New, improved GTX 560 Ti said to be on the way

We’re all looking to the horizon and awaiting the first 28-nm GPUs, but Nvidia might not be finished with its 40-nm offerings quite yet. According to the folks at VR-Zone, the company is quietly readying a more potent version of the GeForce GTX 560 Ti with more execution resources.

The current GTX 560 Ti packs a fully enabled GF114 chip with eight streaming multiprocessors (SMs), 384 shader ALUs, a 256-bit memory interface, and the ability to filter 56 textures per clock and output 32 ROP pixels per clock. VR-Zone claims the new GTX 560 Ti will toss out the GF114 and replace it with a carefully trimmed version of the GF110, the same chip that powers the GeForce GTX 580. That trimmed GF110 will reportedly endow the new GTX 560 Ti with a whopping 14 SMs (leaving two of the chip’s SMs disabled) as well as 448 ALUs, a 320-bit memory interface, 56 textures/clock, and 40 ROP pixels per clock.

VR-Zone says it expects the "448 core" version of the GeForce GTX 560 Ti to look much like the existing GTX 570 and slot in somewhere between the Radeon HD 6950 2GB, which sells for about $250-290, and the Radeon HD 6970 2GB and GeForce GTX 570, which normally will set you back $330 or more, in terms of positioning.

If this report is true, I hope the arrival of the new GTX 560 Ti will mean price cuts for the existing model. That’s what happened when Nvidia unleashed the GeForce GTX 260 "reloaded" back in 2008. Then again, this time, Nvidia has the cheaper GeForce GTX 560 non-Ti to contend with at lower price points.

Comments closed
    • l33t-g4m3r
    • 8 years ago

    Figures. I’ve always thought the x60 cards/architecture were too crippled to sell as midrange, and apparently Nvidia agrees too. The 560 Ti was the only exception, but it makes more sense to stick with one main architecture. Physx/computing performance probably has something to do with this change.

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 8 years ago

    Hmmmm…

    Geforce GTX 560 Ti 448?
    Geforce GTX 570 SE?
    Geforce GTX 565 Ti?

    Now if it was me, I’d laugh and call it the nVidia Geforce GTX 566 SE 448.

    • can-a-tuna
    • 8 years ago

    GeForce GTX 560 Ti Supa-Dupa Platinum Edition!! Now with 40W more power! Ge-fans are so easy to fool…

    • internetsandman
    • 8 years ago

    So with the specs so close to the GTX 570, what point will the higher end card serve if it’s priced at almost a hundred bucks more? especially if card makers decide to imbue the new 560 Ti with higher-than-standard amounts of VRAM?

    • Silus
    • 8 years ago

    Cyril,

    The current GTX 560 Ti can filter 64 textures per clock.

    • d0g_p00p
    • 8 years ago

    Wow… The GTX 560Ti is already a fantastic card for the price. I wonder what the new card will be priced at.

      • d0g_p00p
      • 8 years ago

      Really I get thumbed down because I said the GTX 560Ti is a good card for the price, which it is. I did forget however this is the cheapassreport.com and if any piece of computer hardware is over $100 it’s too expensive/must have money to burn/must have more money than brains/etc..

        • Chrispy_
        • 8 years ago

        No, you get thumbed down because it’s [b<]not[/b<] a good card for the price. TR's own 560Ti review has the usual performance per dollar graph showing that the 560Ti is actually [i<]bottom[/i<] of the group for performance per dollar. You're better off getting a GTX4601GB or anything with a Barts core, or a 1GB 6950. I've already posted that the 560Ti is overpriced. It costs up to $100 more than the 810MHz GTX460 that it supercedes, yet all that extra spending gets you barely 10% more performance. Sub-$200 is called the sweet spot because more expensive cards generally offer lower performance per dollar. At least other high end cards (GTX570/5900-series) bring extra features to the table such as extra GPGPU features or 6-display Eyefinity. The GF114 is a midrange, feature-cut chip redesigned for the $200 price point, then resold at $250 instead.

          • d0g_p00p
          • 8 years ago

          I bought the card based on TR’s review of the card. The GTX 460 was a little too under powered for me and the GTX 570 was just a bit more than I wanted to pay and it was the card I originally going to get before I read the TR review. I don’t think $250 for a card that plays everything at max with very high res is over priced and no, I did check out the GTX 460 and like I said it was under powered at higher res and detail settings.

          Granted you might be right if both cards are running at default clock speed which in your example is not (810Mhz vs 675Mhz default) the same could be said with my 560 it’s running overclocked (950Mhz vs 822Mhz default) Even so if you look at hwcompare with both cards running default the 560 is pulling way more than 10% they are showing 30% higher on average.

          Whatever, I would like to have paid around the $200 dollar mark but I didn’t and I am completely happy with what this card gives me for $250.

    • OneArmedScissor
    • 8 years ago

    I can only imagine how that marketing meeting went:

    “How do we make up for the bad press we’ve received for rebadging the same cards with better looking names?”

    “I know – we’ll use the same name for a better card!”

    *M-M-M-M-MONSTER face palm*

      • ImSpartacus
      • 8 years ago

      When you think about it, it isn’t a terrible rationale to follow. X doesn’t work, so I’ll try X^-1.

      • Arclight
      • 8 years ago

      Is it weird that i imagined *M-M-M-M-MONSTER being pronounced like a quake sound? As in Monster kill….

        • Malphas
        • 8 years ago

        Not really since that’s clearly was he was alluding to. And it’s Unreal Tournament, not Quake.

    • yogibbear
    • 8 years ago

    Selling off their stuff for the eventual 28nm…. wooooooo. Always a good sign.

      • Chrispy_
      • 8 years ago

      The GTX560 Ti has been too expensive for a long time. It is typically 33% more expensive than the GTX460 that it replaced (and that’s using today’s GTX560Ti prices against LAUNCH prices for the GTX460), yet it only offers minor performance benefits, and never enough to justify the extra cost.

        • swaaye
        • 8 years ago

        It sometimes beats a 6950 so maybe the price isn’t that far off.

    • Arclight
    • 8 years ago

    Nvidia naming scheme is kind of atrocious: GTX 560, GTX 560 Ti and soon GTX 560 Ti (448). Srsly, why not just call it GTX 565 or something….

      • BestJinjo
      • 8 years ago

      Just curious, how did you come up with a GTX 560Ti (448) name. Nowhere in the article does it say what this card will be called. No matter what they call it, it’s impossible to get excited about a $250+ card with GTX570 performance almost 2 years after GTX480 arrived on the scene. AMD and NV will have next generation cards ready within 6 months. I’d rather spend $250-300 on an HD7950 than a 40nm GTX560Ti with more shaders.

        • ImSpartacus
        • 8 years ago

        There’s a precedent, remember the GTX 460 Core 216?

        Though we all know that won’t stop nVidia from making it as confusing as possible…

          • RickyTick
          • 8 years ago

          iirc, I think that was the GTX 260 core 216, not the 460. (but your point still stands)

            • Arclight
            • 8 years ago

            IIRC when GTX 460 launched some thought that the 1 Gb version was the same as the 768 mb version, the only difference being the amount of RAM. But in fact the GPUs were slightly different, the 1 Gb version having more bells and whistles. Also after some time they launched another 1 Gb GTX 460 which was actually weaker in terms of GPU than the 768 mb version but it had more RAM. Not to mention there was a 465 which was iirc slower than the GTX 460 1 Gb (the orginal/second of f*ck idk which one).

            As you can see it’s hard to remember

            [url<]http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2010/07/12/nvidia-geforce-gtx-460-graphics-card-review/2[/url<] This review shows the 1 Gb and 768 mb version. PS: Was the GTX 460 1 Gb weaker version named Smart? As in GTX 460 Smart? Psh, i give up.

            • ImSpartacus
            • 8 years ago

            I said it’s a [i<]PRECEDENT[/i<]. As in a previous event that provides guidance to a future event.

            • Arclight
            • 8 years ago

            There are plenty of precedents. I think it all started with the 8800 GTS. There were originally 2 version 320 mb and 640 mb. Then there was a 512mb version which was actually faster. Then that GPU got rebranded to 9800 GTX and paired with 1 Gb of RAM. Then it was improved a little and named 9800GTX+. Afterwards i think it got die shrinked and rebranded GTS 250……

            • OneArmedScissor
            • 8 years ago

            The 9800GTX+ was the die shrink. The peculiar part was that the [i<]real[/i<] GTS 250 had a redesigned PCB that used less power...but they just rebadged some old 9800GTX+s, anyways. You could at least tell by the power connectors. They also claimed that the 8000 series which were moved to the 9000 series were supposed to all be 55nm, but again, existing 65nm cards were rebadged, with no way to know which was which. And then there ended up being two 9600GSOs which weren't anywhere close to the same thing lol. The entire 9000 series, aside from maybe the 9600GT, which actually remained unique (at retail, at least...), was a nightmare to figure out.

            • Arclight
            • 8 years ago

            It’s all FUBAR, i tell you.

            • willmore
            • 8 years ago

            I’ve got both of those 9600GSOs and it’s just bizarre. One is 96 core and the other is only 48. There’s about a 2x difference in folding performance–just as you would expect. Never made any sense to me. But, I knew exactly what I was buying each time as they’re eVGA cards and they’re pretty specific on the specifics of a part.

            • JustAnEngineer
            • 8 years ago

            NVidia’s evil marketing geniuses are truly evil.

            • Malphas
            • 8 years ago

            He wasn’t addressing that, and I’m sure understood it, he was just correcting your facts. We can’t “remember the GTX 460 Core 216?” because no such card existed. A precedent actually has to have taken place before it’s a precedent. I assume you meant to say the GTX 260 (Core 216), which was what he was correcting you on.

        • Malphas
        • 8 years ago

        It says in the source article, plus that’s what they did the the 260/260 (216 Core).

        “Much like the GeForce GTX 260 was upgraded to GTX 260 (216 Core) in 2008, the GTX 560 Ti is set to be revised as GTX 560 Ti (448 Core).”

      • Walkintarget
      • 8 years ago

      When has Nvidia’s naming scheme EVER been something other than atrocious ?? Same stuff, different year as far as I see. Most of us do our research and buy after checking a specific card out, but its the ones new to the whole ‘build your own’ PC that get screwed over in these re-badging fiascoes.

        • Arclight
        • 8 years ago

        @BestJinjo
        I didn’t see any concrete info regarding the name but i made a educated guess knowing nvidia’s history.

        @Walkintarget
        [quote<]Most of us do our research and buy after checking a specific card out, but its the ones new to the whole 'build your own' PC that get screwed over in these re-badging fiascoes.[/quote<] True, true, that goes without saying. I was just stating the obvious. I'm just struck cause they keep at it after so many years....

          • BestJinjo
          • 8 years ago

          Fair enough. I agree with you that calling it GTX560Ti 448 core edition is confusing.

          But I still stand firm that this card is a waste of time, esp. when HD6950 2GB was available for ~ $230 8 months ago and could unlock to an HD6970. What the market needs is a 150-170W HD7950 with performance of a GTX580 for $250.

      • Duck
      • 8 years ago

      Confusing as possible naming is good. It makes Tech enthusiasts more elitist.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This