Published in Reviews

Club3D GTX 560 CoolStream Edition reviewed

by on06 June 2011

Index

club3d-coolStream-front-thumb

Review: CoolStream strikes again



Nvidia launched its Geforce GTX 560 back on May 17th and Club3D instantly hopped aboard the GTX 560 train with two cards – GTX 560 CoolStream Edition and GTX 560 CoolStream OC Edition.

CoolStream design is not a novelty per se as Club3D used it before to provide adequate cooling. Club3D GTX 560 CoolStream Edition runs at reference clocks while the OC edition of course comes factory overclocked.

We were pleased with Club3D’s efforts in providing better cooling but at the same time, we were a bit disappointed to see a mere 20MHz overclock on the OC Edition. Our sample however was CoolStream Edition, which runs at 810MHz. The OC Edition runs 20MHz faster, meaning it’s clocked at 830MHz.

gpuz

Before we move onto our testing, let’s review the specs:

Geforce GTX 560 is based on the GF114 GPU, which comes with one shader cluster less than on Geforce GTX 560 Ti. However, by turning off one shader-cluster, the GTX 560 became almost identical to the GTX 460. Still, the latter is based on the older GF104 GPU with 336 shaders or CUDA processors, 32 ROPs, 56 TMUs and a 256-bit memory interface.

Thanks to design improvements, the GF114 allows for higher clocks than the GF104. Furthermore, the GTX 560 managed to retain the GTX 460’s consumption despite running 135MHz faster for the GPU and 400MHz (effectively) for the memory.

All this suggests that the Geforce GTX 560 is made to fill the gap between GTX 460 and GTX 560 Ti cards. As far as pricing goes, the GTX 560 goes for €150 whereas the GTX 560 Ti costs €20 more. The GTX 460 is currently priced at €125.

560_slide_1080p_gaming

All three of these Geforce cards are classified as so called gamers’ sweet spot, meaning that average budget gamers will love them. The optimum gaming resolution is 1680x1050, although 1920x1080 is possible as well depending on the game and detail settings.


Prev Next »

Last modified on 06 June 2011
Rate this item
(11 votes)

Read more about: