<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Nvidia's GTX 560 Ti 448 detailed</title>
		<description>Discuss Nvidia's GTX 560 Ti 448 detailed</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 06:19:34 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/24801/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Cartman says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34120</link>
			<description><![CDATA[So in the end this card is GTX 570, that cant pass as GTX 570 cuz some core doesnt work. Disable em in BIOS put new sticker and its all good.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Cartman</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2011 19:44:12 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34120</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>evolucion8 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34077</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You are right, plus the fact that the GF104 has some superscalar stuff that helps to boost performance when the compiler allows it. That explain why the GF104 based SKU is a bit erratic on performance as it is more sensitive to driver optimizations than the pure scalar approach of the GF100/GF110.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>evolucion8</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:42:14 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34077</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>techno says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34042</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@eddman...what you say is only true to a point...improved performance on the 460 was not simply a clock multiplied by shader calculation. 460 is based on the GF104 chip which is a redesign containing 8 texture units per SM as compared to the 465 which was a GF100 chip with half the texture units per SM...only 4. As a consequence the texture fill rate of the 465 on a per unit per clock basis is less leading to the card overall having a much reduced fill rate. To quote anandtec there is diminishing return on cutting down a larger chip especially when you consider the power draw of the cut down chip is similar to its larger parent.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>techno</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 10:55:54 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34042</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>eddman says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34040</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@HBeam and techno 465's less performance compared to 460 wasn't anything surprising. Let's do a simple math calculation: 352 shaders * 1215 MHz = 427680 336 shaders * 1350 MHz = 453600 That shows 460 to be 6% faster than 465, and benchmarks proved it. 460 also has 12.2% higher memory bandwidth. Now this card and 560 Ti: 448 * 1460 = 654080 384 * 1645 = 631680 This shows 560 Ti 448 to be about 3.5% faster, at least on paper. Given that it'll also have 18.5% higher memory bandwidth, I don't see why it couldn't be faster.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>eddman</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:14:03 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34040</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>techno says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34038</link>
			<description><![CDATA[^ this There was a reason they made 460 on a different chip rather than just cutting down the 480/470. I'd wait to see benchies before committing to this card.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>techno</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 07:37:34 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34038</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>HBeam says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34034</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Oh noes. Another GTX 465 like piece of crap.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>HBeam</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 04:42:49 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34034</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>dew111 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34025</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This isn't necessarily true. The GF110 has been in production for a long time now, and they probably have a lot of "not quite good enough for GTX 570" dies lying around. Aside from competing with AMD, this is probably a major factor in releasing a card like this. If the financials make sense, they could also divert some of the GTX 570 dies to this card as well. As such, supply will likely be decent, depending on the demand for it. Demand also may be lower due to the upcoming 28nm releases. Time will tell.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>dew111</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2011 23:42:09 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34025</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>eddman says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34021</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I've been looking for a new card to replace my 8800 GTS 320. If this is true and the price is right, then I know what I'll be buying. Can't really wait for radeon 7000 or kepler.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>eddman</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2011 23:02:00 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24801-nvidias-gtx-560-ti-448-detailed#comment-34021</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
