Any GeForce 660/660 Ti Speed Theories?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
you will surely get better than a 580 performance from the 660ti. Isnt that a surprise. So many people said they expect at the least. Nvidias mid grade at least as powerful as last gens highest.

Achieved
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
wow. Just seen the review (tt) and the ti has only a 192bit bus. But is is amazingly fast. faster than the 7950. It is very powerful, Wow

Nope.

You read the review with benchmarks up to page 12 not including AA/AF. I posted the only page that matters, 13, and GTX660Ti falls off a cliff, losing to the GTX580. The server is currently down, but you can see some of them in this post. Who is going to spend $300 on a card and not use AA/AF? This card has no chance whatsoever against a 1.1ghz 7950.
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,605
6
81
So you chose the two games Nvidia does not very well in. Cherry picking ;)
I believe it will tie the 7950 overall.
 

skipsneeky2

Diamond Member
May 21, 2011
5,035
1
71
LOL@people forgetting to slam on their brakes when aa/af is applied in that review,looks just fantastic and i nearly fall off a cliff myself when i checked out those aa results,where it just tanks ha.

Russian is keeping them in check this generation that is for sure.
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
So you chose the two games Nvidia does not very well in. Cherry picking ;)
I believe it will tie the 7950 overall.

Sorry I am not trying to cherry pick. It's because those are the only ones posted on our forum and the website is down. The review itself had very few games tested. I found all of them here if you want to take a look. With AA on, minimum and average frame rates drop a lot, even in older games such as Far Cry 2.

I doubt it will tie an HD7950 unless looking at 800mhz 7950 and no AA. At 860mhz the 7950 card is just 10% slower than the GTX670 at 1080P and can use AA/AF, plus 30-40% more overclocking headroom. For enthusiasts, the 7950 seems to be the clear choice.
 
Last edited:

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
Nope.

You read the review with benchmarks up to page 12 not including AA/AF. I posted the only page that matters, 13, and GTX660Ti falls off a cliff, losing to the GTX580. The server is currently down, but you can see some of them in this post. Who is going to spend $300 on a card and not use AA/AF? This card has no chance whatsoever against a 1.1ghz 7950.

fail---

those same charts have the 680 getting edged out by the 7950. No surprise that the 660 cannot keep up.

wow, great job. anyone can paint a picture by cherry picking.

Here is the conclusion, btw:

"It's hard to fault NVIDIA's upcoming GEFORCE GTX 660 Ti and for good reason. You're talking about a video card that is rumored to hit at the mid-$200 range yet performs like a video card priced $100 more. In this case we're talking about the HD 7950 specifically. You could argue that it can be compared against the more expensive HD 7970 at times, too.



On the flaws side of things, the GTX 660 Ti is plagued with the same issue as all NVIDIA video cards. As soon as we move to 2560 x 1600, the lead it had, generally disappears. We're not sure if AMD is just really good at handling the higher resolution or NVIDIA is just not great at it. At this price point, though, you wouldn't expect a video card to handle 2560 x 1600; often it does, though."

radically different than your cherry picked conclusion. The 660 is gonna run out of steam in high resolutions, with tons of AA. They make cards for those cases. Not midranged ones either.

By the charts i seen, the 660 will be a fly off the chart success. keep it real, please
 

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
Sorry I am not trying to cherry pick. It's because those are the only ones posted on our forum and the website is down. The review itself had very few games tested. I found all of them here if you want to take a look. With AA on, minimum and average frame rates drop a lot, even in older games such as Far Cry 2.

I doubt it will tie an HD7950 unless looking at 800mhz 7950 and no AA. At 860mhz the 7950 card is just 10% slower than the GTX670 at 1080P and can use AA/AF, plus 30-40% more overclocking headroom. For enthusiasts, the 7950 seems to be the clear choice.

ur absolutely correct about overclocked 7950 being more powerful. I have no doubt that when you have max overclocked run up, the 7950 will befaster than the gtx660ti can do. I believe that a +1100mhz 7950 will be able to catch the 680. I can agree with this completely.

But its still not looking good for the 7950 when no matter how you spin it. 95% of card buyers wont be pushing their cards at all. i doubt even 5% of users do. Its not gonna matter in the grand scheme. If the 660ti drops at the middle of 200-300 range, then AMD has a huge huge loss coming
 
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
ur absolutely correct about overclocked 7950 being more powerful. I have no doubt that when you have max overclocked run up, the 7950 will befaster than the gtx660ti can do. I believe that a +1100mhz 7950 will be able to catch the 680. I can agree with this completely.

But its still not looking good for the 7950 when no matter how you spin it. 95% of card buyers wont be pushing their cards at all. i doubt even 5% of users do. Its not gonna matter in the grand scheme. If the 660ti drops at the middle of 200-300 range, then AMD has a huge huge loss coming

Take off your green shades m8.. for a $299 card to tank in performance so hard with AA, is utter fail. At $200, you could have an argument, $299.. no way in hell will informed buyers even touch this.
 

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
Take off your green shades m8.. for a $299 card to tank in performance so hard with AA, is utter fail. At $200, you could have an argument, $299.. no way in hell will informed buyers even touch this.

yep thats it. I guess you guys are right. The 660ti will be a terrible failure!!!!

hahahaha!!!

are you even paying any attention at all to anything? Lets look at this a minute. I have already been pretty darn clear, but anyway. The very few tiny sample of benchmark games RS posted as proof show the 7950 as fast or even faster than the 680. It is no surprize that they are games that the AMD does very well in anyway.

As far as green glasses, i have already stated multiple times that the 7950 is a better choice for enthusiast who overclock. But whatever yo!

Anyway, from the review i seen on the 660ti and by the information that a legit review site has leaked. The 660 will be a serious thorn for AMD. Your denial might be share by AMD who shouldve been owning this round from top to bottom already. But instead their denial and slow actions have allowed nvidia to show up and take the cake.

the absolute worse thing AMD could do is now is respond like they have every other Nvidia launch this year. They were wayyy too slow to respond and in living in fantasy land . If they do this they can watch nvidia continue to chip away at their discrete market share.
 

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
TT seems to imply the 660ti will be a mid 200$ card not a $300 one. if all this is true, AMD will be in a lot of hurt.

The last thing AMD and all of you should do is pretend this card is no big deal. It looks pretty capable to me. Especially if its closer to the 250 mark.
 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
Faster than GTX 650 Ti , slower than GTX 670 , duh...

Launch MSRP $200-$329

And since we are at predictions...
Anyone knows what happened with you_know_whose prediction about Kepler
being fast via PhysX block. Being faster than Tahiti, but only in NV sponsored games;
elsewhere slower than Pitcairn.

Was he bamboozled or what?

What happens is he makes outrageous claims about stuff, then when he ends up being way off base he says the articles he posted were full of fake information he made up to see what other sites try to steal / feed off his articles. It's all a bunch of BS, the guy is a sensationalist - worthless one - with an obviously targeted agenda, and says things just to get page hits.

Is this a dig at fudzilla, apoppin, bsn, or somebody else? Why the double-speak, are we not supposed to talk about those sites anymore?
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
TT seems to imply the 660ti will be a mid 200$ card not a $300 one. if all this is true, AMD will be in a lot of hurt.

The last thing AMD and all of you should do is pretend this card is no big deal. It looks pretty capable to me. Especially if its closer to the 250 mark.

It's not as big deal that we thought it would be if the specs are 24 ROPs/192bit bandwidth for several reasons:

1) It's 6.5 months late compared to HD7950 and now with HD7950 price drops, the GTX660Ti does not look like a clear winner if priced at $300. So 6.5 months late and can't win. That's not great.
2) It's performance drops off a lot with AA, even at 1080P, not just at 2560x1600. The card even loses to GTX580 in some of those games. Losing to a GTX580 is a big deal.
3) Based on #2, overclocking may not make up this ROP/memory bandwidth problem; most likely it won't, but we'll have to see.
4) It looks good against HD7850/7870 and if you say this card is $249, I think it's still worth it to spend $50-60 more for the HD7950 since most enthusiasts on our forum overclock and with that considered = GTX680 performance for $310, making it an amazing deal. The extra $50-60 is basically buying you 30% more performance in overclocked states and ability to use AA and not worry about it. When considering $250-310 videocards, that's a lot of performance for $50-60 more! Also, if this card is $249, NV has a huge price gap from $250 to $400.
5) If GTX660Ti is this crippled, how bad will GTX660 be? 1GB of VRAM?

MSI TF3 is selling out on Newegg, which means people are seeing the value of overclocking the 7950.
 
Last edited:

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
i dont understand the specs. Something doesnt smell correct. Perhaps there are 2 versions and numbers are getting crossed. idk but the performance doesnt fit the specs.

on another note. Go back to those charts and look at the before and after for all the Gk104 cards. They all take a similar performance hit for the AA test
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
i dont understand the specs. Something doesnt smell correct. Perhaps there are 2 versions and numbers are getting crossed. idk but the performance doesnt fit the specs.

on another note. Go back to those charts and look at the before and after for all the Gk104 cards. They all take a similar performance hit for the AA test

Yes but when you're dropping from 70 to 60 it's not that much of a hit compared to 50 dropping to 40
 

hyrule4927

Senior member
Feb 9, 2012
359
1
76
One thing I haven't seen considered is the effect 660ti pricing would have on 5x0 series cards. If it comes in at ~$250, the 560ti, 560ti-448, 570, and 580 would all require massive price cuts to even make sense anymore. Can't see vendors being very happy if their stock of older cards becomes unsellable, so I'd imagine they'll stick to the $299 MSRP for reference cards and customs will cost even more.
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
One thing I haven't seen considered is the effect 660ti pricing would have on 5x0 series cards. If it comes in at ~$250, the 560ti, 560ti-448, 570, and 580 would all require massive price cuts to even make sense anymore. Can't see vendors being very happy if their stock of older cards becomes unsellable, so I'd imagine they'll stick to the $299 MSRP for reference cards and customs will cost even more.

I can't even find GTX580 in stock at most places. All of those cards will be discontinued. GTX660/660Ti will take their place. NV just waited to flush out the channel of all the inventory of those GTX500 series cards. They might keep the GTX560/560Ti for now until GTS650Ti launches.
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,605
6
81
Sorry I am not trying to cherry pick. It's because those are the only ones posted on our forum and the website is down. The review itself had very few games tested. I found all of them here if you want to take a look. With AA on, minimum and average frame rates drop a lot, even in older games such as Far Cry 2.

I doubt it will tie an HD7950 unless looking at 800mhz 7950 and no AA. At 860mhz the 7950 card is just 10% slower than the GTX670 at 1080P and can use AA/AF, plus 30-40% more overclocking headroom. For enthusiasts, the 7950 seems to be the clear choice.

1. Final performance of the 660Ti is not known yet
2. The 7950 comes at 800MHz. There certainly will be OC versions of the 660Ti as well. Apples to apples, please.
3. minimum fps are a useless metric, because it is only one single value and as such neither representative of gameplay experience nor reliable (susceptible to fluctuation). Just look at the values and you see that the 670 has higher minimum fps than the 680 on occasion. Not very plausible.
4. OC is not guaranteed, especially 30-40%.
5. "Clear choice" is a poor choice of words. There are more things to consider. For example Nvidia very often does better in popular games and games that aren't over after 6h. Features are another point you neglected. 10% more or less doesn't really make a difference. Things like TXAA, PhysX, Adaptive VSync might. So it's not as clear as you might think.
 
Last edited:

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
1. Final performance of the 660Ti is not known yet. 2. The 7950 comes at 800MHz. There certainly will be OC versions of the 660Ti as well. Apples to apples, please.

Agreed. But even with overclocking, it's way behind the 680. We already know that an overclocked 7950 can match and even surpass a stock GTX680. Doesn't look good for the 660Ti already.

4. OC is not guaranteed, especially 30-40%.

30% is 99% guaranteed on HD7950 TF3 and Gigabyte Windforce 3x. There is practically no HD7950 with a good cooler and quality PCB that can't hit 1050mhz. Most people are getting 1085-1100mhz on HD7970 TF3 on stock voltage. That's not even considering bumping the voltage to 1.2-1.25V.

For example Nvidia very often does better in popular games and games that aren't over after 6h.

I am really curious on this one. Which games are those?

I looked at this review and I can't find anything much besides WOW and Shogun 2 with AMD's latest drivers. HD7970 GE now leads GTX680 by 10% and GTX670 by 20% at 2560x1600.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/HD_7970_SOC/

AMD now has regained the lead in SKYRIM, Dirt 3, BF3 with AA. I can think of Guild Wars 2 / Medal of Honor Warfighter Beta, Secret World, WOW, Shogun 2 and World of Planes where NV does well. Those are the games you are talking about as more popular?
 
Last edited:

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,605
6
81
Let's see how well the 660Ti overclocks and then make our conclusions, shall we? Also not all people overclock, even enthusiasts ;)

Regarding Skyrim and BF3, the results of different reviews (with current drivers) are mixed. Sometimes the 7970GE is ahead, sometimes it's slower, sometimes it's a tie. I never only look at one review and neither should you. More samples are always better. And don't forget that the 7970GE achieves its performance with increased power consumption and only after roughly 6 months. Kepler was strong there from the beginning. Again, from a technical point of view it makes a valid comparison difficult. To be fair you would have to take a look at a 680 OC.

Batman AA was highly acclaimed and popular - I played it for at least 30h, while Metro 2033 for example was over pretty quickly and it has little to no replay value. Then all the titles you mentioned. Games like Shogun 2 you can play for dozens and hundreds of hours. AvP where the 7970 does really really well was mediocre at best and very short. There are exceptions on both sides of course and it often is a question of personal taste. However, this is my own observation.
 
Last edited:
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
AMD now has regained the lead in SKYRIM, Dirt 3, BF3 with AA.

Interesting to see Sniper Elite V2, a new dx11 game with "tessellation, contact hardening shadows and DirectCompute based effects, including anti-aliasing", and performance drops off on kepler.

But it seems AMD's recent drivers did some magic in a lot of games where it use to lose, it now wins.

ps. I've played Shogun 2 for hundreds of hours. The above bench is done with no AA, but cards with 1.5gb vram crash on it with AA on so they can't get numbers for older cards prolly. It's pushing 2gb vram as well last i checked.
 

Grooveriding

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2008
9,147
1,329
126
I think defining the value of benchmark leads on the subjective 'replay value' of a game is nonsensical at best. You take your benchmarks from the most demanding games and most popular games and whatever card is ahead is the fastest. Bringing in subjective opinions on which game is better than the other to define value within those metrics just makes no sense and adds nothing.

Considering the most popular games around are complete lightweights really emphasizes this point : World of Warcraft, Team Fortress 2, Counter-Strike, League of Legends etc. You can max these games out with a mid-range card.
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,605
6
81
And it is not nonsensical to argue over 10% as is constantly happening in forums all over the world? :)

While these subjective observations should most certainly not enter any kind of rating, they are noteworthy. Why, in your opinion, doesn't it make sense? Doesn't it affect the gamer when most of the time he has better performance? I believe it indeed does.

And of course you have to have a certain level of demand, no argument there. But there are other segments beside highend. So if a certain game is unimportant for the performance assessment of GTX680 vs HD7970, this might not be true for GTX650 vs HD7770 for example.
 

Grooveriding

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2008
9,147
1,329
126
And it is not nonsensical to argue over 10% as is constantly happening in forums all over the world? :)

While these subjective observations should most certainly not enter any kind of rating, they are noteworthy. Why, in your opinion, doesn't it make sense? Doesn't it affect the gamer when most of the time he has better performance? I believe it indeed does.

And of course you have to have a certain level of demand, no argument there. But there are other segments beside highend. So if a certain game is unimportant for the performance assessment of GTX680 vs HD7970, this might not be true for GTX650 vs HD7770 for example.

Because every gamer prefers different games. A game you think is relevant because you like it, I may not.

I don't play World of Warcraft any more and haven't for several years, so it's irrelevant to me how a card benches in that game. Just to give an example. For a lot of people it is going to be relevant.

It's just completely subjective whereas benchmark results are not subjective. Look at how a card performs in a given slice of repeatable game play and that is how it performs. That is not subjective. Gamers will look at all the benchmarks and then use their subjective preferences in games that matter to them and decide what they want to do with their money.
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,605
6
81
Because every gamer prefers different games. A game you think is relevant because you like it, I may not.

I don't play World of Warcraft any more and haven't for several years, so it's irrelevant to me how a card benches in that game. Just to give an example. For a lot of people it is going to be relevant.

It's just completely subjective whereas benchmark results are not subjective. Look at how a card performs in a given slice of repeatable game play and that is how it performs. That is not subjective. Gamers will look at all the benchmarks and then use their subjective preferences in games that matter to them and decide what they want to do with their money.

I believe, millions of gamers would beg to differ when you were to say that BF3, Skyrim, Batman AA, Shogun 2 are irrelevant. Those were blockbusters that sold extremely well, no matter if a couple of people didn't like them. We're talking the non-debatable cases here, not something where you can go either way.
Nvidia does very well in titles like these, at least up to now. Let's see if this pattern continues or not.

When choosing a CPU, people are asked what software they are using. Why should this question be excluded in the GPU sector? Software can be a factor in the purchasing decision.
 
Last edited: