Nvidia GTX 660 Ti Detailed

Oh wow i hoped for 7970 performance after overclocking not before.

Looks like i finally get worthy replacement for gtx 470
 
I hope you all realize that the TweakTown benchmarks are without AA or AF... please refer to the charts when they enable AA and AF, in NV sponsored games even.
 
Still curious how they are managing 2GB with the 192-bit bus.
 
Last edited:
This thing is likely going to be € 300+ here in Europe. It's tempting, but my 460 is really fast enough for 95% of the games I own. Must..resist....upgradititis...
 
For me the HD7850 is not fast enough compared to my 460. (Only 50% faster? Uhm, no thanks.)
The GTX 670 is fast enough, but too expensive (Twice the performance of a 460, but twice the price. Uhm, no thanks.)

Hopefully the 660-Ti will have a better price-performance ratio.
 
From what i seen the the 660 is just short of being twice as fast as a 470... and for $300 thats my price range.
 
Inu said:
From what i seen the the 660 is just short of being twice as fast as a 470... and for $300 thats my price range.
Click to expand...
overall its not even close to twice as fast. even the 670 is only about 75% faster than the 470. and the 660 tanks BAD when you apply some AA.
 
EDIT: Nvm i see you're probably right.
 
Last edited:
maboblivion said:
People who want to say their mid range card beats amd's high end! trolololool :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

While the 660 ti doesn't beat the 7970 Ghz it does remarkably well with AA.

660Ti vs 7850 vs 7870 vs 7950 vs 7970 vs Ghz

Mafia
73 59 65 69 81 88
660Ti on par with 7950. 90% of 7970 performance.

AVP
42 41 44 52 63 72
660Ti on par with 7870. 67% of 7970 performance.

FC2
96 80 84 87 101 102
660Ti Faster than 7950 and close to 7970. 95% of 7970 performance.

Metro
50 48 none 59 70 74
660Ti theoretically on par with 7870. 71% of 7970 performance.

JC2
70 56 none 62 73 84
660Ti Faster than 7950 and on par with 7970. 96% of 7970 performance.

Id say the 660 Ti still has a really strong showing in some games! Across all 5 games it averages 84% of 7970 performance. That's a feat for a supposed $250 card vs a $400-$500 card!

-edit-
In comparison, the 7950 is at an average of 84% of 7970 performance as well.
 
Last edited:
I hope you all realize that the TweakTown benchmarks are without AA or AF... please refer to the charts when they enable AA and AF, in NV sponsored games even.
Click to expand...


This, is about as fast as a 7870 when the AA is turned on. Clearly memory bottleneck.
 
Even with AA and AF, the 660ti is preforming in the 7870 to 7950 range. The 7950 is selling for $349 - $399 before rebates and the 7870 is selling from $279 - $329, so if it hits the $300 price point that seems about right and would make for some good competition. But if the 660ti comes in around $250 like Tweaktown is suggesting... that's a monster deal.

I can't wait for the [H]ard review. :)
 
It was a horrible review, I give them props for this but it looks to be close to 7870 level, which we all expected. What it releases at will tell the tale and of course the oc headroom :D
 
I see the Radeon cards pull ahead at the 2560x1600, but what about 2560x1440? I've got one of them Catleaps, and I'm hoping for a card that can drive that resolution decently. Worried about the 192 bit bus and 2GB VRAM though.
 
It seems as though the 660Ti will benefit significantly from memory overclocking.

Perhaps at closer to 7Ghz memory, this thing will remain competitive with the high-end even at the higher single-display resolutions.

Perhaps it'd be a good idea for manufacturers to pair the 660Ti with some fast memory.

It looks like I may have an upgrade path...finally... I hope the power consumption is low.
 
Archmage said:
It seems as though the 660Ti will benefit significantly from memory overclocking.

Perhaps at closer to 7Ghz memory, this thing will remain competitive with the high-end even at the higher single-display resolutions.

Perhaps it'd be a good idea for manufacturers to pair the 660Ti with some fast memory.

It looks like I may have an upgrade path...finally... I hope the power consumption is low.
Click to expand...
overclocking it to 7ghz is not going to help it enough to really compete any better. your are still having to multiply that by the 192 bits bus so the overall result is hardly a big deal. a 7950/7970 will go up at twice the rate and only bury the 660 even further.
 
MrKlingon said:
I see the Radeon cards pull ahead at the 2560x1600, but what about 2560x1440? I've got one of them Catleaps, and I'm hoping for a card that can drive that resolution decently. Worried about the 192 bit bus and 2GB VRAM though.
Click to expand...

The GTX 660 Ti isn't going to have a chance at keeping up with such reduced memory bandwidth.
 
cannondale06 said:
overclocking it to 7ghz is not going to help it enough to really compete any better. your are still having to multiply that by the 192 bits bus so the overall result is hardly a big deal. a 7950/7970 will go up at twice the rate and only bury the 660 even further.
Click to expand...

My impression was that, at least with respect to single-display resolutions, the 79XX cards benefit more from overclocking the actual GPU, and that they were not so bandwidth limited. Is that incorrect?

Essentially, I was hoping that overclocking the 660Ti would alleviate a bottleneck a bit.

I understand that the overall overclocked bandwidth of the 384 / 256 bus-width cards will increase in larger increments and certainly dwarf that of the 660Ti, but I'm just looking to loosen what seems to be a large constraint.

I'm not expecting parity with an overclocked GTX 670, of course. I'm just thinking that overclocking the memory will be a big help, and MIGHT render the card just fast enough for my planned 2560x1440 setup.
 
after seeing the AA/AF results....ewwww

But the review sucks though....waitin for [H] review
 
Archmage said:
My impression was that, at least with respect to single-display resolutions, the 79XX cards benefit more from overclocking the actual GPU, and that they were not so bandwidth limited. Is that incorrect?

Essentially, I was hoping that overclocking the 660Ti would alleviate a bottleneck a bit.

I understand that the overall overclocked bandwidth of the 384 / 256 bus-width cards will increase in larger increments and certainly dwarf that of the 660Ti, but I'm just looking to loosen what seems to be a large constraint.

I'm not expecting parity with an overclocked GTX 670, of course. I'm just thinking that overclocking the memory will be a big help, and MIGHT render the card just fast enough for my planned 2560x1440 setup.
Click to expand...

2560x1440 with a 660ti? Sli?
Depending on the games you play that seems kinda unbalanced..
Why the high resolution? I only have 1080p and I run a 670
 
DASHlT said:
after seeing the AA/AF results....ewwww

But the review sucks though....waitin for [H] review
Click to expand...

Don't really need AA at high resolutions. Ever since I started gaming at 1920x1080 i stopped using it.
 
From what I read during the 680 launch, the primary thing holding back memory speeds is not the GDDR5 memory chips but memory controllers. 680 GTX was a major breakthrough in creating a memory controller that GDDR5 at higher speeds. So I'm not sure if including faster memory will help if the memory controller is incapable of running any faster.

Archmage said:
It seems as though the 660Ti will benefit significantly from memory overclocking.

Perhaps at closer to 7Ghz memory, this thing will remain competitive with the high-end even at the higher single-display resolutions.

Perhaps it'd be a good idea for manufacturers to pair the 660Ti with some fast memory.

It looks like I may have an upgrade path...finally... I hope the power consumption is low.
Click to expand...
 
Dion said:
Don't really need AA at high resolutions. Ever since I started gaming at 1920x1080 i stopped using it.
Click to expand...

Are you running a <20" monitor?
Depending on the game and aa method aa is good but probably doesn't need to be set as high as people do.
I run a 27" at 1080p and anything above 4x is pretty pointless though I always like a bit of aa. Even FXAA if it is well implemented.
 
Dion said:
Don't really need AA at high resolutions. Ever since I started gaming at 1920x1080 i stopped using it.
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself AA/AF are a must for any game period no matter the resolution.

I cant play a game like consoles with jaggy lines everywhere
 
AF is mostly free on amd and between playable fps and AA, i usualy take fps.
and disable motion blur , hbao cause those are gimmicky. Fps hit is too high for quality it gives.
Add tessallation to that, 32bit colors. :rolleyes:
 
maboblivion said:
AF is mostly free on amd and between playable fps and AA, i usualy take fps.
and disable motion blur , hbao cause those are gimmicky. Fps hit is too high for quality it gives.
Add tessallation to that, 32bit colors. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
AF is mostly free on ANY modern card.
 
cannondale06 said:
overall its not even close to twice as fast. even the 670 is only about 75% faster than the 470. and the 660 tanks BAD when you apply some AA.
Click to expand...

Tanks bad? Not sure what numbers you're looking at. The 2 games I see where performance isn't great with AA are Metro and AVP, and in both those games the 660 was trailing AMD's cards even without AA. Relative performance is similar with and without AA, so if those are the 2 games you care about then definitely look at AMD. Otherwise the 660 is looking really good and depending on the price could be either a good deal or a great deal.
 
MentatYP said:
Tanks bad? Not sure what numbers you're looking at. The 2 games I see where performance isn't great with AA are Metro and AVP, and in both those games the 660 was trailing AMD's cards even without AA. Relative performance is similar with and without AA, so if those are the 2 games you care about then definitely look at AMD. Otherwise the 660 is looking really good and depending on the price could be either a good deal or a great deal.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct, MAD AMD fans would only play AVP and be proud.
 
yanmeng said:
You are absolutely correct, MAD AMD fans would only play AVP and be proud.
Click to expand...

Man i loved AVP. Very fun game.

I decided to get my g/f the 7950 MSI twin frozn III. 3gb of memory, overclocked to 1100+ easy, and it was only $309 (after MIR)

after seeing the AA/AF drop....not worth it
 
Maplehamwich said:
*Snip*
Id say the 660 Ti still has a really strong showing in some games! Across all 5 games it averages 84% of 7970 performance. That's a feat for a supposed $250 card vs a $400-$500 card!

-edit-
In comparison, the 7950 is at an average of 84% of 7970 performance as well.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what people are making a big deal out of with the "AA drop." It's like somehow, because the 660Ti didn't equal or beat the 7970 with AA it's not a worthwhile card. Infact, it's very much on par with the 7950. The cheapest price on Newegg for a $7950 is a Powercolor Radeon at $329 after Rebate. If the 660Ti is indeed a $250 card, it's a better deal.

Comparing overclocks at this time is pre-mature (as there is no record of any), but so is jumping ship on the 660Ti after one review, where it posts an average of 84% of 7970 performance across 5 games, at a rumoured almost half the price.
 
Ajiki-kun said:
Damn. As a new 7950 owner, this makes me sweat.
Click to expand...
Hmm, now that I think about it, this is a good thing. If a $250 660Ti does actually beat 7950, it'll drop the price on 7950 and I can crossfire for cheap. Yay competition.
 
There are new rumors that the 660Ti is going to be a 2gb 256-bit part with 1152 cuda cores. And the vanilla 660 is going a 1.5gb 192-bit part, also with 1152 cuda cores.

It'd be funny if TT ending up reviewing an ES that was nmakes it to final production.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top