260, my comment would have been different.

Of course, what you linked to is the 1GB model, which isn't known to unlock.  But I'm guessing your AMD Favoritism blinded you to those facts, you were just too caught up in the rage of someone else not bowing down to AMD being god that you didn't notice these little details.

The 2GB version you are trying to prove a point with is actually $300.  Though if he is thinking of the GTX560 Ti 448, I would definitely put that card in the running, assuming he is willing to risk the unlock.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

newtekie1 said:


> Of course, what you linked to is the 1GB model, which isn't known to unlock.  But I'm guessing your AMD Favoritism blinded you to those facts, you were just too caught up in the rage of someone else not bowing down to AMD being god that you didn't notice these little details.



It's the core that decides on the unlock, not the memory size. Yes, some manufactorers might change revisions between 1 and 2 GB versions, though that's not the case here. Both are unlockable; I've seen it over OCN. And even if it isn't, you can short out two resistors, then unlock.



newtekie1 said:


> The 2GB version you are trying to prove a point with is actually $300.  Though if he is thinking of the GTX560 Ti 448, I would definitely put that card in the running, assuming he is willing to risk the unlock.



Risking the unlock... it's not the unlock that adds most the performance actually. It's clock speeds with these cards. See W1zzard's article on it. These are Twin-Frozr's, so no limitation of weak stock cooler of the Cayman GPU. It'll OC. And when it does, it'd be a better choice than your belowed, limited nVidia board, which doesn't have as much OC'ing headroom as a good 6950.


----------



## LordJummy (Dec 1, 2011)

newtekie1 said:


> Yes, you are correct, it also isn't $280.  If he had said you can get an HD 6950 2GB for $260, my comment would have been different.
> 
> Of course, what you linked to is the 1GB model, which isn't known to unlock.  But I'm guessing your AMD Favoritism blinded you to those facts, you were just too caught up in the rage of someone else not bowing down to AMD being god that you didn't notice these little details.
> 
> The 2GB version you are trying to prove a point with is actually $300.  Though if he is thinking of the GTX560 Ti 448, I would definitely put that card in the running, assuming he is willing to risk the unlock.



Just to clarify, you can unlock the 1GB models shaders the same as the 2GB. Same core.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Dec 1, 2011)

If the OP is also interested in video editing and uses Premiere Pro the Nvidia is the way to go although CS5.5 supports only 570 and 580 but I've read that there's a posiibility to unlock lower end cards. On the other hand lately (good) games tend to use more VRAM so I'd definitely choose the 448 core Ti with 1280 MB over the one GB model 6950. Better still would be a 2GB 6950, check prices.


----------



## newtekie1 (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> It's the core that decides on the unlock, not the memory size. Yes, some manufactorers might change revisions between 1 and 2 GB versions, though that's not the case here. Both are unlockable; I've seen it over OCN. And even if it isn't, you can short out two resistors, then unlock.
> 
> 
> 
> Risking the unlock... it's not the unlock that adds most the performance actually. It's clock speeds with these cards. See W1zzard's article on it. These are Twin-Frozr's, so no limitation of weak stock cooler of the Cayman GPU. It'll OC. And when it does, it'd be a better choice than your belowed, limited nVidia board, which doesn't have as much OC'ing headroom as a good 6950.



Doesn't have as much headroom as a good 6950?  W1z's review of the 6950 TF III only gave it a 14% overclock without voltage increases, the TF III 560 448 got 15%.  He didn't do voltage increases on the HD 560 Ti TF III, but I'm guessing it would still manage a better overclock than the HD 6950,  25% shouldn't be out of the question with the TF III GTX560 448.

Oh, and then there is the fact that the GTX560 Ti 448 starts with a 10% head start in performance already...

But again, I was just responding to the original comment about any old generic HD6950 for $280.  As I said, I'd put the HD 6950 TF III card in the running if the OP was looking to spend that kind of money.  Sorry if you rampant AMD fanboyism made you glance over that point.


----------



## WarpedHorizon (Dec 1, 2011)

*I should stop thinking.....*

So I got to thinking today- SLI was more as a gimick than a real performance nessesity, and I should probably chose the best single card solution. I like the 560 Ti's alot, but part of me thinks I should explore AMD a bit more. I can get the 6950 with the same MSI parts, more Vram, and the ability to reflash for a lot more speed, for $30 less than the 448 core. And with the launch with the new 7000 series prices should come down. Any thoughts?


----------



## LordJummy (Dec 1, 2011)

WarpedHorizon said:


> So I got to thinking today- SLI was more as a gimick than a real performance nessesity, and I should probably chose the best single card solution. I like the 560 Ti's alot, but part of me almost thinks I should explore AMD a bit more. I can get the 6950 with the same MSI parts, more Vram, and the ability to reflash for a lot more speed, for $30 less than the 448 core. And with the launch with the new 7000 series prices should come down. Any thoughts?



From an unbiased perspective I would say go for the 2GB 6950 (reference if possible for quality pcb and components). My reference 6950 is INCREDIBLE. It overclocked to about 1100MHz (on air. haven't tested it with water). It actually overclocked higher than both of my 6970's. It is a powerful card, and it really shines at high resolutions with texture mods, etc. The 2GB vram is very nice for new games and mods.

My main computer is a dual 6970 setup + a 6950 at the moment.

My secondary computer is same intel platform, but with dual reference gtx 480's. I really love the performance of the sli 480's, but my 6970's seem to outshine them a bit with my triple screen setup. The VRAM comes into play especially when i'm running high end dx11 games, and stuff that has super high res textures.

I would recommend the 6950 2GB if you're to get a single card, want to be able to tinker with it and unlock/OC, and like to turn up the eye candy while playing at high resolutions. I can't speak for the 448 core 560Ti personally.


*EDIT: if using CS5 is your main concern, go with a gtx 480 or a 570. I think adobe only supports cuda.


----------



## newtekie1 (Dec 1, 2011)

WarpedHorizon said:


> So I got to thinking today- SLI was more as a gimick than a real performance nessesity, and I should probably chose the best single card solution. I like the 560 Ti's alot, but part of me thinks I should explore AMD a bit more. I can get the 6950 with the same MSI parts, more Vram, and the ability to reflash for a lot more speed, for $30 less than the 448 core. And with the launch with the new 7000 series prices should come down. Any thoughts?



I don't think prices will come down with the launch of the 7000 series, people always hope for that, but I don't see it happening all that often.  What usually happens is that supplies starts to dry up as the launch nears, and the older cards that  should be going down in price, end up staying at the same price due to supply being low.  Then after launch, the prices don't tend to come down nearly as much as they should.

Going with an AMD card is definitely worth looking into, and if you can get the HD6950 2GB for cheaper than the GTX560 Ti 448, as I said, it is definitely a card worth looking at.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

newtekie1 said:


> Doesn't have as much headroom as a good 6950?  W1z's review of the 6950 TF III only gave it a 14% overclock without voltage increases, the TF III 560 448 got 15%.  He didn't do voltage increases on the HD 560 Ti TF III, but I'm guessing it would still manage a better overclock than the HD 6950,  25% shouldn't be out of the question with the TF III GTX560 448.
> 
> Oh, and then there is the fact that the GTX560 Ti 448 starts with a 10% head start in performance already...
> 
> But again, I was just responding to the original comment about any old generic HD6950 for $280.  As I said, I'd put the HD 6950 TF III card in the running if the OP was looking to spend that kind of money.  Sorry if you rampant AMD fanboyism made you glance over that point.



%25? Uhm, yeah. Maths? You know %25 of a 560 Ti 448 equals about 900 on core right? Good luck with that. I think you should re-read what's written here, especially Jummy's post to inform yourself on this GPU. The Cayman GPU is argueably the best budget choice. 6950's OC beyond 6970 speeds, which means better performance than a 560 Ti 448. The 560 Ti 448 is a crippled 570, you can't expect it to OC like a solid 6950.

The only fanboy here is you. It's centered around you no matter how hard you try to hide it.

"AMD does the same you know. At least nVidia is "updating" the cores and increase the clock speeds, AMD doesn't even bother to do that..."

See? Oh well.


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 1, 2011)

I have both a 560Ti and a 2GB 6950 (currently fully flashed to 6970) on a dual Bios.  What I can tell you about the 6950 (without the flash) is thats it's a damn nice card, mine overclocks to 930mhz without voltage adjustment.  My 560Ti overclocks to 995mhz without voltage adjustment and feels faster and snappier.  

The same really applies with raised voltages, in so much as the 560Ti maintains a healthy Mhz lead over the 6950 which has less headroom for overclocking as mine seems to be limited to 965mhz no matter how much voltage I put through it, where as, I can do a fairly small hike on the 560 to 1.050V and get 1050mhz.

All in all, they are both fine cards, if I was buying just one based on what I know now and it was between a 1GB 6950 or a 560Ti I would simply say go with the cheaper, either way you won't be dissapointed.  I suppose the only thing I could add to that is, that if you do not overclock, then I would probably just about go for the 6950.  As for the special edition..... nice card from the sound of it but I would save my money, to be honest you will have enough with either of these other 2 cards, remembering that a 560ti @ around 1000mhz equates to a stock clocked 570 in performance.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

The plain 560 Ti is a Mhz-based card like the 460 before it. It makes up for it's lack of shader power from high clock speeds. The new one (448) core is based on a 570 and function at lower frequencies, while packing more ROP's/vRAM etc.

A 6950 will beat a plain 560 Ti at the same clocks. There technically is no such thing as "feeling snappier". It's a placebo effect. Look at the chart I posted at the center of the thread. Plain 560 Ti gets slapped by a 6950, whether it's at stock or OC'ed over 6970 speeds.


----------



## LordJummy (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> %25? Uhm, yeah. Maths? You know %25 of a 560 Ti 448 equals about 900 on core right? Good luck with that. I think you should re-read what's written here, especially Jummy's post to inform yourself on this GPU. The Cayman GPU is argueably the best budget choice. 6950's OC beyond 6970 speeds, which means better performance than a 560 Ti 448. The 560 Ti 448 is a crippled 570, you can't expect it to OC like a solid 6950.
> 
> The only fanboy here is you. It's centered around you no matter how hard you try to hide it.
> 
> ...



We've had differences in the past, but I have to agree with you here.

Right on the money.


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> The plain 560 Ti is a Mhz-based card like the 460 before it. It makes up for it's lack of shader power from high clock speeds. The new one (448) core is based on a 570 and function at lower frequencies, while packing more ROP's/vRAM etc.
> 
> A 6950 will beat a plain 560 Ti at the same clocks. There technically is no such thing as "feeling snappier". It's a placebo effect. Look at the chart I posted at the center of the thread. Plain 560 Ti gets slapped by a 6950, whether it's at stock or OC'ed over 6970 speeds.



Snappier includes FPS in the couple of games I play and i clearly didnt say "the same clocks" (I specifically made reference to overclocking, hence why i said if you dont overclock then I would probably recommend the 6950) and my point is, my 560 (so I guess some others) have greater overclocking headroom against their 6950 counterparts, with that headroom comes performance.... simple really.......... I do not come to this conclusion lightly, especially after having enjoyed (and still do) the use of a 6950/6970 for well over a year.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

Tatty_One said:


> Snappier includes FPS in the couple of games I play and i clearly didnt say "the same clocks" and my point is, my (so I guess some others) have greater overclocking headroom against their 6950 counterparts, with that headroom comes performance.... simple really.......... I do not come to this conclusion lightly, especially after having enjoyed (and still do) the use of a 6950/6970 for well over a year.



It doesn't have a greater OC'ing headroom than it's 6950 counterparts. It only OC's higher since it's based on a 460. 6950 has better performance per-clock. Even if it OC's slower, it'll still beat a 560 Ti. Just like how a 470 beats the 560 Ti at slower clocks. Because it simply has a better chip onboard.


----------



## newtekie1 (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> %25? Uhm, yeah. Maths? You know %25 of a 560 Ti 448 equals about 900 on core right? Good luck with that. I think you should re-read what's written here, especially Jummy's post to inform yourself on this GPU. The Cayman GPU is argueably the best budget choice. 6950's OC beyond 6970 speeds, which means better performance than a 560 Ti 448. The 560 Ti 448 is a crippled 570, you can't expect it to OC like a solid 6950.
> 
> The only fanboy here is you. It's centered around you no matter how hard you try to hide it.
> 
> ...



You think 900Mhz would be hard for a GTX560 Ti 448 TF III?  You do realize the card does 863Mhz without any voltage bump at all, right?  You don't think going from 0.98v to 1.10v would allow an extra 37Mhz?  Yeah, good luck with trying to argue that.

Your argument that a HD6950 can overclock past HD6970 speeds is moot, the GTX560 448 is already at HD6970 performance, and out overclocks a HD6950(or at the very least matches it), so you are wrong, sorry.

And my true comment only offends you because you hate to hear anyone even think about the fact that AMD might be the same as nVidia, it kills you to consider it, and anyone that even mentions it, regardless of how true it is, must be a fanboy.


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 1, 2011)

John, it has greater overclocking headroom than MY 6950 which is what is important to me, I find that providing I can get at least 50mhz more out of my 560 over my 6950 in relative terms then I can match it in FPS, any more than that 50 gives me better performance is all I am saying.


----------



## EarthDog (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> Except you can get this
> 
> MSI R6950 Twin Frozr III 1G/OC Radeon HD 6950 1GB ...
> 
> ...


A couple things, that 1GB card is not unlockable, at least mine wasnt (and so said the MSI rep, but I tried anyway). Also, what you quoted is the 2GB model not the 1GB. And after overclocking, it crapped out on me past stock on the core. Great choice there (though yes, Im sure others wouldnt crap out). 

Not to mention 1GB of VRAM Id rather not have considering how at least BF3 uses 1.2GB+ at 1920x1080 4xMSAA Ultra. No thanks.

OCF will have a review up of the 560ti 448core in a couple weeks and it will be compared to the 6950 1GB JohnDoe is talking about.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

newtekie1 said:


> You think 900Mhz would be hard for a GTX560 Ti 448 TF III?  You do realize the card does 863Mhz without any voltage bump at all, right?  You don't think going from 0.98v to 1.10v would allow an extra 37Mhz?  Yeah, good luck with trying to argue that.



Yes. The best card out of all hit that speed. You've to be lucky to do 900 Mhz on a 560 Ti 448. Bumping the voltage doesn't always help if your core is stuck at that point. 900 Mhz is a 580 OC speed.



newtekie1 said:


> Youare argument that a HD6950 can overclock past HD6970 speeds is moot, the GTX560 448 is already at HD6970 performance, and out overclocks a HD6950(or at the very least matches it), so you are wrong, sorry.



It'd make up for it from a higher OC. If that's the case, then you need to provide proof.



newtekie1 said:


> And my true comment only offends you because you hate to hear anyone even think about the fact that AMD might be the same as nVidia, it kills you to consider it, and anyone that even mentions it, regardless of how true it is, must be a fanboy.



No, it doesn't. You'd go about telling people how X's and XT's confuse people in X1900 cards. I've seen it too many times here that I'd almost classify it as trolling. You put nVidia on top of AMD/ATi on every occasion you find.


----------



## newtekie1 (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> Yes. The best card out of all hit that speed. You've to be lucky to do 900 Mhz on a 560 Ti 448. Bumping the voltage doesn't always help if your core is stuck at that point. 900 Mhz is a 580 OC speed.



Yes, and it is the card we are talking about here.  Even the basic Zotac card could hit 900Mhz with voltage bumps.





John Doe said:


> It'd make up for it from a higher OC. If that's the case, then you need to provide proof.



What higher overclock, you haven't really proven that the HD6950 could even manage a higher overclock, and certainly not a high enough overclock to overcome the 10% lacking in performance.



John Doe said:


> No, it doesn't. You'd go about telling people how X's and XT's confuse people in X1900 cards. I've seen it too many times here that I'd almost classify it as trolling. You put nVidia on top of AMD/ATi on every occasion you find.



No, when in a discussion about how nVidia's renaming is meant to confuse, I stated that the x1900XTX was the same as the x1950XT, and pointed out that the same "confusion" argument could be applied to AMD/ATi.  Obviously pointing out that AMD/ATi uses the same strategies you bash nVidia for annoyed you to no end being an AMD/ATi fanboy, sorry.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> Yes. The best card out of all hit that speed. You've to be lucky to do 900 Mhz on a 560 Ti 448. Bumping the voltage doesn't always help if your core is stuck at that point. 900 Mhz is a 580 OC speed.



you do realize that the 560 TI 448, the 570, and the 580 all share the same core right? Clock speed isn't dependant on the amount of the gpu that's unlocked. 900+ works on 570's and 580's alike. It's the 470's and 480's that struggle to hit those speeds. Considering the 560 TI 448 is the same core if a 580 can hit it, so can a 570, and so can a 560 TI 448. (liek seriosuly it's a different core nvidia, change the damn name.:shadedshu)




John Doe said:


> It'd make up for it from a higher OC. If that's the case, then you need to provide proof.


sigh a 560 TI 448 at STOCK is as fast as an OVERCLOCKED and UNLOCKED 6950. So if you overclock the 560 TI 448 AT ALL. You'll beat the 6950 easily. The only benefit the 6950 has is the extra vram in the 2GB model.


----------



## newtekie1 (Dec 1, 2011)

yogurt_21 said:


> It's the 470's and 480's that struggle to hit those speeds.



Shhhh...don't tell him that, he has been going around saying the GTX470 has more overclock headroom than the GTX560 Ti 448.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 1, 2011)

I would trade my reference 570 in for a 560ti 448 for the overclocking alone...

Honestly, by the time that you run out of 1/1.2gbs of ram on these cards, you're already pulling enough eyecandy that you are out of GPU horsepower, barring a few exceptions/multi card setups.  

Also I have found the 570 to play really smoothly and have great driver support.  Im pretty happy with it, barring the crappy VRMs (dont buy a ref 570 ever).

Just my 2c - I would go with a 448 and clock the crap out of it... its the poor man's 580.


----------



## newtekie1 (Dec 1, 2011)

phanbuey said:


> Also I have found the 570 to play really smoothly and have great driver support. Im pretty happy with it, barring the crappy VRMs (dont buy a ref 570 ever).



Or just don't push the voltage past 1.1v is you do buy a reference GTX570.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 1, 2011)

newtekie1 said:


> Or just don't push the voltage past 1.1v is you do buy a reference GTX570.



Mine died on me at 1.05 / 830 Mhz   I thought I was safe... right as I entered a room in Dragon age 2.  The replacement is now undervolted at 766Mhz 

If i got my hands on one of these 448's, it would easily beat my 570 at stock volts, just based on the reviews alone.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

EarthDog said:


> A couple things, that 1GB card is not unlockable, at least mine wasnt (and so said the MSI rep, but I tried anyway). Also, what you quoted is the 2GB model not the 1GB. And after overclocking, it crapped out on me past stock on the core. Great choice there (though yes, Im sure others wouldnt crap out).
> 
> Not to mention 1GB of VRAM Id rather not have considering how at least BF3 uses 1.2GB+ at 1920x1080 4xMSAA Ultra. No thanks.



1 GB vRAM is sufficient %95 of the time. As for the unlock, just because yours didn't, and crapped out when you OC'ed, doesn't mean any other would. If it crapped out when you tried to OC it, then you had a dud chip. 

As for the MSI rep you're talking about, Alex doesn't know what exactly unlocks (all the time) and what not. Nobody does. Unlocking is a chance.



yogurt_21 said:


> you do realize that the 560 TI 448, the 570, and the 580 all share the same core right? Clock speed isn't dependant on the amount of the gpu that's unlocked. 900+ works on 570's and 580's alike. It's the 470's and 480's that struggle to hit those speeds. Considering the 560 TI 448 is the same core if a 580 can hit it, so can a 570, and so can a 560 TI 448.



Frequencies depend heavily on the batch. The 560 Ti 448 has a worse die than both the 570 and the 580, so it'll be hardest to hit 900 Mhz with.



yogurt_21 said:


> sigh a 560 TI 448 at STOCK is as fast as an OVERCLOCKED and UNLOCKED 6950. So if you overclock the 560 TI 448 AT ALL. You'll beat the 6950 easily. The only benefit the 6950 has is the extra vram in the 2GB model.



Yeah, a %9 difference. 6950 OC's very well. And we'll see about that in the review EarthDog mentioned. 



newtekie1 said:


> Shhhh...don't tell him that, he has been going around saying the GTX470 has more overclock headroom than the GTX560 Ti 448.



The 470 has more to gain than many other cards from OC'ing. It makes up for it's slow 600 Mhz stock core when you take it beyond 800-850 core. It can beat a 480 by a tiny bit.

The 560 Ti 448 on the other hand is similar to a 570. It already has a higher stock clock, and doesn't have as much to gain from an OC.


----------



## EarthDog (Dec 1, 2011)

Reread my edit. The 1Gb does not unlock, what you linked is to the 2GB.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

EarthDog said:


> Reread my edit. The 1Gb does not unlock, what you linked is to the 2GB.



And how are you exactly sure about that?


----------



## LordJummy (Dec 1, 2011)

I would love to pit my cherry 6950 up against this new 448 core 560Ti to see which can squeeze out the most total performance.

Is this review not accurate? Someone said there will be a new overclocking review out soon?


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> The 470 has more to gain than many other cards from OC'ing. It makes up for it's slow 600 Mhz stock core when you take it beyond 800-850 core. It can beat a 480 by a tiny bit.
> 
> The 560 Ti 448 on the other hand is similar to a 570. It already has a higher stock clock, and doesn't have as much to gain from an OC.



This is wrong.  The 470 is incredibly difficult to get above 800 Mhz without heavy voltage - anything in or near 850 requires massive volts.  

The 570 core is the same as the 580 core, which can easily hit 950Mhz at 1.15v when properly juiced.  The 570 has weak VRMs which kills the headroom, but the core is much more solid than the 4 series.

If anything these 448Mhz cards, with their tweaked VRM's will easily fly past 900Mhz... depending on how good the software control is, i would not be surprised to see 580 (950Mhz+) at all.


----------



## LordJummy (Dec 1, 2011)

phanbuey said:


> This is wrong.  The 470 is incredibly difficult to get above 800 Mhz without heavy voltage - anything in or near 850 requires massive volts.
> 
> The 570 core is the same as the 580 core, which can easily hit 950Mhz at 1.15v when properly juiced.  The 570 has weak VRMs which kills the headroom, but the core is much more solid than the 4 series.
> 
> If anything these 448Mhz cards, with their tweaked VRM's will easily fly past 900Mhz... depending on how good the software control is, i would not be surprised to see 580 (950Mhz+) at all.



I think he means the 470 yields more substantial gains if you are ABLE to reach those clocks, am I right?

I don't think he's saying it's easier to OC at all.


----------



## newtekie1 (Dec 1, 2011)

LordJummy said:


> I think he means the 470 yields more substantial gains if you are ABLE to reach those clocks, am I right?
> 
> I don't think he's saying it's easier to OC at all.



And it doesn't really matter, since the GTX560 Ti 448 is specced the same as the GTX470 the GTX560 Ti 448 can reach higher clocks in the end, and hence has a higher headroom and will perform better.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

phanbuey said:


> This is wrong.  The 470 is incredibly difficult to get above 800 Mhz without heavy voltage - anything in or near 850 requires massive volts.



I've one that does 825 at 1.03. In fact, the one I kept for PhysX goes all the way up to 900 at 1.025v. 

http://img.techpowerup.org/110919/Temp.jpg



phanbuey said:


> The 570 core is the same as the 580 core, which can easily hit 950Mhz at 1.15v when properly juiced.  The 570 has weak VRMs which kills the headroom, but the core is much more solid than the 4 series.



You need luck to do 950 on a 570, and I'm talking about non-ref 570's. Or even a 580.



phanbuey said:


> If anything these 448Mhz cards, with their tweaked VRM's will easily fly past 900Mhz... depending on how good the software control is, i would not be surprised to see 580 (950Mhz+) at all.



No, they won't. See the link Jummy posted. Card gets slightly outdone by a 6950 at stock. 

Over 950 Mhz on a 560 Ti 448 is a dream. Get back to reality.


----------



## Benetanegia (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> It doesn't have a greater OC'ing headroom than it's 6950 counterparts. It only OC's higher since it's based on a 460. 6950 has better performance per-clock. Even if it OC's slower, it'll still beat a 560 Ti. Just like how a 470 beats the 560 Ti at slower clocks. Because it simply has a better chip onboard.
> 
> http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/9696/haux2.jpg



You know, it's so funny how you keep posting that single bench in every single thread and pretend it proves anything... 

1- It's a single game, single config and you didn't ever post the link to where it belongs (aka ZERO proof). Everybody is showing you average performance of a dozen or two of games, from W1zzard's review (aka the best review) from the same site you are posting on.

2- HAWX 2, first of all, seriously? Second: TESSELATION. The GTX470 is a high-end chip and has 4 Polymorph engines. GTX560 Ti is mid-range card and Nvidia cut corners there, only including 2 PEs. That alone makes those results worthless, since the card with more tesselators will obviously gain more from overclocking, since it's not bottlenecked at the geometry stage.

3- 32xAA. Same as above. High-end versus mid-range. 320 bit/1280 MB vs. 256 bit/1024MB. Of course the card with the memory advantage gains more with such a high AA level, but speaks nothing about the true OC capabilities of each core. As dozens of reviews have shown, the GTX500 series overclock as well (percentually speaking) if not better than GTX400 series, and that includes the 560 Ti and also the 560 Ti 448.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> You know, it's so funny how you keep posting that single bench in every single thread and pretend it proves anything...



Then take it to the thread I took it from. 470 beats the 560 Ti once both are OC'ed period. You should do some research.

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2391312#post2391312


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> No, they won't. See the link Jummy posted. Card gets slightly outdone by a 6950 at stock.
> 
> Over 950 Mhz on a 560 Ti 448 is a dream. Get back to reality.



No way - it hits 860Mhz at stock volts - uses the same silicon as the 580:

here you go:

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/asus_gtx580_review/4.htm

962mhz on a 580 at 1.23v. 560TI 448 will OC better than the 570 - it already does! lol... its hitting 860Mhz on STOCK volts.  No 570's, and few 580's can hit 860mhz on stock volts.

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/asus_engtx580_directcu_ii/4.htm

979Mhz on a 580 at 1.15v...

You give that card enough juice, and it will fly.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

phanbuey said:


> No way - it hits 860Mhz at stock volts - uses the same silicon as the 580:
> 
> here you go:
> 
> ...



Same silicon but NOT the same batch, not the same PCB. The 580 has the best die out of the three. It has an easier chance of hitting higher speeds. But not the 560 Ti 448. You don't need to link to a 580 review. Your point is unrelated to the OP.

As for my 470's, I've two here that both easily do 825 at 1.025v.


----------



## Solaris17 (Dec 1, 2011)

LordJummy said:


> *From an unbiased perspective* I would say go for the 2GB 6950 (reference if possible for quality pcb and components). *My reference 6950 is INCREDIBLE.* It overclocked to about 1100MHz (on air. haven't tested it with water). It actually overclocked higher than both of my 6970's. It is a powerful card, and it really shines at high resolutions with texture mods, etc. The 2GB vram is very nice for new games and mods.
> 
> My main computer is a dual 6970 setup + a 6950 at the moment.
> 
> ...


----------



## Benetanegia (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> Then take it to the thread I took it from. 470 beats the 560 Ti once both are OC'ed period. You should do some research.
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2391312#post2391312



Oh my... really? A 320 bit 448 SP card beats a 256 bit 384 SP card when both are clocked at similar speeds? Wow, who would have thought that. 

The problem (as everybody is telling you everywhere including the first page in that thread) is that getting a GTX470 to 900 Mhz is nearly imposible, while 1 Ghz on the GTX560 Ti is rather "average" *in comparison* (with enphasis on the bolded part). Like you are being told over and over again you have to be lucky to get the GTX470 past 800 Mhz.



John Doe said:


> Same silicon but NOT the same batch, not the same PCB. The 580 has the best die out of the three. It has an easier chance of hitting higher speeds. But not the 560 Ti 448. You don't need to link to a 580 review. Your point is unrelated to the OP.
> 
> As for my 470's, I've two here that both easily do 825 at 1.025v.



Oh please don't tell me that you really think these trully are harvested/salvaged parts, this late in the game, with GTX580 on the market for over a year now. They are the exact same chips as GTX570, with the exact same capabilities. Only they artificially crippled them so to create a new spot in the lineup and to move some inventory. Similar thing some partners did with some GTX470s that were sold as GTX465 back in the day. The ones that unlocked, remember?


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 1, 2011)

John Doe said:


> Same silicon but NOT the same batch, not the same PCB. The 580 has the best die out of the three. It has an easier chance of hitting higher speeds. But not the 560 Ti 448. You don't need to link to a 580 review.
> 
> As for my 470's, I've two here that both easily do 825 at 1.025v.



Its exactly the same shit lol, with SMD's disabled... in any case later batches almost always OC better than earlier ones.  If you look at how 580's overclock at stock (no volts) they are very similar to the 448Ti.  The review you linked had a regular non gf110 560ti at 1Ghz lol.

In fact, usually the fewer SP's you have enabled on the same silicone, the higher you can OC, on average, if everything else is the same... just take a look at your 6950 vs 6970, same rule applies.  Your contradicting yourself by saying your 6950 OC's better than a 6970, but that this card wont do better than a 580 lol.


----------



## John Doe (Dec 1, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> The problem (as everybody is telling you everywhere including the first page in that thread) is that getting a GTX470 to 900 Mhz is nearly imposible, while 1 Ghz on the GTX560 Ti is rather "average" *in comparison* (with enphasis on the bolded part). Like you are being told over and over again you have to be lucky to get the GTX470 past 800 Mhz.



Many 470's do 800-850. And it'd beat a 560 Ti even at that speed. There's enough difference for it to beat a 560 Ti. Do some more research.



Benetanegia said:


> Oh please don't tell me that you really think these trully are harvested/salvaged parts, this late in the game, with GTX580 on the market for over a year now. They are the exact same chips as GTX570, with the exact same capabilities. Only they artificially crippled them so to create a new spot in the lineup and to move some inventory. Similar thing some partners did with some GTX470s that were sold as GTX465 back in the day. The ones that unlocked, remember?



Oh please take your BS back to Spain. 470 isn't the point of discussion, 560 Ti is. I only posted it as an example.



phanbuey said:


> Its exactly the same shit lol, with SMD's disabled... in any case later batches almost always OC better than earlier ones.  If you look at how 580's overclock at stock (no volts) they are very similar to the 448Ti.  The review you linked had a regular non gf110 560ti at 1Ghz lol.



Again, the two are unrelated.



phanbuey said:


> In fact, usually the fewer SP's you have enabled on the same silicone, the higher you can OC, on average, if everything else is the same... just take a look at your 6950 vs 6970, same rule applies.  Your contradicting yourself by saying your 6950 OC's better than a 6970, but that this card wont do better than a 580 lol.



I didn't say 6950 OC's better than a 6970. I said you can take a 6950 beyond 6970 speeds. You have higher chance of bigger clocks on a 6970. Same with comparing a 560 Ti against a 580.


----------



## Benetanegia (Dec 2, 2011)

John Doe said:


> Many 470's do 800-850. And it'd beat a 560 Ti even at that speed. There's enough difference for it to beat a 560 Ti. Do some more research.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please take your BS back to Spain. 470 isn't the point of discussion, 560 Ti is. I only posted it as an example.



First of all relax, kid, and mesure your words. Second the point of discussion is the GTX 560 Ti *448*, NOT the one you are comparing the GTX470 and HD6950 with. Pay attention. The 448 SP version is much faster and as has been proved several times *with real proof*, it also overclocks wonderfully. Stop trolling with your BS. It's not the first time you end up asshamed and I guess it won't be the last.


----------



## erocker (Dec 2, 2011)

Thread cleaned, stay on topic and post in a civil manner.


----------



## EarthDog (Dec 2, 2011)

John Doe said:


> And how are you exactly sure about that?


Not 100% sure. I would imagine you cant bios flash to the 6970 with it, which of course was/is not mandatory, as the memory does not match. This card does have a dual bios, but the board isnt reference which I believe significantly decreases the chances of the unlocking, correct?

Heh, just read erocker's post.. muh bad. PM me if you want JDoe.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 2, 2011)

http://www.guru3d.com/article/msi-geforce-gtx-560-ti-448-core-oc-power-review/23

914Mhz core with slight voltage tweak...  @580 speeds lol.


----------



## WarpedHorizon (Dec 3, 2011)

Lol I didn't mean to set off a firestorm....... 
I'm still undecided, and it would help if Microcenter would update their website so I could see the December ad. Microcenter has the Sapphire 6950 2GB, and if it wasn't $300 I'd get it. (The $20 rebate doesn't count). But at $300 I'd better off getting a 448 core. Only Amazon doesn't have them in stock, and I want it by next weekend, so I can't just use my Prime Trial to get it in two days. 
Oh and for reference the OC review shows a 6970 at 950 mhz vs. a 448 Core at 945 mhz and the 448 core places above the 6970 in almost every benchmark. And to really make things difficult the standard 560 Ti also did really well. It out preformed the 6970 in a few tests! And freeing up $50 in budget would let me make my case suck a bit less (an 80 mm intake and 120mm exhaust fan aren't going to give me much thermal headroom)


----------



## puma99dk| (Dec 4, 2011)

in my country i won't recommand buying a GTX560Ti 448 bcs it's starting at the same price as the GTX570 so from my pov, it's not worth it in my country since tax daddy ruined that price of the card :/

the GTX560Ti 448 starts around 399USD / 296euro same goes for GTX570.


----------



## Darkleoco (Dec 4, 2011)

Just to mention this for the 6950's if you are going to OC them and and tweak the voltage you would be able to get some very nice performance out of them, my cards are both running at 935/1400 and this is at stock voltage with about a half hours worth of tweaking so I still have some nice performance locked up in their.


----------

