Conclusions
In each case the Sparkle GTX 260 Plus with its massive 1792MB of memory outshone the 896MB card. Again, the Asus card when overclocked did not quite make up the performance difference shown by the extra memory, but it was close on the latter two tests. It wasn’t even close on Crysis, just as it wasn’t close on 3DMark Vantage.
So I suppose the question is more than clock rate vs memory size. I suppose you could overclock the GPU more, but 20% is a healthy overclock, and not attained by all video cards. Many cards I have overclocked showed no performance gains at all over the stock clock. And I have said here in the past, I don’t care for overclocking video cards in the first place, at least not for other than academic reasons. I’ve even had factory overclocked video cards that weren’t as stable as they would have been at the reference clock.
I consider the Sparkle GTX 260 Plus a nice video card. The white fan shroud definitely gives it a different look. The skrived heatsink is very effective, though I think it needs a little more fan speed than the stock setting. The fan is silent up to about 65%, which is plenty of wind to keep the GPU cool.
The Sparkle GTX 260 Plus sells for $219 at my favorite online retailer. That does take it out of the “bang-for-the-buck pricing that I feel the 896MB GTX 260s are in, but it does outperform them. Is paying an extra $20-$45 worth it, which is what the Sparkle GTX 260 Plus costs over the 896MB crowd? I’ve seen people spend over $100 to get a few extra FPS, the choice is up to you.
ThinkComputers gives the Sparkle GTX 260 Plus 1792MB video card a 9 out of 10 score.
Pros:
– Unique looks
– Extra memory gives significance performance over reference GTX 260
– Effective skrived heatsink
– Silent fan
Cons:
– Some may not like the white fan shroud
– Price takes it out of the under $200 category, but still priced well below the Radeon HD 5850
[ad#review1068-bottom]
Using skived fins in the heatisink is a nice touch.
Nice to see someone still releasing a GTX 260. A lot of other manufacturers seem to have stopped making them.
Using skived fins in the heatisink is a nice touch.
Nice to see someone still releasing a GTX 260. A lot of other manufacturers seem to have stopped making them.
What about cooling. I heard it need separate exhaust ?
IT LOOKS GREAAAAAT BOB. TOP OF THE LINE. YOU GOT IT BOY. DAD
with the cooling shell so large i wonder why they didn't make it a 2U PCI card?
What about cooling. I heard it need separate exhaust ?
What do you mean? It is a 2-slot video card…
It looks to me like the video exhausts some of the heat back into the case.
IT LOOKS GREAAAAAT BOB. TOP OF THE LINE. YOU GOT IT BOY. DAD
with the cooling shell so large i wonder why they didn't make it a 2U PCI card?
What do you mean? It is a 2-slot video card…
It looks to me like the video exhausts some of the heat back into the case.
2U as in it takes up two slots. Not internally, but externally. All mobo's are spaced differently so the internals don't matter. But, slot spacing on the back of a case is always the same. SO i was wondering why the mounting bracket on the card wasn't a 2U since the cooling shield was so big?
i.e. https://thinkcomputers.org/reviews/asus_engt…
Good question and since technically it takes up 2-slots I wonder why Sparkle never used a traditional PCI bracket with exhaust holes.
2U as in it takes up two slots. Not internally, but externally. All mobo's are spaced differently so the internals don't matter. But, slot spacing on the back of a case is always the same. SO i was wondering why the mounting bracket on the card wasn't a 2U since the cooling shield was so big?
i.e. https://thinkcomputers.org/reviews/asus_engt…
Good question and since technically it takes up 2-slots I wonder why Sparkle never used a traditional PCI bracket with exhaust holes.
This is a pretty good graphics card for the price you're paying, plus i've always been a fan of nvidia =D. top notch
This is a pretty good graphics card for the price you're paying, plus i've always been a fan of nvidia =D. top notch
True dat buts its too bad the GT200 and GT200b stocks are quite low.
True dat buts its too bad the GT200 and GT200b stocks are quite low.
Why would you benchmark that card in only 1280×1024?
Do you think that an additional 896 megs of GDDR3 (on top of the 260GTX's original 896mb) is going to make any appearance at resolution that low? Why would you even bother doing a benchmarking review if you weren't going to test this thing on more than 3 benchmarking utilities and on such a low resolution? You aren't going to need a card with more than 512mb of GDDR3 at that resolution. (Are we in 1998?) I know! How about 1680×1050 or 1920×1200, because we all know in 2009 everyone uses CRT monitors only capable of 1280×1024 resolution! How long did it take you to run these tests? 15 minutes? 20 minutes? Man, put a little effort into the next review. ThinkComputers… I don't see a lot of work or think going on here.
Why would you benchmark that card in only 1280×1024?
Do you think that an additional 896 megs of GDDR3 (on top of the 260GTX's original 896mb) is going to make any appearance at resolution that low? Why would you even bother doing a benchmarking review if you weren't going to test this thing on more than 3 benchmarking utilities and on such a low resolution? You aren't going to need a card with more than 512mb of GDDR3 at that resolution. (Are we in 1998?) I know! How about 1680×1050 or 1920×1200, because we all know in 2009 everyone uses CRT monitors only capable of 1280×1024 resolution! How long did it take you to run these tests? 15 minutes? 20 minutes? Man, put a little effort into the next review. ThinkComputers… I don't see a lot of work or think going on here.
You are entitled to your opinion but whining like a little baby doesn't help.
You are entitled to your opinion but whining like a little baby doesn't help.
You are entitled to your opinion but whining like a little baby doesn't help.
IMO 1792MB of memory is bit much.
IMO 1792MB of memory is bit much.
good for higher resolutions
Yea, it's a pretty good card, and sad to see it go.
i agree, that testing on a larger resolution should have been included. Perhaps, you could have not been so harsh in your comments though.
good for higher resolutions
Yea, it's a pretty good card, and sad to see it go.
i agree, that testing on a larger resolution should have been included. Perhaps, you could have not been so harsh in your comments though.
IMO 1792MB of memory is bit much.
good for higher resolutions
Yea, it's a pretty good card, and sad to see it go.
i agree, that testing on a larger resolution should have been included. Perhaps, you could have not been so harsh in your comments though.