GTX 1660Ti reviews out

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
At 1080p techpowerup perf/price chart is almost exactly the same:
View attachment 143898

BTW. $2.69 and $2.96 is almost exactly the same level anyway...
For no RTX features they could do better and price 1660Ti at 250$ then perf/price would be sufficiently improved to praise this card so much... just sayin...

The chart isn't the same at all. TPUP actually shows GTX 1060 as having better perf/dollar when reality is the total opposite, and it shows 2060 as being much closer to 1660 than it is as well. Hint: try some math.
 

euskalzabe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
1,115
No disappointing card. Only disappointed person.
You are right on that front, I shouldn't be unfair to the product. This will be an attractive upgrade for those still in Maxwell. I wish we would still get generation on generation upgrades of the magnitude we got 10 years ago. I guess this is the new normal.
 

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
2,685
New huge benchmark by HUB:

Steve points out that AMD's advertising of the Vega56 price drop was misleading and how some bone-headed tech sites (my words) fell for it. At $400, Vega 56 gets crushed.

GTX 1060 prices are a bit silly at $200 for a 3 GB card and $250 for the 6 GB. No doubt the upcoming 1660/1650ti will cause those prices to drop hard.
 

Dayaks

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,059
New huge benchmark by HUB:

Steve points out that AMD's advertising of the Vega56 price drop was misleading and how some bone-headed tech sites (my words) fell for it. At $400, Vega 56 gets crushed.

GTX 1060 prices are a bit silly at $200 for a 3 GB card and $250 for the 6 GB. No doubt the upcoming 1660/1650ti will cause those prices to drop hard.
Yeah, Vega 56 at $400 is nuts and add in electricity. It’s only saving grace is it’s an overclocker/modders play thing. Honestly Vega 56 looks like end of life type pricing/stock.
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,045
And a $350+ card with 6gb of ram. I also think those that buy at the lower prices also in general keep there cards a lot longer. Still think a Vega is a bettter buy than a 2060 by a significant amount.
With decent PSU Vega can be overclocked quite a lot. It is however very power hungry and most even without any
The chart isn't the same at all. TPUP actually shows GTX 1060 as having better perf/dollar when reality is the total opposite, and it shows 2060 as being much closer to 1660 than it is as well. Hint: try some math.
I can easily buy 1060 6gb for 1000 PLN and cheapest 1660ti is 1450 so without knowing exchange rates and taxes I can deduce 200$ : 280$ radio is valid. so it seems TPU charts are quite representative of reality.

Difference in benchmark are mostly due to game selection.

For comparison 2060 is 1600 PLN so it is just 150 PLN difference for non-FE 2060 and 1660Ti... making the new card a complete and utter joke imho when it comes to value

2060 FE is more expensive but as with any RTX cat it is just waste of money to get FE card anyway so the should not be even taken into account in these kinds of comparison, especially with 16600Ti, a budget card
 

crazycrave

Gawd
Joined
Mar 31, 2016
Messages
889
I don't understand, as it is like AMD had Nvidia chase the RX 590 as both 1660Ti and 2060RTX was targeted at the card, while AMD keeps selling RX570/580 under $200 with free games till April to clear stock.
 

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
2,685
And a $350+ card with 6gb of ram. I also think those that buy at the lower prices also in general keep there cards a lot longer. Still think a Vega is a bettter buy than a 2060 by a significant amount.
A 6GB $350 card vs a slightly worse performing and much power hungry 8 GB card AT $400 is a tougher choice for many. If you MUST have the highest textures, the latter is probably better.

I still think DLSS will get better. For those that want 4k DLSS which would be closer to OneX graphics at 4k, being able to play those games at 60 fps on any 4k screen is enticing.

GDDR6 is sort of a double edge sword. The bandwidth is great, but I am sure Nvidia wanted to make the card profitable due to the cost. For the 1660ti, a 192 bit 6 GB framebuffer is arguably a perfect balance of bandwidth and size for that performance. For the 2060, many see it as being to small.

The best option would have been 256 bit of 8 GB DDR5X on the 2060. However, the optics of having more advance memory in the slower SKU may have not been as favorable and more likely, it would have been tougher to design with the architecture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XoR_
like this

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
2,685
I don't understand, as it is like AMD had Nvidia chase the RX 590 as both 1660Ti and 2060RTX was targeted at the card, while AMD keeps selling RX570/580 under $200 with free games till April to clear stock.
The 2 new Nvidia cards were more if a 2 prong attack on Vega 56. The standard 1660 will be out in a few weeks and should match or beat the RX590 in performance, power, and CURRENT price.
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,045
GDDR6 is sort of a double edge sword. The bandwidth is great, but I am sure Nvidia wanted to make the card profitable due to the cost. For the 1660ti, a 192 bit 6 GB framebuffer is arguably a perfect balance of bandwidth and size for that performance. For the 2060, many see it as being to small.
If they were to sell it at the same price they might as well reduce price of 2070 ; )
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
8,070
A 6GB $350 card vs a slightly worse performing and much power hungry 8 GB card AT $400 is a tougher choice for many. If you MUST have the highest textures, the latter is probably better.

I still think DLSS will get better. For those that want 4k DLSS which would be closer to OneX graphics at 4k, being able to play those games at 60 fps on any 4k screen is enticing.

GDDR6 is sort of a double edge sword. The bandwidth is great, but I am sure Nvidia wanted to make the card profitable due to the cost. For the 1660ti, a 192 bit 6 GB framebuffer is arguably a perfect balance of bandwidth and size for that performance. For the 2060, many see it as being to small.

The best option would have been 256 bit of 8 GB DDR5X on the 2060. However, the optics of having more advance memory in the slower SKU may have not been as favorable and more likely, it would have been tougher to design with the architecture.
DLSS will never match the native resolution. I have a 2080ti and love it but I think DLSS is basically nvidia putting tensor cores to use while they are not being used. its sort of like putting lipstic on a pig.
 

cybereality

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
6,173
DLSS will never match the native resolution.
Plus, you can get similar quality and performance boost from just adjusting the render scale in games that support it.

And that works with any card at any resolution, unlike DLSS which is severely limited to particular resolutions on particular cards in only a couple games that add support.

If Nvidia can find a way to make it more generic and work across the board (sort of like DSR worked) then that would be a win. As is it is not really useful.
 

SpongeBob

The Contraceptive Under the Sea
Joined
Jan 15, 2011
Messages
724
who's this targeted for?...isn't Nvidia undermining their own technology- DLSS/ray-tracing?...Nvidia should be pushing RTX features and not minimizing them
So Nvidia should be pressuring game developers to support raytracing so they can sell more expensive cards? To me, this card is one of the most consumer-friendly cards I've seen from them in a while.
 

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
2,685
DLSS will never match the native resolution.
No kidding.

4k DLSS was designed to look closer to 1800p upscaled at closer to 1440p native performance cost.

In BFV it looks closer to 1440p native with 1800p upscaled performance. Pretty much a fail. However, Metro does MUCH better. It still has potential depending on the game type.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
8,070
Plus, you can get similar quality and performance boost from just adjusting the render scale in games that support it.

And that works with any card at any resolution, unlike DLSS which is severely limited to particular resolutions on particular cards in only a couple games that add support.

If Nvidia can find a way to make it more generic and work across the board (sort of like DSR worked) then that would be a win. As is it is not really useful.
I think they did it mainly to boost ray tracing. That is why at certain resolutions if the game is already fast enough it doesn’t benefit at all due to faster frame rates already. And you get it at 4K as well. Plus a game is much harder to do then a repetitive benchmark.
 
Last edited:

tajoh111

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
210
I think the most craziest thing is the biggest criticism people expected at this launch is some people thought this should have been the next GTX 2050 TI which is crazy.

This card is 127-135% faster than a gtx 1050 ti which has not happened every even with a node shrink between successive between success generations in this series. Having double the die size along with having GDDR6 makes this a completely different class of chip. The performance difference is actually consistent with last gens GTX 950 to GTX 1060 in terms of performance gains so this should not have been a GTX 1x50 ti. The hypocrisy of certain youtube channels like the good old gamer and not an apple fan is ridiculous which are okay with the third revision of polaris 10 being shifted from rx480 to 590 but are not okay with new and largers chips with more expensive memory being called a successor chip.

Further more, this type of card in the $150-179 would launch AMD entire product stack perhaps save the Radeon VII into the sun, nuking AMD entire product stack into loss pricing. 100 dollar RX 580s and 200 dollar Vega 56 might sound nice for consumers for a few months, but if you want AMD to give up on graphics and drop out of the competition, this is most anti competitive move you could do.

That is forgo most or all the profits on a GTX 1660 ti to force AMD to accept losses on each card sold or do huge inventory write downs where there stock is forced to sit on shelves(if they don't do a price drop) until they are worthless or AMD is forced to sell at huge losses. AMD graphic division would implode if this card launched in that price range. Heck a 250 RTX 2060 would do it as well. Nvidia not being ultra aggressive on pricing at this price range is the only thing that has been keeping AMD in the game so long without mining.
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,045
Further more, this type of card in the $150-179 would launch AMD entire product stack perhaps save the Radeon VII into the sun, nuking AMD entire product stack into loss pricing. 100 dollar RX 580s and 200 dollar Vega 56 might sound nice for consumers for a few months, but if you want AMD to give up on graphics and drop out of the competition, this is most anti competitive move you could do.

That is forgo most or all the profits on a GTX 1660 ti to force AMD to accept losses on each card sold or do huge inventory write downs where there stock is forced to sit on shelves(if they don't do a price drop) until they are worthless or AMD is forced to sell at huge losses. AMD graphic division would implode if this card launched in that price range. Heck a 250 RTX 2060 would do it as well. Nvidia not being ultra aggressive on pricing at this price range is the only thing that has been keeping AMD in the game so long without mining.
Memory gets more expensive, only two memory suppliers, process node is harder and more expensive to do, boards are more complex... and competition have cards with like twice the TDP and GCN card in the pipeline... and people still expect Nvidia to release cards so cheap that they would have hardly any profit from selling them just because of some unwritten law "new generation was always faster & cheaper" ... ridiculous =(

I bet NV could launch RTX 2060 with the price of 1660Ti with the 250$ price tag, 2070 with 400$ and so on but that would just like you say only make things worse for them and obviously for AMD, just like you said
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,045
So Nvidia should be pressuring game developers to support raytracing so they can sell more expensive cards? To me, this card is one of the most consumer-friendly cards I've seen from them in a while.
This post look like another "1660Ti is great cars bcause it lacks RTX features" kind of thinking...

It is sad, so so sad =(((((((((((((((
 

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
2,685

modi123

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
5,865
From what I am gathering all the two-fan GTX 1660ti reference perform about the same, right? Not one substantially better, or worse, than the others?
 
Last edited:

Raghar

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 23, 2012
Messages
209
I can easily buy 1060 6gb for 1000 PLN and cheapest 1660ti is 1450 so without knowing exchange rates and taxes I can deduce 200$ : 280$ radio is valid. so it seems TPU charts are quite representative of reality.
Compare STRIX vs STRIX, and compare GTX 1060 6G pricing half year ago with GTX 1660Ti pricing now. Sellers want to get rid of GTX 1060 6G cards before GTX 1660 would be released, thus they dropped prices quite a bit.
 

rkatapt

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 8, 2003
Messages
12,487
I am in for one to replace a 1050Ti in the wife's computer. We'll see how much of a difference it makes. Only paid $130 for it. Had $100 in Amazon gift cards and I signed up for the Amazon credit card which gave me another $60 in credit. Then immediately paid off the credit card.
 

cybereality

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
6,173
So I got some time with the 1660 Ti tonight.

Overall a solid performer at 1080p. For $289 (EVGA factory OC model), there are no complaints.

Tried Far Cry 5, full max settings 1080p, HD textures, etc. and getting in the 80 - 90fps range.

Dying Light, full max everything, and getting upwards of 120fps.

DOOM, which I guess no one tests since it runs so good, getting in the above 100fps range on Nightmare settings Vulkan.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider. Was almost playable at Very High but I found High settings to be better. On High getting in the 80fps range.

Dirt Rally 2.0, also almost playable on max settings. Setting graphics options to Ultra, but using CMAA and 4x AF I was able to get just over 60fps. However on High settings it was around 100fps+ and much more responsive.

So overall, I think for 1080p gamers this is perfect. You may not max out every game, but the performance is there for smooth 60fps gaming with a few small tweaks (or even 120fps with lower settings).

I think it's well priced for what it is, and for the market it is targeting. Still could test a few more games, but my initial impression is that it's solid.
 

Pieter3dnow

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
6,785
This post look like another "1660Ti is great cars bcause it lacks RTX features" kind of thinking...

It is sad, so so sad =(((((((((((((((
You mean totally not what Nvidia is about?
Maybe a few people on here noticed that Nvidia is about making money segmenting the market with proprietary technologies and a ton of marketing. The idea that Nvidia cards and drivers are superior is in almost each and every topic in the AMD forums people echoing the cold hard "truth" while in reality Nvidia does more harm then good to the videocard business. It has trickled down from GPP to reviewers being blacklisted the stupid amount of youtubers which do product placements and the consistence on the marketing side made this company what it is.

You paid premium price for their product the websites say it is the fastest the websites say it is the "best" the profits for Nvidia get posted on every website or even used in youtube videos. And yet they "forget" about ray tracing well you can buy the book.

With all the money that Nvidia has with all the games supporting features that were only available in GameWorks most people thought that ray tracing would follow in the footsteps ..

To people considering this 1660TI I would look at Vega 56 better card better price.
 

stashix

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
344
But Vega 56 is not the same price.
Even if it was it's still somewhat debatable if it's a better product - power consumption and heat don't really matter at the high end where you're kinda expected to own a decent case and PSU, but they absolutely do matter in the midrange market where a lot of people have a cheapo case and 500W power supplies.
 

illusio13

n00b
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
49
I think people with a GTX1060Ti and below would be served well with this upgrade. 30-50% performance increase for only a 10% price hike is a win in my book. Specially in contrast to the RTX line.

Then again I have been enjoying this level of performance with my GTX1070 for a couple of years now.
Interesting dude, your view point..............., as an aside; does that then make this card..., like the V7 a worthless upgrade, pointless, since you have HAD this performance for 2 years........., just like the 1080ti / vega 7 comparisons ?
 

illusio13

n00b
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
49
This is for mainstream consumers, who are largely still playing at 1080p. 1080p accounts for 60% of gamers, according to Steam stats.

DLSS and RT are nice, but as we see it's intensive even for a $1,200 video card, no way Nvidia could make that work for under $300.
Not having a go OK.............; i wish you all would shutup about how ~ £300 is MID_RANGE.................... LOL! That price historically has always been lower-high end, yet to offset the Non-sense prices now being charged for High-end, you must call this mid-range to maintain the relative measure yes.............................., even my RX 580 @ ~£247 was bordering on upper-mid-range. £300 is lower-high-end.

Wish all the reviews and sites would stop this BOLLOKS :-(
 

stashix

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
344
Interesting dude, your view point..............., as an aside; does that then make this card..., like the V7 a worthless upgrade, pointless, since you have HAD this performance for 2 years........., just like the 1080ti / vega 7 comparisons ?
That's not a strictly equivalent situation.
The 1660Ti gets you either 30% more performance at a ~30€ higher price (at 279€ it's in between the 249€ MSRP of the 1060 and 299€ of the 1060 FE) or the same performance at a discount compared to the 1070.
V7 gets you the same performance at the same price only later.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,712
Maybe a few people on here noticed that Nvidia is about making money segmenting the market with proprietary technologies and a ton of marketing. The idea that Nvidia cards and drivers are superior is in almost each and every topic in the AMD forums people echoing the cold hard "truth" while in reality Nvidia does more harm then good to the videocard business. It has trickled down from GPP to reviewers being blacklisted the stupid amount of youtubers which do product placements and the consistence on the marketing side made this company what it is.
Perhaps you have different definitions of the words 'truth', 'harm', and 'good'. I see AMD pushing out an ancient architecture and failing to innovate on the GPU front. Nvidia is innovating, and they're acting like a typical company would in their position.

I remain surprised at just how much leeway AMD is given over the years. They bought ATI, and since that point that division has barely survived. They've occasionally almost caught up; that's about the best that can be said. ATI was an innovator in the graphics space, not always successful, but hell, they were competing with the top up until they were purchased.

You paid premium price for their product the websites say it is the fastest the websites say it is the "best" the profits for Nvidia get posted on every website or even used in youtube videos. And yet they "forget" about ray tracing well you can buy the book.
Did you 'forget' how many times you and others like you laughed and cried about ray tracing on RTX cards? How it will never be fast enough and it is a waste of space? Why are you complaining about the lack of it on a lower-end card now?

With all the money that Nvidia has with all the games supporting features that were only available in GameWorks most people thought that ray tracing would follow in the footsteps ..
RTX is based on DXR, which is the DX spec, and so is Gameworks. AMD's failure to implement DirectX efficiently has nothing to do with Nvidia pushing graphics fidelity using the spec. I thought AMD users were all about adhering to specs!

To people considering this 1660TI I would look at Vega 56 better card better price.
With the release of the GTX1660, the Vega 56 is rendered obsolete. The only thing spending more money on the Vega 56 will get you is additional power draw, heat, and noise.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,712
Wish all the reviews and sites would stop this BOLLOKS :-(
While I'm inclined to agree- I've considered US$300 to be the top of mid-range/bottom of high-end myself- it is certainly a matter of opinion. Further, we're asking quite a bit more out of these parts, and their cost to manufacture has gone up quite a bit too; more than one way to skin a cat and all.
 

illusio13

n00b
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
49
This card is the revelation world needed!!!!!111
View attachment 143892
It have almost exactly the same performance/price as RTX 2060 and less overclocking headroom but removing RTX features surely made all it so much better because now it is not "slow" at ray-tracing. It cannot do it at all.
Heil to it and its spiritual ancestor GF4 MX440

Oh God !!! I like TPU, but their methodology is.............., suspect and full of bias? Not that it has always been to the green-eyed-monster ! Surely, many of you will remember them; like lots of site's being called AMD shills etc........... :)

But, for fuck sakes TPU; stop it with the canned, inconsistent benchmarks; which honestly, seem desinged to undermine AMD and only promote Nvidia exclusively....... :-(

Makes that chart you posted above " fucking worthless..... right; since its NOT a level playing-field there-in represented; as a tool to use for purchasing.

Atleast on [H]ere; inside the gameplay ( more tha some 60 second run-through, canned benchmak etc.......,etc ); INSIDE THE GAME-PLAY; that is the only metric for using to make a purchasing decision........... F****&%^&*^%$%^%&** : You young people, and the delusions you portray, using suspect data, not even willing to test its provenance...........

Level the playing field when comparing products; dont present gimped shit as having ANY FUCKING value..... Dude's n Gals :-(

Edit : spelling.

No offense meant; but if you ( TPU, or anybody else ) WANT to take it that way......; cool!:)
 

illusio13

n00b
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
49
That's not a strictly equivalent situation.
The 1660Ti gets you either 30% more performance at a ~30€ higher price (at 279€ it's in between the 249€ MSRP of the 1060 and 299€ of the 1060 FE) or the same performance at a discount compared to the 1070.
V7 gets you the same performance at the same price only later.

Dude, no offence....; stop that BOLLOKS about MSRP......................, what a fucking worthless metric...; no wait; MAYBE 2+ years after release yes...:-(
 

illusio13

n00b
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
49
What did he mean by this I wonder?

:), when ever; have we been able to buy @ MSRP.......upon release; i cannot remember anytime in the last couple of decades, maybe longer........: bit fuzzy memory; but thinking back in the Geforce 2 / Voodoo era ...... :-(
 

stashix

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
344
:), when ever; have we been able to buy @ MSRP.......upon release; i cannot remember anytime in the last couple of decades, maybe longer........: bit fuzzy memory; but thinking back in the Geforce 2 / Voodoo era ...... :-(
Right now for example? Where I live anyway.
https://www.czc.cz/msi-geforce-gtx-1660-ti-ventus-xs-6g-oc-6gb-gddr6/254990/produkt

If you look at the "bez DPH" price (that means without VAT, since that gets slapped on top and every country has a different rate) it's listed for ~6500 CZK, which is about 260€.
Better models creep closer to the 279€ mark.
 

illusio13

n00b
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
49
Right now for example? Where I live anyway.
https://www.czc.cz/msi-geforce-gtx-1660-ti-ventus-xs-6g-oc-6gb-gddr6/254990/produkt

If you look at the "bez DPH" price (that means without VAT, since that gets slapped on top and every country has a different rate) it's listed for ~6500 CZK, which is about 260€.
Better models creep closer to the 279€ mark.
Nice data point dude......; :) i stand corrected! Happy, I am:)

Edit : .......:-( just looked on OCUK.... ehhhhhhh! @ £259 , not sure if that includes VAT ( 20% in UK ).
What a MONKEY i am...........; rageing against the machine...., before even looking myself! :)

I'll shutup now dude's n Gals :)
Edit 2 - if we can all agree to ADD the VAT before quoting prices this stops all this MSRP nonsense; since it ( MSRP ) is not / NEVER actually the price we pay....NO? Unless we wait 2+yrs later...LOL:)

All of these metrics used to undermine new products..., relative value/performance non-sense:-=(
 
Last edited:

Stoly

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,714
Interesting dude, your view point..............., as an aside; does that then make this card..., like the V7 a worthless upgrade, pointless, since you have HAD this performance for 2 years........., just like the 1080ti / vega 7 comparisons ?
Pointless for me of course, but for people on lesser cards this could be a good option. Something similar applies to V7, if you have a GTX1080Ti then its worthless, but if you really really really want an AMD card that performs like a GTX1080Ti then at least you have a choice.

It really makes you wonder why not just keep the GTX1070, but I assume nvidia just wants to phase out Pascal cards.
 
Top