GALAXY GeForce GTX 660 Ti GC 3GB Video Card Review

raghu78 said:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/08/16/galaxy_geforce_gtx_660_ti_gc_3gb_video_card_review/1

"GALAXY is setting a price of $339 for this video card, so $40 over the reference GTX 660 Ti pricing"

This review has no problem pitting a factory overclocked GTX 660 Ti against a reference HD 7950. What would be more appropriate is a factory overclocked HD 7950 against this card. There are many factory overclocked cards like the Gigabyte HD 7950 OC (900 Mhz), and Sapphire HD 7950 950 Mhz edition for USD 350.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125414
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102991

Its clear to see hardocp has not much good to say about arguably the best price performance high end card in the market. But this isn't by any means a reflection of the current market reality. HD 7950 OC cards provide incredible value for the consumer's money.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/03/01/xfx_radeon_hd_7950_black_edition_video_card_review/8
Click to expand...

I guess we'll find out.

Brent_Justice said:
Stay tuned. This GPU, as you might imagine, is very overclocking friendly.
Click to expand...

I'm sure it will be just like so many were saying last week, how the 660ti would just be killed by both the 670 and the 7950 because of its paltry, useless 192-bit memory bus. Yep, 7950 RULZ!!!
 
martinmsj said:
I was hoping for some single slot solution to challenge in the 250-300 range. I was disappointed in find out the card is the same size as a 670. I have a big, hot, and hungry 480 GTX I wouldn't mind switching out.
Click to expand...

I am in the same boat. I would love a shortened version of the 660TI that doesn't use that extra 2 inches in length just for the fan. I would rather have a shorter card, even if I still have to sacrifice another slot. Get me one of those stock, at $20 under MSRP and I'm buying.
 
I know this is launch price but £250 is a little over my budget. I guess a few months wait won't hurt given that I've been waiting since the 7870/50s were released...
 
Bravo to Nvidia for such a competitive product. Now AMD will have to lower the price of the HD-7850 and HD-7870. Bring on the $200 Kepler!
 
I'm impressed with the 3GB performance but I'm hoping that that there will be a different 660 model that is shorter in length.
 
martinmsj said:
I was hoping for some single slot solution to challenge in the 250-300 range. I was disappointed in find out the card is the same size as a 670. I have a big, hot, and hungry 480 GTX I wouldn't mind switching out.
Click to expand...

This doesn't make any sense, single slot cards run very hot (e.g. HD 4850). Larger heatsinks mean better cooling.

Would definitely be interested to see SLI performance with these 3GB cards, should make for a killer setup.
 
On a side note, as I scroll down the list of 600-series cards I see that virtually every model is now in stock. It's been a long time since I checked, but I wonder--did manufacturing catch up, did the lower models take the pressure off the 680 inventory, or what? If yields improved, that may bode well for Big Kepler...
 
Awesome to see this much power for the money, but I keep coming back to the same point: what's the use of pushing the performance envelope when there is no game out there that stresses these cards at normal resolutions? I'm by no means complaining that $300 now buys you a card that can play any game at highest settings when, just 12 months ago, that amount of power cost $500+ -- and I'll be even more happy next year when $150 buys this amount of power. But where's the beef? Owning a high-end card nowadays is like having a Ferrari with only a quarter mile to drive it on.

I sold my dual GTX 680s after a recent epiphany... After a marathon session of Skyrim I ran a couple 3DMark benches. I came to the realization that benchmarking was the ONLY time I was getting my money's worth out of these cards, and that's just stupid. I'm now happily using a single 7970m in most games and am $900 richer.
 
I don't think 3gb makes much of a difference if any, seeing that 670 2vs4gb perform pretty much the same.

Still, for 30 dlls more, plus OC its a great deal.
 
harmattan said:
I sold my dual GTX 680s after a recent epiphany... After a marathon session of Skyrim I ran a couple 3DMark benches. I came to the realization that benchmarking was the ONLY time I was getting my money's worth out of these cards, and that's just stupid. I'm now happily using a single 7970m in most games and am $900 richer.
Click to expand...
Amen to that. That was the same epiphany that led to me selling/returning my 7970/680. I plan to be sitting on this card for a very long time.
 
XamediX said:
I am in the same boat. I would love a shortened version of the 660TI that doesn't use that extra 2 inches in length just for the fan. I would rather have a shorter card, even if I still have to sacrifice another slot. Get me one of those stock, at $20 under MSRP and I'm buying.
Click to expand...
checkout Bit-tech's review of the Zotac 660 Ti. :D
Zotac GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB amp! Editon

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/08/16/nvidia-geforce-gtx-660-ti-2gb-review/3

The performance is really good and the bang for the buck is actually pretty good but unless it gets down to $250 some people will probably go for a 560 Ti.

harmattan said:
Ferrari with only a quarter mile to drive it on.
Click to expand...

Sounds like just a drag race to me. lol. Although, there's only so fast you can go when it's a 1/4 mile at a time, yes.
 
David_Schroth said:
As for the AA side of things, we do test it on many of the games, but we report on what provides the best game play experience. As a general rule, FXAA does not have a material impact on performance (in a sense, it is "free" AA), while traditional AA has far more of an impact.

For Max Payne and Batman: Arkham City, FXAA looks better than AA and doesn't have a huge performance hit.

For BF3, there's a HUGE difference in image quality between 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 in my eyes, and I'd rather play at 2560 with no AA than 1920 with 4x AA.

For Witcher, AA is turned on in the configuration along with FXAA. I've found that Witcher is either playable at a resolution or not on a card, regardless of the AA setting.
Click to expand...

Well people Differ. I am one who plays with 4xMSAA.

FXAA is blurry and doesnt look good just alone. Gotta have MSAA
 
slh28 said:
This doesn't make any sense, single slot cards run very hot (e.g. HD 4850). Larger heatsinks mean better cooling.

Would definitely be interested to see SLI performance with these 3GB cards, should make for a killer setup.
Click to expand...

Interesting. What doesn't make sense is you using older cards (older technology) to impose limitations on new cards (new technology)...


Mind blown.

harmattan said:
Awesome to see this much power for the money, but I keep coming back to the same point: what's the use of pushing the performance envelope when there is no game out there that stresses these cards at normal resolutions? I'm by no means complaining that $300 now buys you a card that can play any game at highest settings when, just 12 months ago, that amount of power cost $500+ -- and I'll be even more happy next year when $150 buys this amount of power. But where's the beef? Owning a high-end card nowadays is like having a Ferrari with only a quarter mile to drive it on.

I sold my dual GTX 680s after a recent epiphany... After a marathon session of Skyrim I ran a couple 3DMark benches. I came to the realization that benchmarking was the ONLY time I was getting my money's worth out of these cards, and that's just stupid. I'm now happily using a single 7970m in most games and am $900 richer.
Click to expand...

Which is why I was hoping this would pack the power of a 480 GTX into a much smaller package. (To be fair the 480 GTX is a huge beast.) I love the Raven but for the past few months I've been loving the idea of a mini-itx build right under the nice new Samsung Smart TV I just bought with my wireless controller, keyboard, and mouse. I still have DA:O to finish then on to Alice:Madness, BioShock1/2, Fallout 3, Portal 2, etc.. so I don't really need top of the line yet.

This card has me in the video card buying mood because it's such a great card. (Just the size of the card is the only gripe.)
 
Last edited:
Commander Suzdal said:
On a side note, as I scroll down the list of 600-series cards I see that virtually every model is now in stock. It's been a long time since I checked, but I wonder--did manufacturing catch up, did the lower models take the pressure off the 680 inventory, or what?
Click to expand...

Possibly talking out of my ... but I'm guessing there was pent up demand for single card solution greater than 580 (leading to sold out 680 cards), but there [may not be] the same demand for the 660Ti cards?
 
Last edited:
If my 460 ever starts feeling slow I have a reasonable upgrade path. I think I might wait for some better revisions though.
 
Thanks for including the Reference 660ti vs the 560 and 460. It is interesting to see how those cards hold up in the modern games at max settings. The 660 looks like a proper 100%+ upgrade for me but I'll still wait and see what happens with the prices
 
I just ordered the 2gb Gigabyte version from Newegg for $299. I just realized this review was for the 3gb model. I don't know that I need the extra gig for $40 more if I have no plans to SLI.

And free Borderlands 2, whut whut!
 
Ajiki-kun said:
Minor typo: "The GALAXY GTX 660 Ti GC is a much better value than the Radeo HD 7950 at $339"

Great review!

... but I'd like to know about 3GB vs. 2GB like a user above mentioned, as well as if there are any caveats to the mixed-memory configuration in the 2GB-over-192-bit. Please and thank you. =D
Click to expand...
I suspect that the 3GB version doesn't have this mixed-mode memory, and just doubles up on the optimal design that you'd see if NVIDIA had gone with a 1.5GB reference board. The performance difference going from 2GB reference to 3GB here will be HUGE in the 1.5-2GB texture range, if that's what they actually did.
 
Burticus said:
I just ordered the 2gb Gigabyte version from Newegg for $299. I just realized this review was for the 3gb model. I don't know that I need the extra gig for $40 more if I have no plans to SLI.

And free Borderlands 2, whut whut!
Click to expand...
the review had a 2gb and a 3gb card
 
In all our gameplay the GALAXY GTX 660 Ti GC provided a better gaming experience than the Radeon HD 7950.

You appear abit biased as you normaly say they gave the same experience since you could only change the actual setting in batman the others the 7950 ran the same settings just lower FPS... You normaly say thats the same playable gameplay experience in your other reviews when this occurs.

just somthing that stood out while reading imo
 
Its a good card, but based on this review I would probably go for the 7950 over it.

Maybe the 7870 will drop to 7850 pricing now? I can crossfire for much cheaper now!

Was hoping for a non ti version for cheaper. If nothing is released by february I can see myself upgrading to this by that time.
 
Ajiki-kun said:
Dammit, the Galaxy rep went offline! Can somebody tell me if the Galaxy warranty is transferable?
Click to expand...

I'm here; have been all along. I saw your pm earlier but have been rushing around to get all the 660 Ti launch stuff taken care of and needed a moment to give you a proper reply. Sorry if the suspense was unbearable.

To answer your question, Galaxy warranties don't need to be transfered--we warranty the product, not the customer. As long as you have the original receipt you'll be entitled to any remaining warranty coverage just the same as the owner before you.
 
Brent_Justice said:
For the inevitable request to follow those that did not thoroughly read the evaluation, overclocking will be done in a follow-up with lots of performance comparisons. Stay tuned. This GPU, as you might imagine, is very overclocking friendly.
Click to expand...

Will there be some SLI and/or Surround testing too?

I'm curious to find out how much of a jump two reference GTX 660's would be from two 6950's (2GB)... Given what I paid for the 6950's (<$230) and how well they've held up, I'm probably still better off waiting for the new gen cards at the end of the year (and/or a price drop on the GTX 660), but still, awful tempting... Took forever for NV to release the GTX 660 but I like what they've put out from a price/performance standpoint.
 
SonicTron said:
I assume this card is going to be sub-$300 typically on sale. Nvidia really needs to bring more cheap tri-monitor cards to market. This is a great start.
Click to expand...

It's not gonna provide enough performance for anything but older games or games that aren't very demanding tho... Even a single GTX 680 is kinda borderline w/some games at 5760x1200. I'm thinking next gen (early next year) we might finally start seeing mid-range or mid-to-high end cards that can do a respectable job at Surround resolutions w/most current games (barring an influx of more demanding games/engines after the new consoles launch next year!).
 
A lot of people are complaining that it isn't much of an improvement over last gen's cards... Well, in my case, I'm coming from an older ATI 3800 series card and a 1680x1050 res. So, I'm looking for a new card that will last me a few generations (3800 still works fine in most things, but is definitely showing it's age) to match a new 30" monitor. Do I want last gen? Probably not. Might be faster now with games that have been out for a while, but I want a card that will last me through some unreleased games. Now, I'm not sure if the 570 series will best a 660 in a year or two, even if it can at some things now. Not going to take that bet.

Great review, as always. I'm on the fence between ATI and NVIDIA right now (allegiance to none), but NVIDIA is looking very good right now. Mid-October is my buying time and these reviews are really helping me out. I don't care if new cards come out in December and I miss out. I make a date, save the cash and buy. I can't wait forever. :)
 
Ur_Mom said:
A lot of people are complaining that it isn't much of an improvement over last gen's cards... Well, in my case, I'm coming from an older ATI 3800 series card and a 1680x1050 res. So, I'm looking for a new card that will last me a few generations (3800 still works fine in most things, but is definitely showing it's age) to match a new 30" monitor. Do I want last gen? Probably not. Might be faster now with games that have been out for a while, but I want a card that will last me through some unreleased games. Now, I'm not sure if the 570 series will best a 660 in a year or two, even if it can at some things now. Not going to take that bet.

Great review, as always. I'm on the fence between ATI and NVIDIA right now (allegiance to none), but NVIDIA is looking very good right now. Mid-October is my buying time and these reviews are really helping me out. I don't care if new cards come out in December and I miss out. I make a date, save the cash and buy. I can't wait forever. :)
Click to expand...
the 570 is not faster than the 660ti now and wont be in the future. still if you want to play at 2560x1600 then a 670 is the lowest I would go from Nvidia. also I sure hope the rest of your pc is not as old as that 3800 series card.
 
niconx said:
If my 460 ever starts feeling slow I have a reasonable upgrade path. I think I might wait for some better revisions though.
Click to expand...

YAY! a fellow gtx 460 owner, feel the same way my highly oc'ed 460 msi hawk is a beast still got it clocked at 850mhz core, 4400mhz mem, and not even over voltage, when i did over volt i easily hit 920mhz core, an at the speed its faster then HD6870, gtx 470. but that pretty much goes without saying... anyway probably won't upgrade to the gtx 600 series as my 460 can easily handle anything i through at it as 1080p, if it starts showing some age might just drop 80$ an toss another 460 in there, then oc the hell outta'em.
 
put settings to the max and turn up MSAA and this card falls apart vs. the 7950 and 670.

Batman%201920.png

Crysis2%201920.png

MaxPayne3%201920.png

Metro%201920.png

Skyrim%202560.png


This card does well in BF3, that's about it.

BF3%20%201920.png
 
Impulse said:
It's not gonna provide enough performance for anything but older games or games that aren't very demanding tho... Even a single GTX 680 is kinda borderline w/some games at 5760x1200. I'm thinking next gen (early next year) we might finally start seeing mid-range or mid-to-high end cards that can do a respectable job at Surround resolutions w/most current games (barring an influx of more demanding games/engines after the new consoles launch next year!).
Click to expand...

I don't mean for tri-monitor gaming. I meant a great single-monitor gaming card that gives you the flexibility of a multi-monitor setup. I do a lot of work and entertainment that flows best with at least 3 monitors, but I also want a card that will kill games on a single monitor. And I only want one card to do all of this. More please, nvidia!
 
cannondale06 said:
put settings to the max and turn up MSAA and this card falls apart vs. the 7950 and 670.

This card does well in BF3, that's about it.
Click to expand...

You have several games there where you can make comparisons between Tom's and the [H] review. Even the 670 results don't make sense, let alone the 660Ti. There's a reason most people here don't pay much attention to Tom's any more.
 
cannondale06 said:
put settings to the max and turn up MSAA and this card falls apart vs. the 7950 and 670.

This card does well in BF3, that's about it.
Click to expand...

Most reviews I'm seeing show the 660 Ti at reasonably close (~10-15%) levels to the GTX 670, heck even looking at the minimums on your charts you linked from that one review, it looks decent though slower than others I've seen. Once you OC the memory (which seems to be a bit more of a bottleneck than on the 670, which gains little from it) you end up at effectively the same speed barring what you can get for your core OC.

I just bought a pair of the MSI Power Edition OC 660 Ti's to replace my single 670. At $310 minus a 31-dollar (10% off code), I paid just 279 each and got a BL2 coupon for each included which I'm planning on selling (I'm assuming I'll get ~40 for them for this calculation). By the time I sell my 670 I'll end up with an out-of-pocket cost of only ~$110-120 more, and oc'd 660 Ti's in SLI will just demolish even the highly-oc'd 670 I have in my sig by an obscene margin ;). The value on these is ENORMOUS. Oh, and there's a 10 dollar rebate on the cards too, which I can send in but I wasn't even including that. Thanks neweggbusiness :D.

Oh, and the OC PE MSI cards purportedly have voltage control for up to +100mv on the core, as well as volts on the memory, from what I'm seeing on forums.

With any luck, my two new cards will be on my doorstep tomorrow, since they're shipping from only a couple of states away and are already on the Packaging phase.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Most reviews I'm seeing show the 660 Ti at reasonably close (~10-15%) levels to the GTX 670, heck even looking at the minimums on your charts you linked from that one review, it looks decent though slower than others I've seen. Once you OC the memory (which seems to be a bit more of a bottleneck than on the 670, which gains little from it) you end up at effectively the same speed barring what you can get for your core OC.

I just bought a pair of the MSI Power Edition OC 660 Ti's to replace my single 670. At $310 minus a 31-dollar (10% off code), I paid just 279 each and got a BL2 coupon for each included which I'm planning on selling (I'm assuming I'll get ~40 for them for this calculation). By the time I sell my 670 I'll end up with an out-of-pocket cost of only ~$110-120 more, and oc'd 660 Ti's in SLI will just demolish even the highly-oc'd 670 I have in my sig by an obscene margin ;). The value on these is ENORMOUS. Oh, and there's a 10 dollar rebate on the cards too, which I can send in but I wasn't even including that. Thanks neweggbusiness :D.

Oh, and the OC PE MSI cards purportedly have voltage control for up to +100mv on the core, as well as volts on the memory, from what I'm seeing on forums.

With any luck, my two new cards will be on my doorstep tomorrow, since they're shipping from only a couple of states away and are already on the Packaging phase.
Click to expand...
gtx660ti SLI is garbage at 2560x1600 though. http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-nvidia-geforce-gtx-660-ti/7/
 
Galaxy said:
I'm here; have been all along. I saw your pm earlier but have been rushing around to get all the 660 Ti launch stuff taken care of and needed a moment to give you a proper reply. Sorry if the suspense was unbearable.

To answer your question, Galaxy warranties don't need to be transfered--we warranty the product, not the customer. As long as you have the original receipt you'll be entitled to any remaining warranty coverage just the same as the owner before you.
Click to expand...

Nice policy--and kudos on releasing a card with 50% more memory for only a 10% higher price!

Tech question if you don't mind--did Galaxy divvy up the extra memory in such a way as to balance out the memory channels (such as, 1 GB per each of the three 64-bit channels)? Or would that require changes to the hidden memory controller logic that only nVidia has access to?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top