Discussion Looking forward to Nvivia's 7nm 1660TI equivalent.

[mildewman]

I suspect my next video card might be a 1660TI equivalent. My 1070TI is fine for 1080 gaming, but at 4k would be a bottleneck.

I could buy a future 7nm 2000 series type card, but at this point ray tracing and DLSS seem to me to be not worth the vast cost increase / framerate nerf of the card.

A 7nm 1660TI equivalent will probably have vastly more ram bandwidth than my 1070TI, and Nvidia is claiming a big increase in rasterization performance. As long as it has 8gig of Vram, a 7nm 1660TI equivalent card might be the best price/performance for standard rasterized gaming at 4k ! (when i say equivalent i dont mean the same specs as, i mean the same market segmentation position - the best Nvidia 7nm card you can buy that does not have RT and DLSS cores)

 

[GodisanAtheist]

Not entirely sure what you mean by 1660ti equivalent as a replacement for your 1070ti given the 1660ti is roughly on par with the 1070 non-ti, buti think we can all agree that we're excitedly waiting for NV's 7nm replacement.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Yeah, looking at the RDR II charts @ 1080P, GTX 1660ti won't cut it for future games, neither will a GTX 1070 or 1070ti.

 

[Bouowmx]

192-bit GDDR6 means 6 or 12 GB. I'd bet no doubling of RAM amount.
192-bit, 16 GT/s = 384 GB/s. 50% increase sounds like "vastly more".

TSMC 7 nm affords a lot more transistors to play with than 16/12 nm does. I don't see the -06 level die skipping RT. Maybe skipped on the -08 level (if it exists) and possibly -07 level.

 

[Dribble]

The equivalent will probably have ray tracing as they are bound to extend that down the stack a bit.

 

[JTsyo]

Same. I got a GSYNC 1080 monitor so I won't be upgrading to 4K anytime soon. My 970 is hanging on fine for now. If I had to get a card right now the 1660Ti would be the one. I would be due for an upgrade next year.

 

[Justinbaileyman]

Yeah but dont we have a good ways to go before they release these??
Like May or June of 2020 right??
Or do you think its gonna be sooner??

 

[mildewman]

First half of 2020 as far as i know. And to everyone who somehow thinks im planning on "upgrading" from a 1070TI to a 1660TI - its probably best to read posts before replying to them.

 

[AtenRa]

I suspect my next video card might be a 1660TI equivalent. My 1070TI is fine for 1080 gaming, but at 4k would be a bottleneck.

I could buy a future 7nm 2000 series type card, but at this point ray tracing and DLSS seem to me to be not worth the vast cost increase / framerate nerf of the card.

A 7nm 1660TI equivalent will probably have vastly more ram bandwidth than my 1070TI, and Nvidia is claiming a big increase in rasterization performance. As long as it has 8gig of Vram, a 7nm 1660TI equivalent card might be the best price/performance for standard rasterized gaming at 4k ! (when i say equivalent i dont mean the same specs as, i mean the same market segmentation position - the best Nvidia 7nm card you can buy that does not have RT and DLSS cores)

I dont expect 7nm 1660Ti replacement to be faster than current RTX2070 (no super).
So i dont believe it will be a good upgrade for you if you currently have the 1070Ti.

 

[Jaskalas]

Oh dear god....

• RDR2 absolutely crushes my GTX 1060 at 1080p.

Hah, yes. I too welcome our new 7nm overlords... when ever they might exist.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Yeah, looking at the RDR II charts @ 1080P, GTX 1660ti won't cut it for future games, neither will a GTX 1070 or 1070ti.

Ugh, is making me want to go blow money on a 2060 Super or 5700 even though those two will surely age like crap too.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Ugh, is making me want to go blow money on a 2060 Super or 5700 even though those two will surely age like crap too.

I don't know about the "RX 5700 ageing like crap". Remember all the GCN-era "Fine Wine" memes? Maybe RDNA will age "Gracefully" as well. Time will tell.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I don't know about the "RX 5700 ageing like crap". Remember all the GCN-era "Fine Wine" memes? Maybe RDNA will age "Gracefully" as well. Time will tell.

About the only thing from the year before the current gen that aged well at all this gen was the HD 7970, which was the RTX 2080 Super equivalent of the period. I have no faith in a sub $700 gpu bought today still being halfway decent in 3 years.

I'm scared if I buy a 1660 Super it won't even be good next year for Dying Light 2 and Cyberpunk honestly.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I'm scared if I buy a 1660 Super it won't even be good next year for Dying Light 2 and Cyberpunk honestly.

Yeah, as the owner of four GTX 1660ti cards currently, I know the feeling, looking at the RDR II 1080P charts, seeing the RX 5700 score 61FPS, whereas the GTX1660ti scoring, what, 38FPS, and the kicker being that both are roughly the same price (ference RX 5700 Fire-dsale price of $290).

 

[Ranulf]

The 1660 Super is the first card this gen that looked like it was a worthy upgrade (price/perf) to my 970. The only thing motivating me to buy now is to get support from nvidia for my freesync monitor. I'm honestly surprised how well the 970 has held up.

It seems like RDR2 performance depends highly on settings. The real shocker is that $350+ cards can barely handle 60fps at 1080p with ultra/high settings. Drop down a few water settings, AA etc., reflections and perf goes up. The game has enough issues for all kinds of systems, typical rockstar programming.

I have no confidence on Nvidia's product stack lasting till next year at this point. This is shaping up to be like the GTX 960, launched in Jan 2015 (4gb a few weeks later) and replaced 1.5 years later in July 2016 with 1060, at a $30-50 price increase. Yet there were plenty of deals from late 2014 thru 2015 for cards that beat the 960 for that same price increase.

Good run down on RDR2 settings:

Red Dead Redemption 2 Most Important Graphics Options - Every Setting Benchmarked

Every graphics setting in Red Dead Redemption 2 PC benchmarked and tested for Frames Per Second performance hit. Best PC graphics settings to turn on and off in RDR2

www.game-debate.com

 

[AtenRa]

About the only thing from the year before the current gen that aged well at all this gen was the HD 7970,

Also the Hawaii R9 290/X aged better than any other card until that time.
Even today the Hawaii 290/X are able to play all new AAA games at 1080p at much higher fps than the NVIDIA equivalent of the same time frame.

 

[Guru]

I'll probably go for the RX 5700 in early 2020, maybe catch it on a discount hopefully. Or I may wait until summer 2020, when Nvidia plans to release their next gen, followed likely by AMD few months down the road as well, so hopefully we'll get to see some price competition.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Also the Hawaii R9 290/X aged better than any other card until that time.
Even today the Hawaii 290/X are able to play all new AAA games at 1080p at much higher fps than the NVIDIA equivalent of the same time frame.

I'm not counting Hawaii because those cards came out the same month this current console gen started, not a year before a new generation like we're at now. If we fast forwarded a year to the start of the new console gen the R9 290x equivalent would probably be the Ampere Titan/80Ti/80 or RX 5800 XT / 5900 XT.

 

[Samwell]

I don't know about the "RX 5700 ageing like crap". Remember all the GCN-era "Fine Wine" memes? Maybe RDNA will age "Gracefully" as well. Time will tell.

Wouldn't expect this to happen. RDNA1 will of course age better than GCN and Pascal, as both will get killed with new consoles. There are already games like RDR for Pascal or Ghost Reacon for GCN, which perform awful. But RDNA1 lacks so many features, which RDNA2 will get. All new DX12 Features, which were announced in the last weeks should be in RDNA2 and the consoles (Turing already has most of them). Additionally consoles will get increased amounts of RAM. Ampere and RDNA2 should also get 16GB, but 8 GB cards will age badly.