Nvidia GeForce GTX 560 Ti Review

By on January 25, 2011, 7:53 AM
Although we've seen plenty of good things from Nvidia's latest GeForce GTX 570 and 580, both cards are too pricey for the mainstream bracket as many gamers prefer to spend less than $300 on a GPU upgrade. For those folks, AMD is currently offering the Radeon HD 6870 and HD 6850 graphics cards, while Nvidia's solution consists of the 6-month-old GeForce GTX 460 768MB and 1GB.

It was only a matter of time until Nvidia added a mainstream performance graphics card to its GTX 500 series, and today we have that product. Known as the GeForce GTX 560 Ti, this new graphics card will retail for $250, placing it in direct competition with the Radeon HD 6870.


But what's the the "Ti" nomenclature comeback? Maybe Nvidia is trying to send a subliminal message, wanting to put their new GeForce GTX 560 Ti in a similar light to the very well regarded but now ancient GeForce 4 Ti 4200. Whatever the case may be, you won't hear us complaining if they decide to deliver great value on a performance oriented mainstream card.

Read the complete review.




User Comments: 38

Got something to say? Post a comment
Guest said:

You forgot to mention AMD's 6950, which is AMD's direct attempt to bump the GTX 560 Ti out of the spotlight. Launching at the same price point, it clearly outmatches the 560 and once again shows that AMD knows exactly what it is doing.. most of the time.

It's hard to recommend the 560 over the 6950, since they are releasing at the same price point and since the 6950 is offering better performance per pricing... and AMD is also dropping the pricing on the 6970, which makes it ever harder to recommend the card atm.

madboyv1, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Well, the two points for either card is: if you want more than two displays (ie three) then you get the 6950. If you play games that utilize Physx (or CUDA) or you intend to, or would like to overclock*, then get the 560 Ti.

Likewise, if you like AMD, get the 6950. If you like Nvidia, get the 560 Ti. If none of the above matters, flip a coin.

I don't see the difficulty here in terms of how and what to recommend. =)

*An arguable point, since last time I cared to check you can still "unlock" a 6950 to be a gelded 6970.

klepto12 klepto12, TechSpot Paladin, said:

this looks promising but the 6950 looks better overall and the 1GB version is $10 more plus with newer drivers the 6950 will just get faster i know the 560 will to but from a basic non overclocked stand point the 6950 is faster and the better card.

princeton princeton said:

My big factor is that SLI does and probably always will scale better.

klepto12 klepto12, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Princeton said:

My big factor is that SLI does and probably always will scale better.

Sli scaling is better but by how much crossfire seems to be catching up have you seen the scaling of the 6870 cards pretty nice if i do say so myself.

g4mer said:

It may get faster when new drivers come out.

TomSEA TomSEA, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Nice review as always. Blows my mind that you are using 16 different cards in the comparisons. Is there really a market for that many different cards??

madboyv1, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Princeton said:

My big factor is that SLI does and probably always will scale better.

I forgot about that one with my list of considerations earlier.

Being at around $250 ($500 for a pair), I wonder how the 560 Ti SLI'd stacks up against a single 580, out of curiosities sake. =o

Mizzou Mizzou said:

Nice card, looks like it falls between the Radeon HD 6870 & 6950. Will be interesting to see if we can get a little pricing war going.

My big factor is that SLI does and probably always will scale better.

From the reviews I've seen AMD has made some serious improvements in CrossFire scaling on the 6800 series cards. Not sure you can actually make a blanket statement that SLI will always scale better. Here's an early review of the GTX 560 Ti running SLI, looks like the HD 6950 in CrossFire is holding up pretty well. Expect we'll see similar SLI reviews of the GTX 560 from more sites pretty soon, till then I would say the jury is still out.

GeForce GTX 560 Ti SLI Guru3D

fpsgamerJR62 said:

I had Geforce 4 4400 Ti back in the day when I was still running a Pentium 4. It worked great right out of the box and never gave me any trouble. I'm glad that Nvidia, for whatever reason, has brought back the Ti name in a card which overclocks as well as the original Titanium cards.

Johny47 said:

I'm just wondering, because the 570 'replaces' the 480 some say you can have these two together in SLI, would it work the same way with a 470 and a 560? I know they have different bandwidth's and ROP's whatever but just curiousbecause I'd love to do this, already have a 470.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

Princeton said:

My big factor is that SLI does and probably always will scale better.

That's a weird thing to say. the fact is that the 6XXX series scales every bit as well as the nvidia cards, in some games, better.

The benchmarks bare this out, and The 6000 series based customer builds I build/bench, do as well.

From the reviews I've seen AMD has made some serious improvements in CrossFire scaling on the 6800 series cards. Not sure you can actually make a blanket statement that SLI will always scale better.

...just saw this, what Mizzou said.

captainawesome captainawesome said:

why are both AMD and nvidia not sticking to a neat convention. The 560 is meant to replace the 470? Why can't it replace the 460. So that it can be a repeat of the 460s awesome value/performance ratio.

Sarcasm Sarcasm said:

TomSEA said:

Nice review as always. Blows my mind that you are using 16 different cards in the comparisons. Is there really a market for that many different cards??

Of course there is. There's the informed and uninformed markets. There's the fanboy and gamer markets. There's also the "enthusiast" and "more money than brains" market.

As usual a 3 tier bracket for each segment.

Although it's starting to get more and more confusing with all these naming schemes from both AMD and Nvidia. 560, Ti.... Really Nvidia??? Ti??? 6970 is not a 5970 replacement? Really AMD???

I could go on...

madboyv1, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Mizzou said:

From the reviews I've seen AMD has made some serious improvements in CrossFire scaling on the 6800 series cards. Not sure you can actually make a blanket statement that SLI will always scale better. Here's an early review of the GTX 560 Ti running SLI, looks like the HD 6950 in CrossFire is holding up pretty well. Expect we'll see similar SLI reviews of the GTX 560 from more sites pretty soon, till then I would say the jury is still out.

GeForce GTX 560 Ti SLI Guru3D

Thanks for the link, seems like what I was expecting...

Relic Relic, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Good review Steve, the 560 performs nicely and with the aggressively repriced AMD cards I'd say us gamers are pretty much covered.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

Nice review.

Now the dust has settled...it looks like the status quo has been resumed. Both AMD and Nvidia will now price according to relative performance. The only flies in the proverbial ointment are:

1. Will the 1Gb version of the HD 6950 unlock to pseudo HD 6970. If yes, then the HD 6950 is probably a no-brainer from a purely performance standpoint- although the majority of users won't ever flash their BIOS it becomes a selling point none the less.

2. If it does, then I think "failed unlocker" HD 6950's could cannibilize the HD 6870 market to an extent (albeit at the hands of increased HD 6950 sales). There are already a disproportionate amount of HD 6950's in the reselling markets.

3. Pricing and the prevalence of factory OC'ed GTX 560 cards. I wouldn't think it beyond the realms of possibility that stock clocked cards could end up as the exception rather than the rule, nor would I rule out a vendor raising clocks across the board (as EVGA did with the GTX 460 1Gb).

So we now have massive segmentation in the mainstream market for the majority of 2011 and both AMD and Nvidia's full model lineups in the marketplace (uber-enthusuast dual cards excepted), it now falls upon the respective software teams to make the most of the hardware. With some eagerly awaited new game releases due soon, good drivers on game launch day are going to translate into card sales.And of course, sets the table nicely for the end of the year when both manufacturers should be launching cards based upon the process node they were designed for -as opposed to 32nm designs that required compromise and built on the 40nm process.

Driver teams start your engines!...

Staff
Steve Steve said:

You forgot to mention AMD's 6950, which is AMD's direct attempt to bump the GTX 560 Ti out of the spotlight. Launching at the same price point, it clearly outmatches the 560 and once again shows that AMD knows exactly what it is doing.. most of the time.

It's hard to recommend the 560 over the 6950, since they are releasing at the same price point and since the 6950 is offering better performance per pricing... and AMD is also dropping the pricing on the 6970, which makes it ever harder to recommend the card atm.

Did you just skim over the review and then decide to comment?

"With that, the Radeon HD 6950 1GB can be had for a mere $10 extra. Before the change the GeForce GTX 560 Ti was ~17% cheaper and just 6% slower. Now the price difference is negligible and the performance difference remains small for the most part."

Nice review as always. Blows my mind that you are using 16 different cards in the comparisons. Is there really a market for that many different cards??

No there is not. Many are previous generation cards that are no longer for sale. It provides the reader with an idea of how much more performance they stand to gain if they upgrade.

Kibaruk Kibaruk, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Am I reading correctly????? Did my dreams come true????????

Have I not seen any fanboy comments our there?

Back to topic, since price difference is not existant at this point and one is a bit slower than the other I would go with the 6950. At least I dont intend to overclock something that costs a couple hundred bucks just to get a bit of an edge, would rather have my life warranty intact =P Good review as usual.

Guest said:

What settings were used for the graphic drivers, Q or HQ?

ddg4005 ddg4005 said:

I bought two of these cards from Newegg this morning (one for each box since my motherboards don't support SLI). Based on the reviews I've skimmed through it looks like a good product for the money. I'll confirm this once I've installed the cards and put them through their paces.

Arris Arris said:

I bought two of these cards from Newegg this morning (one for each box since my motherboards don't support SLI). Based on the reviews I've skimmed through it looks like a good product for the money. I'll confirm this once I've installed the cards and put them through their paces.

Let us know how you get on with these, and grats on the new cards

princeton princeton said:

Kibaruk said:

Am I reading correctly????? Did my dreams come true????????

Have I not seen any fanboy comments our there?

Back to topic, since price difference is not existant at this point and one is a bit slower than the other I would go with the 6950. At least I dont intend to overclock something that costs a couple hundred bucks just to get a bit of an edge, would rather have my life warranty intact =P Good review as usual.

Most companies cover overclocking now as long as you don't alter voltages.

Sarcasm Sarcasm said:

Kibaruk said:

Am I reading correctly????? Did my dreams come true????????

Have I not seen any fanboy comments our there?

Back to topic, since price difference is not existant at this point and one is a bit slower than the other I would go with the 6950. At least I dont intend to overclock something that costs a couple hundred bucks just to get a bit of an edge, would rather have my life warranty intact =P Good review as usual.

Does being able to Unlock the 6950 to a 6970 have anything to do with this decision?

DokkRokken said:

Heh, my 470's are starting to feel a little long in the tooth after reading this, and other reviews. :P

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

And in less than a year from now the GTX 5xx and HD 69xx are going to feel prehistoric. Kind of makes you wonder why people get so melodramatic over who's better, who's best*.

*quick musical reference for captaincranky

DeerDance said:

Whats is the deal with the pictures? Thats how 1GHz Gigabyte 560 SOC version looks. At newegg gigabyte also have 900GHz version. But review seems to be of 822MHz version with pics of SOC version. I am confused.

Staff
Steve Steve said:

Whats is the deal with the pictures? Thats how 1GHz Gigabyte 560 SOC version looks. At newegg gigabyte also have 900GHz version. But review seems to be of 822MHz version with pics of SOC version. I am confused.

Its the SOC version. We wanted to review the GeForce GTX 560 Ti at launch, not an overclocked card so we clocked it back to defaults.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

High End Video Card Reviews, Done for a Song...

And in less than a year from now the GTX 5xx and HD 69xx are going to feel prehistoric. Kind of makes you wonder why people get so melodramatic over who's better, who's best*.

*quick musical reference for captaincranky

No one knows what it's like, to be the bad man, to be the sad man, behind blue eyes.......: Back at ya, DBZ

I'll see your Who reference, and raise you one...

Yepper, in another year they'll al be sayin, "who the f*** are you", to last year's VGA..

And then, "but will it play Crysis", to welcome in the new one......

Guest said:

I agree. Though it all depends if the 6950 1GB can be unlocked and how successful the unlock is.

If its 80% chance to unlock and not destroy the card, they it wins as clear as it could be.

It also depends on how much overclock sellers put on their cards, if you see majority of GTX 560TI with 1000mhz core and 5000mhz memory clocks at $260 then the 560 wins hands down.

We just need to wait only two more weeks and things are going to become clearer.

klepto12 klepto12, TechSpot Paladin, said:

i dont see there being any cards clocked to 1Ghz core maybe like 920 to 940 Mhz but 1000 Mhz would seem like they wouldn't warranty it.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

i dont see there being any cards clocked to 1Ghz core maybe like 920 to 940 Mhz but 1000 Mhz would seem like they wouldn't warranty it.

Gigabyte GV-N560SO-1GI (1000/2000/4580 core/shader/memory)- this card seems to have a bit left in the tank...1167/2334/4900 on air cooling.

Sparkle Calibre X560 (1000/2000/4800)

Probably reasonable to assume that EVGA's SSC and FTW editions should be pretty close to these numbers too given that their base OC (SuperClocked) model runs at 900/1800/4212

in addition so far you could add:

MSI's TwinFrozr II/SOC (950/1900/4200)

PoV/TGT TFC "Beast" (954/1908/4224)

Galaxy White Edition (950/1900/4400)

Mizzou Mizzou said:

The boys at hwbot are a hardcore dedicated crowd ... that's a phenomenal overclock on the Gigabyte card, the 5.3 GHz on the 2500K isn't too shabby either. Looks like the early reports that the 560 has plenty of overclocking headroom were spot on.

klepto12 klepto12, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Gigabyte GV-N560SO-1GI (1000/2000/4580 core/shader/memory)- this card seems to have a bit left in the tank...1167/2334/4900 on air cooling.

Sparkle Calibre X560 (1000/2000/4800)

Probably reasonable to assume that EVGA's SSC and FTW editions should be pretty close to these numbers too given that their base OC (SuperClocked) model runs at 900/1800/4212

in addition so far you could add:

MSI's TwinFrozr II/SOC (950/1900/4200)

PoV/TGT TFC "Beast" (954/1908/4224)

Galaxy White Edition (950/1900/4400)

i stand corrected i only saw 900mhz clocks on all the cards on newegg.

djorgen said:

Its the SOC version. We wanted to review the GeForce GTX 560 Ti at launch, not an overclocked card so we clocked it back to defaults.

Steve,

How can you brave about the OC potential of the card when you're actually testing the SOC version?

Do you know that the Gigabyte SOC cards are specially 'hand picked' for being SOC cards -- i.e. not every 560 Ti coming out of the factory is good enough to be one? Meaning, again, that you're paragraph about the awesome overclocking potential of the the 560 Ti just doesn't hold up?

No wonder that you could overclock the card as much as you did -- the card was after all stock clocked at 1000/4600 from the factory. Thus OC-ing it till 1010/5000 wasn't really much of an OC at all.

Just a friendly reminder! :-)

- J

Guest said:

Not to fuel the fire, but I was wondering the same thing :-\

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

@ djorgen, Guest #38

Probably because the GTX 560Ti is a fully functional GTX 460...which overclocks like hell on wheels. It probably doesn't take a genius to work out that if Gigabyte are binning a 1000MHz SKU -and offering a three year warranty into the deal, then the stock GPU has a reasonable amount of overclocking headroom.

Guru 3D : 980 Core, 1225 (4900 effective) Memory (Nvidia reference card)

Guru3D: 1044 Core/ 1237 (4950 effective) memory (Gigabyte SOC)

TPU : 943 Core/ 1240 (4960 effective) memory (Nvidia reference card)

OCC: 1017 Core/ 1164 (4656 effective) memory (Nvidia reference card)

OCC: 1004 Core/ 1202 (4808 effective) memory (Asus DCII TOP)

Bit-tech: 955 Core/ 1125 (4500 effective) memory (Nvidia reference card)

OC3D: 1050 Core/ 1100 (4400 effective) memory (Nvidia reference card)

OC3D: 1025 Core/ 1200 (4800 effective) memory (Gigabyte SOC)

Hardware Canucks: 991 Core/ 1108 (4432 effective) memory (Nvidia reference card)

Amtech: 1060 Core/ 1150 (4600 effective) memory (Asus DCII TOP)

[H]OCP: 1015 Core/ 1085 (4340 effective) memory (Galaxy GC)

Neoseeker: 1000 Core/ 1100 (4400 effective) memory (Palit Sonic)

Hexus: 1040 Core/ 1170 (4680 effective) memory (Gigabyte SO)

Ninjalane: 1000 Core/ 1100 (4400 effective) memory (EVGA SC)

Legion Hardware: 966 Core/ 1092 (4370 effective) memory (Inno3D OC)

Geeks3D: 970 Core/ 1050 (4200 effective) memory (Asus DCII TOP)

PC Perspective: 1035 Core/ 1075 (4300 effective) memory (MSI Hawk)

Hardware Heaven: 990 Core/ 1095 (4380 effective) memory (Inno3D iChill)

PureOC: 1020 Core/ 1110 (4440 effective) memory (Palit Sonic)

Xbit: 975 Core/ 1200 (4800 effective) memory (EVGA SC)

Xbit: 1050 Core/ 1210 (4840 effective) memory (MSI OC)

Xbit: 950 Core/ 1100 (4400 effective) memory (Palit Sonic)

Xbit: 930 Core/ 1225 (4900 effective) memory (Zotac reference)

etc...

etc...

Not bad for a GPU nominally binned at 823 / 1004...with that kind of potential ready to be uncorked I guess both(?) of you will be itching to buy one....thought not

Trolls!....DIS-MISSED!

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.