Nvidia card benchmarks - cost effectiveness

[colorlabs]

hello everyone,

i took the benchmark data people posted here: http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... 96&start=0

and put it into a spreadsheet https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key ... y=CIretpwP

I looked up prices on newegg (or google shopping if not found there) and charted performance alongside cost effectiveness (the units being $ per megasamples, multiplied by some unknown constant :)

the 480 is "theoretical" because it seems no one tried it out before switching to a new benchmark on a different thread. it's based on Radiance saying the 480 is 1.2x faster than the 470.

anyway - my quick analysis is that 260's are the best "deal" - assuming that the 470 overclocked post is an anomaly. thoughts?

PS: feel free to point out the probably dozens of flaws in my logic & my spreadsheet :)

[Daniel]

I just got my GTX 460 2GB. I'm getting an average of 5.9 megasamples/sec.

[radiance]

once cuda 3.2 is out it will be 1,5x faster on these new GTX460 cards. (at least, we hope it will)

Radiance

[colorlabs]

Some more graphs from more recent benchmarks:

http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... 673#p30673

[9fly]

How about adding 460 2GB / 470SLI / 480SLI / 480 quad or triple and some cubix versions benchmarks

Thank you.

So may be 470SLI is the best p/p with octane right?