It doesn't have the same die size as the chip it replaces (GP106) though.This is what the entire Turing lineup should have been. 33% more efficient and 40% faster than the Pascal chip it replaces with sane die sizes.
RTX came a generation too soon.
I think it's clearly the 1660 Ti that's better. You might be tempted to say that you can get ray tracing with the 2060, but right now the support is utterly lacking and the results that are there are terrible in terms of the performance you'll get.
TU116 - 6,600 million transistors packed in 284 mm² --> GTX 1660TiIt has 50% more transistors than the 1060, for 40% more performance.
Actually, 35% improvement in performance for 42% larger is a very good gain.but with regards to perf/mm2 it is at best a wash, and at worst a regression (unless of course the TU116 as seen in 1660 Ti is not fully enabled).
If you go lower, it tends to be better at perf/$.I looked through the list of games in the AT benchmark, and the 2060 provides 17% better average frame rate at 1440p and 15% better average frame rate at 1080p, while it costs 25% more than the 1660 Ti.
I agree that the 1660ti looks a bit big for the performance. However, to get better performance, they probably could've also increased clock speeds. However, the card looks like it was engineered to be essentially as fast as a 1070. Also, perf/mm^2 isn't everything. Perf/watt has improved. The 1660ti has 20% better perf/watt than the 1070, and 8% better perf/watt than the 1080. In addition, as already stated elsewhere, Nvidia have added FP16 cores instead of Tensor cores.TU116 - 6,600 million transistors packed in 284 mm² --> GTX 1660Ti
GP104 - 7,200 million transistors packed in 314 mm² --> GTX 1080
You don't see a problem here if the 1660Ti is all there is to get from TU116?
Drop the clocks on the 1080 to match 1660Ti performance and watch that perf/watt advantage melt away. Also, do keep in mind both the 1070 and 1080 use older memory chips and more of them, so card perf/watt advantage does not directly translate into chip perf/watt advantage.Also, perf/mm^2 isn't everything. Perf/watt has improved. The 1660ti has 20% better perf/watt than the 1070, and 8% better perf/watt than the 1080.
Well, there is a nice advertisement. But for Folding, I think the 2060 is better, and for DP operation the AMD Radeon VII is better (both perf/$$).Bigger die, smaller die, tensor cores , no tensor cores, faster than this ,slower than this, cost this much,,cost that much......
Bottom line, for at least the next 5 or 6 month's its the fastest card you can buy with the best price/ performance, has low temps, low power consumption, overclocked well, and is quiet.
And you can buy it at MSRP $279.
Yea, AMD falls even further behind in performance per watt (and pretty much every other metric as well). Bring on the obligatory "power consumption doesnt matter" from the AMD camp.Dunno what's going on at NV, but this definitely one of the most interesting line ups.
How will RTX fair? Is the future the removal of Tensor/RT-Cores? FIND OUT NEXT EPISODE ON NVIDIA BALL Z!!!!!
In all seriousness, this shows that NV is ready to compete on just about ANY level AMD (and eventually Intel) wants to compete on. They are ready to cater to a wide range of buyers from average gamer who just want the FPS to early adopters who don't mind dropping extra cash for boutique features.
Navi is facing more competition than Vega did.
Doesn't put it in a really great light, since 1060 and 1070 are now close to 3 years old cards.So I read a few reviews, this is what im seeing.
* better price performance than gtx 1060 or 2060 and the fastest card per price performance.
Nvidia will sell millions of these.
The RX 590 was never a good deal, free games included or not. There is a rumor floating around that the RX 580 8GB will be $200 - that is a better deal than a $240 RX 590. Priced between the RX 580 and the GTX 1660 Ti means that you're better off spending $40 less for 12-15% lower performance or spending $40 more for 25% higher performance. Either way you get better perf/dollar than the RX 590.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|H||Review AMD RX 5600XT Review Thread||Graphics Cards||279|
|T||Article [TechPowerUp] Radeon RX 5500 Review||Graphics Cards||36|
|M||Discussion Looking forward to Nvivia's 7nm 1660TI equivalent.||Graphics Cards||18|
|Ray Tracing’s A Game Changer ,Call of Duty: Modern Warfare , and RTX review for "Control" ,Minecraft NEW Ray Tracing RTX Mode Hands-On And Tested||Graphics Cards||203|
|Question Any reviews with the 5700 vs 2060 super overclock vs overclock||Graphics Cards||13|
|Review AMD RX 5600XT Review Thread|
|Article [TechPowerUp] Radeon RX 5500 Review|
|Discussion Looking forward to Nvivia's 7nm 1660TI equivalent.|
|Ray Tracing’s A Game Changer ,Call of Duty: Modern Warfare , and RTX review for "Control" ,Minecraft NEW Ray Tracing RTX Mode Hands-On And Tested|
|Question Any reviews with the 5700 vs 2060 super overclock vs overclock|