GTX 660Ti Reviews

[cmdrdredd]

By hugely you mean its either ~99% of a gtx660ti or much faster??

Have you even looked at the main page you keep posting only snippits from? Look at it closely. One reviewer gets something like 99% another gets 115%. How does that even happen with a modern CPU? That much variation doesn't tell the people looking at the charts very much IMO. There is no solid confirmation.

It's unreliable to even look at it at that point.

 

[Silverforce11]

Really? It says 660 Ti on 3DCentar, so I'm pretty sure that's what it means.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong because most of the reviews didn't even used reference cards, instead used custom cards which boost higher.

 

[Silverforce11]

Have you even looked at the main page you keep posting only snippits from? Look at it closely. One reviewer gets something like 99% another gets 115%. How does that even happen with a modern CPU? That much variation doesn't tell the people looking at the charts very much IMO. There is no solid confirmation.

It's unreliable to even look at it at that point.

What's unreliable are reviews that pick a few games only, most of which could be biased towards AMD or NV.

Thats why you either take them all as a whole, and end up with 7950 being faster, or you take tpu, computerbase.de etc that review a LOT of games, which end up with 7950 faster anyway.

I would figure the reason for the variation would be obvious...

 

[Silverforce11]

Also, what part of: "Also, note the 7950 STOCK already beating the 660ti? Feel free to add 40-50% perf to your 660ti..... wait, no, you can't."

Don't you understand??

 

[f1sherman]

I'm pretty sure you're wrong because most of the reviews didn't even used reference cards, instead used custom cards which boost higher.

Each one of those reviewers also has referent 660 Ti included, so it seems that you are wrong... again

Also, what part of: "Also, note the 7950 STOCK already beating the 660ti? Feel free to add 40-50% perf to your 660ti..... wait, no, you can't."

Don't you understand??

OK... so how many times do you want me to acknowledge 7950 barely beating 660 Ti :sneaky:

 

[Silverforce11]

Each one of those reviewers also has referent 660 Ti included, so it seems that you are wrong... again

I'm pretty sure i dont see REFERENCE results here: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/geforce-gtx-660-ti.html

Custom card vs stock 7950, still loses.

OC vs OC, not even a contest.

 

[Crap Daddy]

What's unreliable are reviews that pick a few games only, most of which could be biased towards AMD or NV.

Thats why you either take them all as a whole, and end up with 7950 being faster, or you take tpu, computerbase.de etc that review a LOT of games, which end up with 7950 faster anyway.

I would figure the reason for the variation would be obvious...

Relax man. The 7950 is faster. It should be for a card with 50$ more MSRP. I know, it can be had for as low as 300 something but it was launched at 450$. So this 660Ti is priced as it should be at launch since it is obviously a better card than the 7870 which has the same MSRP. I know, it can be had as low as 260 something. But again you can't argue with an aggregate of 12 reviews which place the card on par or 1-2 percent slower than a 7950 across the board and I'm looking only at 1080p because that is the target resolution for a midrange card.

The market will decide if this is the right price same as the market decided that a 7950 at some point was not worth 450$ and not even 400$. In fact the market says that this card apparently is not worth AMD's set MSRP of 350$

 

[f1sherman]

@Silverforce

Throw away that xbitlabs Zotac with 7MHz base OC, and 26MHz boost overclock from
overall aggregate and 660 Ti looks even better. In fact throw away Tom's and 660 Ti is faster at 1920x1080p 4xAA

and I guess we all know 7950 can be an awesome OC...

 

[RussianSensation]

Few facts though...

660 Ti is 80% of GTX680 performance for 60% of it's price.

One more fact. $317 1.1-1.2ghz MSI TF3 7950 = or > GTX680 for 60% of an after-market 680's price.

It's almost unfair to pick on the 680 since I can find a $374 GTX670 Gigabyte Windforce = GTX680. Suddenly that $300 660Ti doesn't look so hot. There is a reason the 670 costs more. Even at 1322mhz overclock a 660Ti couldn't match a stock 670 in BF3 at 2560x1600. The average framerate of a 1322mhz 660Ti was just 2 fps higher than GTX680's minimum. Some people here run 2560x1440/1600 monitors and like using MSAA.

So:

- 7850 has substantially better stock speed price/performance than 660Ti/7870

- 7850 OCed has the best price/performance this round for ~$207-220.

- HD7750/7770 have no viable NV competitors on the desktop for $90-110

- GTX560Ti and HD6870 for $150 provide the best entry level for budget gamers

- 660Ti = 800mhz 7950 in games at 0-4AA 1080P but loses at 8AA, with 660Ti holding advantages in BF3, GW2, Lost Planet 2, The Secret World, Project Cars, Max Payne 3 and the usual HAWX 2. 660Ti otoh will get beaten in Dirt Showdown, Sniper Elite V2, Serious Sam 3, BulletStorm, Serious Sam 3, Metro 2033, Crysis 1/Warhead, Anno 2070, Arma II / Day-Z Mod, Risen 2, Alan Wake.

- An overclocked 660Ti gets smoked by an OCed 7950 in games outside of the ones where NV does well. This is because an 1167mhz Oced 7950 keeps up with an almost 1300mhz GPU Boosted Oced 670, which by definition makes 7950 a way better card than a 660Ti for the enthusiast for just $20-30 more:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33850994&postcount=15

- Reference 680 costs $50 more than a Vapor-X 7970 and loses at both stock and overclocked speeds.

- It takes $600-720 MSI GTX680 Lightning/EVGA Classy 680 + EVBot to claim fastest single-GPU crown on air this round against a $450-470 Sapphire Vapor-X 7970.

If GTX660Ti is great value for $300, for enthusiasts that means a $320 7950 is an even better value, while for non-overclockers who want Borderlands 2 and NV eco-system (PhysX, TXAA), the 660Ti present the best performance/$ in NV's stack but even at 1300mhz, falls short against a stock 670 with MSAA or high resolutions/demanding games.

 

[Crap Daddy]

TPU has this performance/dollar chart at 1920/1200 based on Newegg prices:

Do you think they think different?

 

[RussianSensation]

CrapDaddy, do you purposely ignore that most people in this thread agree that a GTX660Ti $300 + $50 BL2 coupon is better than a stock 7950 because it's just as fast, costs less and uses less power? Like what is the point of that graph?

If you are going to play the value card, you can't ignore $210-220 7850 or $320 7950 + OC either. All 3 cards make sense depending on the user.

 

[f1sherman]

One more fact. $317 1.1-1.2ghz MSI TF3 7950 = or > GTX680 for 60% of an after-market 680's price.

Fact 1) It says $351 not $317.

Fact 2) It says "Engine Clock: 880 MHz", so where did this 1.1-1.2GHz come from

- 7850 has substantially better stock speed price/performance than 660Ti/7870

I know how you like graphs so here ya go one

DISCLAIMER: Similarly like AMD, Techpowerup does not give free +400MHz boost to 7950 like you do.

Call me unbelieving Thomas but if these cheap 7950/70 were built for those speeds you review them at, I am sure AMD would release them sooner or later, and certainly when GK104 halted their sales.
But AMD can not even guarantee 925MHz and recommends not to flash BIOS, and when flashed this is the real clock:

There was/is that Toxic 7970, but it costs $700 and cca. 10 of them got sold before it went out of stock.

TLDR Yeah I gather that 7950 OCs nicely. That's a great feature, and should be regarded as such.
Shall I regard them as 1200MHz GPU because forum guy has it such in his sig?

Uhmm... not really.

 

[f1sherman]

@Crap Daddy Y U beat me to it??

 

[chimaxi83]

Holy hell do these fanbois want you to absolutely LOVE the 660... its strange

 

[RussianSensation]

Fact 1) It says $351 not $317.

Fact 2) It says "Engine Clock: 880 MHz", so where did this 1.1-1.2GHz come from

So now $15 off coupon code on the front page and a $20 General MSI rebate don't count? Remove the MSI rebate and it's $332 still not $351. 7950 is like Q6600 / i5 2500k / i7 920 of the CPU world. It overclocks after 5 min of tinkering. Which is why people here bought a Q6600 G0 for $300 and not spent $999 on the QX6850 or got the $284 i7 920 instead of the $999 i7 975.

That's what we try to do here -- find a diamond CPU / GPU that has the potential to come close or even beat top parts. This saves us $ for future upgrades and rewards our research for picking quality parts that can actually achieve those characteristics.

For $20-30 more, 7950 has the potential to beat the $450-500 1000mhz 7970/680. 660Ti does not have this potential. For enthuasists, the 7950 is an underclocked enthusiast GPU and 660Ti is a real mid-range crippled GPU with gutted ROP/memory bus internals. One GPU can handle 8xMSAA and has 3GB VRAM for mods that doesn't cripple it in Skyrim, the other has to rely on FXAA to look good and at this point has 2GB of VRAM that may not even be used fully before crippling the memory bandwidth to 48GB/sec. The point is 7950 is like that i5-3570K CPU that can hit 4.5ghz and perform amazing while 660Ti is like an i5-3470 that performs about the same but has little left above that.

I know how you like graphs so here ya go one

Notice I said $207-220 HD7850 prices which is what you can find easily if you look. TPU uses MSRP only. Looking at market prices, 660Ti costs about 50% more than a 7850 and offers 34% more performance.

DISCLAIMER: Similarly like AMD, Techpowerup does not give free +400MHz boost to 7950 like you do. Call me unbelieving Thomas but if these cheap 7950/70 were built for those speeds you review them at, I am sure AMD would release them sooner or later, and certainly when GK104 halted their sales.

It's called yields. Just like NV launched GTX460 at 675mhz but many cards hit 850-925mhz. Yup, Fermi GTX460 was a smashing overclocking card and our forum members did take its overclocking capabilities into account when comparing it against the more expensive 5850 and later to the 6850/6870 cards. If you don't overclock your cards, then well this doesn't matter to you.

But AMD can not even guarantee 925MHz and recommends not to flash BIOS, and when flashed this is the real clock:

Yes and mentioned by every knowledgeable member of our forum you don't need to put 1.25V into a 7950. AMD did that to guarantee that all cards including those with 50% ASIC can reach 925mhz. What about MSI TF3 that's binned from the factory for 80%+ ASIC and hits 1100-1200 at or below 1.175V, basically guaranteed? Not a single person on our board who actually bought that card wasn't able to get 1100mhz at 1.175V. I know it's hard for you to believe that AIBs would bin top 7950 chips and put them into Gigabyte Windforce 3x, Sapphire Dual-X 950mhz and MSI TwinFrozr while reference cards would get bottom of the barrel 7950 chips..... :sneaky:

There was/is that Toxic 7970, but it costs $700 and cca. 10 of them got sold before it went out of stock.

10 of them? I am not even going to ask where you got your facts.

HD7970 Vapor-X has the identical cooler from the TOXIC and 8 Black Diamond Chokes VRM from the TOXIC. At stock speeds it's faster than a $500 reference 680 and it overclocks to 1250mhz and can beat a 1290mhz 680 that costs more $. So why exactly are you bringing up the TOXIC? The reason I brought the MSI Lightning / EVGA Classy cards is because they are the only 2 GTX680 cards that can actually beat the Vapor-X. I am otherwise unaware of any other 680 that can hit 1350-1380 mhz on air without a volt mod.

TLDR Yeah I gather that 7950 OCs nicely. That's a great feature, and should be regarded as such.
Shall I regard them as 1200MHz GPU because forum guy has it such in his sig?

A 925mhz 7950 already beats 660Tis per 3DCenter's 12 reviews since 800mhz 7950 = GTX660Ti. You already linked to us that those GPU Boosted 7950s only get 5-6% performance increase since the GPU boost only works 50% of the time. That means the MSI TF3 880mhz or 900mhz Gigabyte Windforce 3x for $320-330 would beat a 660Ti using the same logic. I've never met a single after-market 7950 that couldn't get to 1000mhz period. If you choose to not overclock, like I said the 660Ti is a good card for non-overclockers.

While at it, did you ignore Athlon XP1700+ @ 2400+ speeds, Athlon XP 2500+ @ 3200+ speeds overclocking? Athlon X2 3800+ @ 4800+ speeds? Opteron 165 Overclocking? E6400 @ 3.2-3.4ghz, Q6600 @ 3.2-3.4ghz? Q9550 @ 3.8-4.0ghz, Core i7 920 @ 4.0ghz, Core i5 750 @ 3.8ghz, i5 2500k/2600k @ 4.5ghz, etc.

and on the NV side:

- GeForce 3 Ti 200 overclocked to GeForce 3 speeds
- GeForce 4 Ti 4200 overclocked to Ti 4600 speeds
- 6600 Non-GT had 50% overclocking headroom
- 6800 Non-Ultra unlocked into pipelines + Oced ~ 6800GT
- 7800/7950GT overclocking
- 8800GT's overclocking
- MSI TwinFrozr GTX260 216 could overclock to beat GTX275/280 easily
- Recent overclocking of 460/470 cards.

If we follow your advice, we should spend $300 for GTX660Ti and if we want more performance, we should spend $400 for a GTX670 and $500 if we wanted GTX680 level of performance? You know that's exact opposite of what we are trying to achieve here? We aren't aiming to make NV/AMD/Intel $$$ but we want to maximize the value per $ spent that an enthusiasts probably worked hard for to earn. If price/performance wasn't a factor, we'd be rocking Core i7 3960X + GTX690 SLI or similar. A lot of people try to maximize performance/$ and won't hesitate to download MSI Afterburner / EVGA Precision X and spend 5 min to get 20-40% more performance if it's possible to save $150-200 from buying top cards.

1170mhz HD7950 goes head-to-head against the OCed 1300mhz 670, which frankly makes the 660Ti look mid-range that it is.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33850994&postcount=15

If people considered saving $70-80 over the 670 to get a 7950 and overclock it, why wouldn't they spend $20-30 more over the 660Ti and get a way faster card in 5 minutes?

 

[zaydq]

Fact 1) It says $351 not $317.

Fact 2) It says "Engine Clock: 880 MHz", so where did this 1.1-1.2GHz come from





I know how you like graphs so here ya go one

DISCLAIMER: Similarly like AMD, Techpowerup does not give free +400MHz boost to 7950 like you do.

Call me unbelieving Thomas but if these cheap 7950/70 were built for those speeds you review them at, I am sure AMD would release them sooner or later, and certainly when GK104 halted their sales.
But AMD can not even guarantee 925MHz and recommends not to flash BIOS, and when flashed this is the real clock:

There was/is that Toxic 7970, but it costs $700 and cca. 10 of them got sold before it went out of stock.

TLDR Yeah I gather that 7950 OCs nicely. That's a great feature, and should be regarded as such.
Shall I regard them as 1200MHz GPU because forum guy has it such in his sig?

Uhmm... not really.

Its in my sig and in my own thread. I've got the proof there if you're so skeptical.

 

[f1sherman]

No. I am not skeptical about your OC.
Overclocking is called such for a reason. It's a welcomed bonus, a well-desired feature, not a flat added value.

You can't sell your 1200MHz TF3 for (1200/880 x $350), not even to another overclocker, so what is it's value on normal market? I'd say pretty much the same as the one that clocks to only 1000MHz.

Because there's a risk, no one is guaranteeing you anything, there's an added wear&tear, added TDP, and stability issues. Yeah I know... rock-solid right? Forums are full of rock-solid systems with issues.

So pardon me for considering your TF3 only 880MHz GPU, that has the potential to run well outside it's parameters.

@RS soh sweepie...zzz..zzz...later

 

[ocre]

Holy hell do these fanbois want you to absolutely LOVE the 660... its strange

i would say quite the opposite. instead of LOVE, insert HATE.

There are 90% imbalance with full attack on the 660ti while a few are just trying to say,

"its not really that bad"

And it really isnt considering the real facts. So many are just trying to make stuff up and dont care if its truthful or not.

like this one:

- 7850 has substantially better stock speed price/performance than 660Ti/7870

wait????
Now we resort to flat out lies? And how is this acceptable? The proof of this being nothing but misinformation has been repeatedly posted. Why spread misinformation?

 

[Siberian]

It's no wonder AMD is going out of buisness.

 

[cmdrdredd]

It's no wonder AMD is going out of buisness.

Yep cause even when Nvidia releases a card at a pricepoint it doesn't belong in at all, they are defended like Leonidas at Thermopylae. You know you lost but you just can't give it up.

 

[RussianSensation]

No. I am not skeptical about your OC.
Overclocking is called such for a reason. It's a welcomed bonus, a well-desired feature, not a flat added value.

OK, it's been a very important differentiator at least a decade on our forum in CPUs and GPUs. You must have not been here then when all those products (CPUs and GPUs) I described were popular because of overclocking on our boards.

Ever since I joined the forum and was a junior, the veteran guys are the ones who taught me that a real enthusiast isn't someone who spends $1000 on a $1000 CPU but someone who takes a budget part and tries to extract maximum value from it to get as close as possible to the so called "enthusiast" SKU product. Over time the term "enthusiast" perhaps changed to include "someone who spends as much as possible on PC parts or any hobby".

However, I have never forgotten what they taught me and that is: any person can spend $500 on a $500 GPU. Can you get a $300 GPU to perform as fast or faster as a $500 GPU? That takes real skill and research. And forums like these help people save $ by doing exactly that.

It is from this very point that overclocking and picking enthusiast parts that allows people to save money if possible and get more value. It's a huge reason why people mod cars, mod computers and overclock. If you just want to compare stock vs. stock, that's fair, but this forum isn't BestBuy where someone gives a card 5/5 stars and calls it a day.

Maybe you should visit our CPU section where people de-lid 3770Ks, overclock CPUs, spend $ on Corsair H100, Thermalright and Noctua coolers and try to extra even more value from their purchased parts.

Now we resort to flat out lies? And how is this acceptable? The proof of this being nothing but misinformation has been repeatedly posted. Why spread misinformation?

Lies?

660Ti is 34% faster than a stock 7850 and costs 40-45% more. The 7870 is hardly better.

A stock 7850 at current market prices in the US and Canada provides better performance/$ than either the 660Ti/7870 and substantially better value than either of those when it's overclocked.

It's no wonder AMD is going out of buisness.

Many of us can't wait to buy a GTX780 for $800-1000.

BTW, why did you leave GeForce.com? Got bored there? Ever since you joined our forum, it's been nothing by NV biase from you. Not a single objective comment of those 71 made. I remember the first one you said was something along the lines of: "NV is better than AMD. AMD is a poor people's brand. That's what everyone who plays Blizzard games says." Something like that?

 

[zaydq]

No. I am not skeptical about your OC.
Overclocking is called such for a reason. It's a welcomed bonus, a well-desired feature, not a flat added value.

You can't sell your 1200MHz TF3 for (1200/880 x $350), not even to another overclocker, so what is it's value on normal market? I'd say pretty much the same as the one that clocks to only 1000MHz.

Because there's a risk, no one is guaranteeing you anything, there's an added wear&tear, added TDP, and stability issues. Yeah I know... rock-solid right? Forums are full of rock-solid systems with issues.

So pardon me for considering your TF3 only 880MHz GPU, that has the potential to run well outside it's parameters.

@RS soh sweepie...zzz..zzz...later

You're right, theres no added value to the card's worth. There is an added value for you as the buyer when you get it up to $450 speeds. Why buy a Mustang GT when within the price savings you can get up to speed with a V6 + supercharger and save some cash? Its almost the same idea.

 

[blastingcap]

660Ti is 34% faster than a stock 7850 and costs 40-45% more. The 7870 is hardly better.

A stock 7850 at current market prices in the US and Canada provides better performance/$ than either the 660Ti/7870 and substantially better value than either of those when it's overclocked.

Looks like you now think AMD's GCN architecture isn't the steaming pile that you once made it out to be, and that the 7850 is a good value.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33485225&postcount=46

 

[RussianSensation]

Looks like you now think AMD's GCN architecture isn't the steaming pile that you once made it out to be, and that the 7850 is a good value.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33485225&postcount=46

You gotta look in the context that post was made. The Original Poster in that thread said he wanted to keep his card for 3 years and could only upgrade once. It says it right there in the 2nd line. Based on the response it seems HD7870 was around $340-350!!

HD7000 drivers were still rather poor, with coming out of sleep, black screen/BSOD and performance issues that were later fixed with 12.7s.

During the time and given the information we had available, I made an educated guess and recommended the OP in that thread to get a GTX670 over the 7850, despite 7850 being priced at $250, because I honestly thought that 7850 was not the best choice in the context: for keeping a card for 3-4 years. I remember specifically that thread and there is no question that I generally recommend someone get a cheaper card and reinvest the savings unless the opposing card has huge overclocking headroom or the person intends to keep that card longer than 2 years, or plays at higher resolutions with MSAA, etc.. In this case he didn't want to upgrade for 3 years at least.

It is true that I did make a mistake by underestimating the impact of GCN in games. I didn't anticipate AMD putting so much $$ behind AMD Gaming Evolved. That response was barely around Dirt Showdown launch. I wrongly thought that game would be simple and just based on the EGO Dirt 3 engine. As you now know Dirt Showdown actually added DirectCompute for global illumination model and contact hardening shadows courtesy of AMD working together with the developer to take advantage of those GCN features. You told me back then you thought it'd be a factor in future games.:thumbsup: You were more forward looking than me on that. Good job.

Further, if you see my response, the games I listed AMD tanked in: Crysis 2, BF3, Dirt 3, Batman AC. It wasn't until June 22nd and AMD launched Cats 12.7 Betas, that the performance in those 4 games started to be addressed. Again when I was asked to recommend a card in May of 2012, HD7850's performance in those games vs. 670 was really slow. So the price/performance looks very poor for the 7870, and not great for a 7850, especially for someone wanting to keep the card for 3 years.

Since that post, two more games followed that use GCN's features: Sleeping Dogs and Sniper Elite V2. I still think given the information available at the time and pricing of 7950/7970 back then, that I agree with my recommendation for that person's purposes. I think the 670 was a good choice for 3 years in anticipation of Frostbite 2.0 games and possibly Unreal Engine 4 games vs. the 7850. IIRC, he also said he wasn't comfortable with overclocking.

What I did make a mistake, I admit, in that I underestimated the impact of AMD gaming evolved on GCN's features for a bunch of games that now came out. So in that regard, you were right since you thought DirectCompute and GCN feature could play a bigger role than tessellation would in affecting the performance delta between AMD and NV cards. Also, no way could I have anticipated that AMD's driver team could make up so much deficit in 4 of those games! That was insane

 

[Mistwalker]

Looks like you now think AMD's GCN architecture isn't the steaming pile that you once made it out to be, and that the 7850 is a good value.

And this is the main reason I (and I imagine others) value RS's posts so much: because he never ignores context. He always posts with the best value in mind at that moment, and is willing to actually re-evaluate when things change.

There was a time the 7900 series was overpriced, hampered by poor driver support, and the 670/680 were relatively very attractive cards. Now things are very different and the 7950 is by far the best high-end value out there.

I'm not sure in what spirit you intended your post, but I hope it was a friendly jest that he actually is capable of looking at the whole picture, a viewpoint severely lacking on these boards these days. I'd hate to think someone would be roasted for changing their opinion with the circumstances, which is exactly what responsible self-interested consumers should be doing.