Join Us On Facebook

Compare any two graphics cards:
VS

GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm vs Radeon HD 4870 X2

Intro

The GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm has core speeds of 576 MHz on the GPU, and 999 MHz on the 896 MB of GDDR3 RAM. It features 216 SPUs along with 72 Texture Address Units and 28 Rasterization Operator Units.

Compare those specifications to the Radeon HD 4870 X2, which comes with a core clock frequency of 750 MHz and a GDDR5 memory speed of 900 MHz. It also uses a 256-bit memory bus, and makes use of a 55 nm design. It features 800(160x5) SPUs, 40 TAUs, and 16 Raster Operation Units.

Avatar

Settings: Ultra High Quality
AA: 8x
AF: none
Resolution: 1920x1200
Test Machine: Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)
Radeon HD 4870 X2 64 FPS
GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm 36 FPS
Difference: 28 FPS (78%)

Battlefield Bad Company 2

Settings: High Quality
AA: 4x
AF: 8x
Resolution: 1920x1200
Test Machine: Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)
Radeon HD 4870 X2 60 FPS
GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm 32 FPS
Difference: 28 FPS (88%)

Left4Dead 2

Settings: Very High
AA: 8x
AF: 16x
Resolution: 1920x1200
Test Machine: Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)
Radeon HD 4870 X2 134 FPS
GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm 74 FPS
Difference: 60 FPS (81%)

Supreme Commander 2

Settings: High
AA: 8x
AF: 16x
Resolution: 1920x1200
Test Machine: Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)
Radeon HD 4870 X2 99 FPS
GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm 36 FPS
Difference: 63 FPS (175%)

Radeon HD 4870 X2 wins

(Based entirely on the benchmarks listed above)

When combining all game benchmark scores on this page together, the Radeon HD 4870 X2 wins overall, by 179 FPS. Please note that we do not have the results of every benchmark ever done for these cards, so the results may differ wildly in different games.

Radeon HD 4870 X2 357 FPS
GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm 178 FPS
Difference: 179 FPS (101%)

Power Usage and Theoretical Benchmarks

Power Consumption (Max TDP)

GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm 171 Watts
Radeon HD 4870 X2 350 Watts
Difference: 179 Watts (105%)

Memory Bandwidth

The Radeon HD 4870 X2 should in theory be quite a bit faster than the GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm in general. (explain)

Radeon HD 4870 X2 230400 MB/sec
GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm 111888 MB/sec
Difference: 118512 (106%)

Texel Rate

The Radeon HD 4870 X2 should be quite a bit (more or less 45%) better at AF than the GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm. (explain)

Radeon HD 4870 X2 60000 Mtexels/sec
GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm 41472 Mtexels/sec
Difference: 18528 (45%)

Pixel Rate

If running with lots of anti-aliasing is important to you, then the Radeon HD 4870 X2 is the winner, and very much so. (explain)

Radeon HD 4870 X2 24000 Mpixels/sec
GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm 16128 Mpixels/sec
Difference: 7872 (49%)

Please note that the above 'benchmarks' are all just theoretical - the results were calculated based on the card's specifications, and real-world performance may (and probably will) vary at least a bit.

One or more cards in this comparison are multi-core. This means that their bandwidth, texel and pixel rates are theoretically doubled - this does not mean the card will actually perform twice as fast, but only that it should in theory be able to. Actual game benchmarks will give a more accurate idea of what it's capable of.

Price Comparison

Please note that the price comparisons are based on search keywords, and might not be the exact same card listed on this page. We have no control over the accuracy of their search results.

GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm

Amazon.com

Other US-based stores

Amazon.co.uk

Amazon.de

Amazon.fr

Radeon HD 4870 X2

Amazon.com

Other US-based stores

Amazon.co.uk

Amazon.de

Amazon.fr

Specifications

Model GeForce GTX 260 216SP 55 nm Radeon HD 4870 X2
Manufacturer nVidia ATi
Year December 22, 2008 Aug 12, 2008
Code Name G200b R700
Fab Process 55 nm 55 nm
Bus PCIe x16 2.0 PCIe 2.0 x16 (PCIe bridge)
Memory 896 MB 1024 MB (x2)
Core Speed 576 MHz 750 MHz (x2)
Shader Speed 1242 MHz (N/A) MHz (x2)
Memory Speed 999 MHz 900 MHz (x2)
Unified Shaders 216 800(160x5) (x2)
Texture Mapping Units 72 40 (x2)
Render Output Units 28 16 (x2)
Bus Type GDDR3 GDDR5
Bus Width 448-bit 256-bit (x2)
DirectX Version DirectX 10 DirectX 10.1
OpenGL Version OpenGL 3.1 OpenGL 3.0
Power (Max TDP) 171 watts 350 watts
Shader Model 4.0 4.1
Bandwidth 111888 MB/sec 230400 MB/sec
Texel Rate 41472 Mtexels/sec 60000 Mtexels/sec
Pixel Rate 16128 Mpixels/sec 24000 Mpixels/sec

Memory Bandwidth: Memory bandwidth is the max amount of information (counted in megabytes per second) that can be moved past the external memory interface in one second. It's worked out by multiplying the card's bus width by its memory clock speed. If it uses DDR type memory, the result should be multiplied by 2 once again. If it uses DDR5, multiply by 4 instead. The higher the bandwidth is, the better the card will be in general. It especially helps with AA, High Dynamic Range and high resolutions.

Texel Rate: Texel rate is the maximum texture map elements (texels) that are applied per second. This is calculated by multiplying the total texture units of the card by the core clock speed of the chip. The higher this number, the better the graphics card will be at handling texture filtering (anisotropic filtering - AF). It is measured in millions of texels in one second.

Pixel Rate: Pixel rate is the maximum number of pixels the video card can possibly record to its local memory in a second - measured in millions of pixels per second. The figure is calculated by multiplying the amount of Render Output Units by the clock speed of the card. ROPs (Raster Operations Pipelines - aka Render Output Units) are responsible for outputting the pixels (image) to the screen. The actual pixel output rate also depends on many other factors, most notably the memory bandwidth - the lower the bandwidth is, the lower the ability to reach the maximum fill rate.

Facebook Activity

Comments

Be the first to leave a comment!

Your email address will not be published.


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree