Question 1660 Ti details

Qwertilot

Golden Member
Nov 28, 2013
1,410
37
106
#3
It'll give them DLSS which will actually be genuinely rather valuable in this market segment.
 
Oct 18, 2013
12,267
469
126
#4
It'll give them DLSS which will actually be genuinely rather valuable in this market segment.
Will it though? I thought DLSS was a cheap way to get to 4k without needing all the power to actually do 4k. If that is correct, who needs this budget card but has a 4k monitor?
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,446
201
126
#5
This will at least give us an idea of what the Tensor cores can do for us sans the RT cores, if anything.
 

Qwertilot

Golden Member
Nov 28, 2013
1,410
37
106
#6
DLSS can definitely potentially help at 2560 too but 4k monitors really aren't crazy money any more.

If you presume - unclear how safe yet! - that most of the really graphically demanding stuff going forwards will get DLSS then you could likely happily run a 4k monitor off one of these.
 

Dribble

Golden Member
Aug 9, 2005
1,654
101
106
#7
Will it though? I thought DLSS was a cheap way to get to 4k without needing all the power to actually do 4k. If that is correct, who needs this budget card but has a 4k monitor?
DLSS can be setup for any resolution, but so far Nvidia only seems to be providing 4k and 2560 res implementations. Once these lower end cards come out I guess they'll enable it for lower resolutions.

I'm guessing the 1660Ti will be optimised for 2560 DLSS - not so sure about 4k, it might not have enough tensor cores to process 4k images fast enough. What it will mean is if you are ever struggling with fps and the game supports DLSS you can just click the button for a big fps boost at the cost of a minor drop in image quality. That will put it well ahead of cards without the tensor cores in those games.
 
Sep 13, 2010
158
6
81
#8
This selective DLSS thing is a bummer.. If I am not able to use those Tensor cores for 1080/1440p resolutions (That I am planning to purchase this card for), per my choice, it's a wastage of Die space IMO

They should have just included all the normal/Shader cores (1920)
 

tviceman

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2008
6,586
35
126
www.facebook.com
#10
It looks to be about 2/3 the size of TU106, which would put it at around 300mm2, give or take 15mm2. That isn't really big at all considering it's on a pre-existing manufacturing process 4-5 years old now (that has admittedly been tweaked) and is producing >700mm2 dies.

Given that it's about the same size as GP104, I wonder why they even did this at all as opposed to to just rebadging GP104. Turing isn't much more efficient than Pascal in perf/w, so they eliminated the cost-savings benefit of die size by tacking on the tensor cores. Are tensor cores really that important for midrange chips? I personally doubt it. I think Nvidia is betting too hard on proprietary hardware features for the mass market.
 
Last edited:

Qwertilot

Golden Member
Nov 28, 2013
1,410
37
106
#11
It’ll be interesting to see the perf/w gap with reltively similar die sizes to compare.

The tensor cores have maybe some nice uses for gaming, but these chips are going to sell for AI things as well of course - especially for executing the results of training neural networks.

So very solid reasons to fit the tensor cores in given that they could.
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,446
201
126
#13
Jun 8, 2003
14,098
118
126
#15
I believe this is the performance without tensor cores.
My math told me week's ago it would be slightly slower than the gtxq1070 but I didnt account for the memory bandwidth increase.288gb vs 256gb for the 1070.

$280 and on par or faster than a gtx1070, with 192 tensor cores?
This card is half of a rtx2080 just like the 1060 was about half of a 1080 and the 960 was half of a 980.

This is the gtx1060 successor. About 31% faster than a 1060 for $35 more money.
Slot the 1660ti on this chart at the 1070 performance.

Next the 1660 will slot in between the gtx1060 and rx590 for $199.
perfrel_1920_1080 (1).png
 
Last edited:
Jun 8, 2003
14,098
118
126
#16
Last edited:

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
6,193
174
126
#17
Videocardz said earlier that the 1660 6 GB would be $229.
 

Qwertilot

Golden Member
Nov 28, 2013
1,410
37
106
#21
This is a massively more price sensitive segment of the market, so I think it always going to come in fairly affordable. Some half decent competition probably expected at some point as well.
 
Aug 25, 2001
43,254
445
126
#22
Nice improvement for a slight bump in price!
I might get one. Hard to choose between the RTX 2060, GTX 1660 Ti, and GTX 1660. It will probably come down to price, for me. I'm not interested in any way in the RTX feature-set, unless those cores can be re-purposed somehow for DC work or mining.

Been on my RX 570 cards for like a year, time for an upgrade! I hope that Nvidia's drivers, and the HDMI 2.0 support, are working in these cards.

I've had trouble, with GTX 1050 / 3GB / Ti and GTX 1060 3GB cards, not recognizing my 40" Avera UHD TV properly, and I am stuck with a reduced color-depth, really rather dismal-looking, visually, as compared to with my RX 570 cards (bold and bright, good colors / contrast). Worst yet, I don't think that I had any flexibility to change the NV driver settings. Like it wasn't detecting HDMI 2.0 support somewhere.
 

Bouowmx

Senior member
Nov 13, 2016
833
14
116
#23
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti price of 280 USD is 80% that of RTX 2060. GTX 1660 Ti also has 80% the cores of RTX 2060 (1536 vs 1920).

GTX 1660 Ti should be more like 250 USD, especially with the exclusion of hardware ray tracing. Otherwise, it exists only to up-sell the RTX 2060.
 
Jun 8, 2003
14,098
118
126
#24
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti price of 280 USD is 80% that of RTX 2060. GTX 1660 Ti also has 80% the cores of RTX 2060 (1536 vs 1920).

GTX 1660 Ti should be more like 250 USD, especially with the exclusion of hardware ray tracing. Otherwise, it exists only to up-sell the RTX 2060.
The 1660ti exist to compete against the $260 rx590. With the gtx1660ti for $20 more you can have ~ 20% more performance.

Lets not forget in about 6 month's there might be a Navi based card with 1660ti performance also.
 

Bouowmx

Senior member
Nov 13, 2016
833
14
116
#25
The 1660ti exist to compete against the $260 rx590. With the gtx1660ti for $20 more you can have ~ 20% more performance.
At 230 and 280 USD, Turing GTX has the same cores-price ratio as the RTX 2060 does. For example, for 1.25x price, one can get 1.25x performance, plus hardware ray tracing. RT is a 'free' value-added feature.

I suppose Turing GTX would have to settle below MSRP like Radeon RX 590.
 

Similar threads



ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS