GTX 560 vs 660

[qzyxya]

GTX 560 vs 660? Is it worth the extra ~$60 for the 660? How much of an improvement will it be over he 560? (buying one of these, not upgrading from a 560 to a 660).
Bare in mind that I'm going to be using this mostly for gpu acceleration in adobe cs6 (and possibly c4d or some 3d software), as opposed to gaming. Though I will still be doing a bunch of gaming, I dont care too much about the exact fps and detail/graphics quality, unless its a huge jump. I mainly play tf2, portal 2, cs:s, gmod, a little bfbc2, ac3, and metro 2033 (im fine with low on dx9 i dont need too much eye candy, though high detail would be good).

So basically, fermi vs kelper for gpu compute?
And are there any benchmarks for specifically cuda work or adobe cs6 work, instead of just gaming?

Thanks

 

[raghu78]

GTX 560 vs 660? Is it worth the extra ~$60 for the 660? How much of an improvement will it be over he 560? (buying one of these, not upgrading from a 560 to a 660).
Bare in mind that I'm going to be using this mostly for gpu acceleration in adobe cs6 (and possibly c4d or some 3d software), as opposed to gaming. Though I will still be doing a bunch of gaming, I dont care too much about the exact fps and detail/graphics quality, unless its a huge jump. I mainly play tf2, portal 2, cs:s, gmod, a little bfbc2, ac3, and metro 2033 (im fine with low on dx9 i dont need too much eye candy, though high detail would be good).

So basically, fermi vs kelper for gpu compute?
And are there any benchmarks for specifically cuda work or adobe cs6 work, instead of just gaming?

Thanks

the GTX 660 is around 30 - 35% faster than GTX 560 in games. GTX 660 runs much cooler, draws less power and will also be quieter than gtx 560.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814500270

you can get a GTX 660 for 215 (195 after rebate). at those prices its easy to choose GTX 660 over a GTX 560. which country are you from ?

 

[qzyxya]

the GTX 660 is around 30 - 35% faster than GTX 560 in games. GTX 660 runs much cooler, draws less power and will also be quieter than gtx 560.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814500270

you can get a GTX 660 for 215 (195 after rebate). at those prices its easy to choose GTX 660 over a GTX 560. which country are you from ?

US

What about for cuda work

 

[nenforcer]

The 560 holds it own in the compute portion but those GPU's are so close in price and the 660 has advantages in almost every other way

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/660?vs=543

These is just no reason to buy a 560 at this stage of the game.

 

[Ventanni]

660 for sure. Should also have more video memory too, which is important for games like Skyrim.

 

[3DVagabond]

I'll just show this, FWIW. The 560 isn't included, but 2 other Fermi cards suffer from pretty bad latency issues.

 

[darkfalz]

I can't justify replacing my (overclocked) 560 with a 660 / 660 Ti but it's definitely worth the extra money if you are buying now. Mainly because of the reduced power consumption. 560 is still a pretty good card and does most of my 1080p games at 60 FPS but at full load, it's pretty noisy and chews a fair bit of power. 660 is probably 20-40% faster dependent upon game, with lower power and heat. I plan to put the 680 in my HTPC box when the 680 replacement comes out (assuming it's not just 15% faster than the 680 like some rumours).

 

[Termie]

US

What about for cuda work

OP, amazingly no one even remotely answered your question.

So here you go:

http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Photoshop-CS6-GPU-Acceleration-161

The 660 is nearly as fast as a 580, so you can safely assume it's slightly ahead of a 560, which was much weaker at compute. Because it's cooler and more efficient, there are additional reasons to get the 660. But be forewarned: the reference cooler on the 660 is much louder than the reference 560, so get an aftermarket model.

By the way, if you're on a budget, the 650ti, which was not tested, would likely perform very close to the 660 and faster than the 560. It's about 2/3 the cost of a 660.

 

[qzyxya]

OP, amazingly no one even remotely answered your question.

So here you go:

http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Photoshop-CS6-GPU-Acceleration-161

The 660 is nearly as fast as a 580, so you can safely assume it's slightly ahead of a 560, which was much weaker at compute. Because it's cooler and more efficient, there are additional reasons to get the 660. But be forewarned: the reference cooler on the 660 is much louder than the reference 560, so get an aftermarket model.

By the way, if you're on a budget, the 650ti, which was not tested, would likely perform very close to the 660 and faster than the 560. It's about 2/3 the cost of a 660.

Thank you, . But don't the newer kelper/6xx series cards preform worse at compute stuff? It appears that there isnt much of a diffefence between all of the different cards, like 30 second renders vs 20 seconds. That one is for photoshop, which uses openCL allong with cuda (I believe) so if I were just doing ps cs6 id get an amd card. So the gtx650 would be better than the 560 for the mercury playback engine? Would taht be because it has like 700 cuda cores vs the ~300 or 448 of the 560?

The 660 i woudl get is this zotiac http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...&SID=u00000687

which gtx 650 ti would be good? And how does the 650 ti compare to the 560 in all around stuff like gaming? Better since the new architecture?

 

[Termie]

Thank you, . But don't the newer kelper/6xx series cards preform worse at compute stuff? It appears that there isnt much of a diffefence between all of the different cards, like 30 second renders vs 20 seconds. That one is for photoshop, which uses openCL allong with cuda (I believe) so if I were just doing ps cs6 id get an amd card. So the gtx650 would be better than the 560 for the mercury playback engine? Would taht be because it has like 700 cuda cores vs the ~300 or 448 of the 560?

The 660 i woudl get is this zotiac http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...&SID=u00000687

which gtx 650 ti would be good? And how does the 650 ti compare to the 560 in all around stuff like gaming? Better since the new architecture?

Kepler does have slightly reduced compute ability versus Fermi, but the GTX560 wasn't a full Fermi. Nevertheless, you can see that in both compute and gaming, the 560 is actually very close to a 650Ti: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/543?vs=680

In newer games, the 650Ti will pull ahead, but for pure compute, it's not better than the 560, it's just cheaper. The cheapest option would be this Galaxy 650Ti for $125AR at Newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814162127

On the other hand, the 660 is unquestionably ahead in gaming, but also much stronger in compute, on average: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/543?vs=660

If you have the budget for it, the 660 is a significant step up from the 560 and the 650Ti. The Zotac is obviously the best buy at $195, and it is quieter than the reference cooler. That being said, it is louder than just about every other custom cooler, on account of the small size of its fans. This 660Ti noise benchmark comparison will give you a good feel for the noise difference (these cards use the same coolers as the 660 models): http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-ti-memory-bandwidth-anti-aliasing,3283-16.html

The Asus is quietest, followed by the MSI and the Gigabyte, as shown here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-ti-memory-bandwidth-anti-aliasing,3283-15.html

 

[ShintaiDK]

Only the 570/580 had better CUDA performance. The 560 mimmicks the the lower parts, just like GK104. So no reason at all not to get the 660.

 

[qzyxya]

Kepler does have slightly reduced compute ability versus Fermi, but the GTX560 wasn't a full Fermi. Nevertheless, you can see that in both compute and gaming, the 560 is actually very close to a 650Ti: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/543?vs=680

In newer games, the 650Ti will pull ahead, but for pure compute, it's not better than the 560, it's just cheaper. The cheapest option would be this Galaxy 650Ti for $125AR at Newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814162127

On the other hand, the 660 is unquestionably ahead in gaming, but also much stronger in compute, on average: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/543?vs=660

If you have the budget for it, the 660 is a significant step up from the 560 and the 650Ti. The Zotac is obviously the best buy at $195, and it is quieter than the reference cooler. That being said, it is louder than just about every other custom cooler, on account of the small size of its fans. This 660Ti noise benchmark comparison will give you a good feel for the noise difference (these cards use the same coolers as the 660 models): http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-ti-memory-bandwidth-anti-aliasing,3283-16.html

The Asus is quietest, followed by the MSI and the Gigabyte, as shown here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-ti-memory-bandwidth-anti-aliasing,3283-15.html

Is there a way to have an idea of how loud it would actually be? Because my laptop has a fan which is pretty loud (laptop is a lenovo y580 btw) but it doesnt really bother me too much. Is there a decibell rating of how loud it is?

 

[qzyxya]

I'm thinking about getting this ram, would it be good?

Should I look for ones with better timing, like 9 9 9 24 or whatever, or would the lower voltage on this be better? I assume this computer won't be able to run it at like 2133mhz or any overclocked thing, but i might as well buy it for the next build right?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820147094

 

[notty22]

I'm thinking about getting this ram, would it be good?

Should I look for ones with better timing, like 9 9 9 24 or whatever, or would the lower voltage on this be better? I assume this computer won't be able to run it at like 2133mhz or any overclocked thing, but i might as well buy it for the next build right?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820147094

That ram, unlike other 'specialty' kits, tells you are getting 30nm, and it's rated at 1.35v. Those are all pluses, and make it very flexible performance wise, with possibly more voltage, tuning. It's why it's popular. Why buy a older binned kit, rated for a higher voltage with heat spreaders, when this kit can do the same. That's the logic out there anyways.

 

[qzyxya]

That ram, unlike other 'specialty' kits, tells you are getting 30nm, and it's rated at 1.35v. Those are all pluses, and make it very flexible performance wise, with possibly more voltage, tuning. It's why it's popular. Why buy a older binned kit, rated for a higher voltage with heat spreaders, when this kit can do the same. That's the logic out there anyways.

Ok thanks. Does the timings of the ram matter much, like the 9 9 9 24 or 11,11,11,28 in this case?

 

[3DVagabond]

It looks like Samsung just doesn't bother binning these above the 1600MHz, 11-11-11-28 spec. From reading the user reviews it looks like these sticks are likely to run at higher specs. Just might have to up the voltage a bit, which there's plenty of room for.

 

[Termie]

Is there a way to have an idea of how loud it would actually be? Because my laptop has a fan which is pretty loud (laptop is a lenovo y580 btw) but it doesnt really bother me too much. Is there a decibell rating of how loud it is?

The Tom's Hardware review included decibel ratings for 660Ti models, which will be very similar to the 660 models - at least the rankings will be the same by manufacturer. The 660 models may be universally a tad quieter.

Ok thanks. Does the timings of the ram matter much, like the 9 9 9 24 or 11,11,11,28 in this case?

The Samsung 30nm RAM is underrated at DDR3-1600 11-11-11-28. It is capable of far higher performance than that, even at stock voltage. You can just set it at 9-9-9-24 at stock voltage and it will work fine at DDR3-1600, although you could be even more aggressive if you wanted. Not too much reason to be, though.

 

[BeauCharles]

I'll just show this, FWIW. The 560 isn't included, but 2 other Fermi cards suffer from pretty bad latency issues.

Those latency issues vary from game to game. Many times its the AMD card suffering from them (and he didn't mention playing BF3).

 

[3DVagabond]

Those latency issues vary from game to game. Many times its the AMD card suffering from them (and he didn't mention playing BF3).

Everything varies from game to game. If you read the reviews you'll see that it's pretty consistent from game to game (not without exception, obviously) that Fermi is the worse for latency. There also is no response from anyone about changing that. I'm just making the OP aware just in case it matters to him. Personally, I think it's a non issue unless people notice it while gaming. As you might have noticed in the other threads though, some people think it's the only measurement that matters and all other benches should be disregarded.

As far as BF3, I showed that because it's a game that's known to run equally well on both brands. Some of these games just prefer one brand over the other and it makes comparisons worthless.

 

[qzyxya]

Alright I'll see what I can afford, the $195 660 or the $125 650 ti. Thanks for the help. Is there a way to give +rep or something?

 

[FalseChristian]

The GTX 660 is 70% faster than a GTX 460 1GB and since a GTX 560 is just a GTX 460 with higher default clocks you're probably looking at a 50% increase plus it overclocks well and you get 2GB of GDDR5.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Alright I'll see what I can afford, the $195 660 or the $125 650 ti. Thanks for the help. Is there a way to give +rep or something?

Definitely save the extra cash for a 660 if you can. Kepler's just a much better card family than Fermi.