TPU: nVidia readies 1660TI

[BFG10K]

https://www.techpowerup.com/251606/nvidia-readies-geforce-gtx-1660-ti-based-on-tu116-sans-rtx

Good to see it won't include any RTX garbage, so the die should be a lot smaller/cheaper.

If it gets 1070 performance for $250 with 6GB, that'll be a really nice mid-range card.

 

[Ranulf]

If the 1660ti really is 80% 2060 (1536 CUDA cores, without RTX), it will have worse price/perf than the 2060 at $300 (and will also be a bit slower than the 1070), and the value proposition is already worse without RTX. I don't see how anyone would buy this for more than $275, and IMO even that is pushing it. Considering the core count and no RTX the 1660ti should also be significantly smaller than the 2060 (assuming it's a full chip).

Regarding performance, a 80% 2060 would will end up around 5% slower than the 1070, according to TPU. They'll need to increase clocks a bit to beat a 1070. A 1280 CUDA core 1660 (non ti), would end up around ~8% faster than the 1060, assuming 2060 clocks. Anything more than $200 for that kind of performance is really pushing it, as a $185 RX 580 already achieves 1060 equivalent performance .

Re: more than $200
You would think so but I believe Nvidia still is huffing its own farts on pricing. They haven't bothered to compete much in lowering 1060 prices to sell them off the past 2 months. For me this is shaping up to be a repeat of 2014 into 2015 as I look for a replacement of my 970. The only 2060 that interests me so far is the MSI that isn't on sale yet or is jacked up to $460 at a NE 3rd party seller.

From the reviews, the 2060 really kills the 2070 in price/perf.

 

[BFG10K]

Feb 15, $279: https://www.hardocp.com/news/2019/01/23/nvidia_1660_ti_will_launch_on_february_15_at_279/

Only question now is performance.

 

[Qwertilot]

~1070 levels surely? Power draw vs Pascal is going to be quite interesting.

Also if tensor cores or not (rumours yes of course.).

 

[happy medium]

$279 6gb 1660ti=gtx980ti/gtx1070
$220 cut down 5gb 1660=rx480/580
$179 4gb 1560 no Ti version= 1060 3gb or rx570
$129 cut down 3gb 1530= 1050ti

https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...70-ti-for-349-us.2559638/page-9#post-39707048

I said this last week in the rtx2060 thread.
Amazing I was right on target.
This will be the performance of these cards also, bet on it.

quote Hardcop article.
"Now, HardOCP's sources tell us that the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti will launch on February 15, with an MSRP of $279. The GTX 1660 will launch in early March at $229, while the GTX 1650 will go on sale for $179 in late March."
https://www.hardocp.com/news/2019/01/23/nvidia_1660_ti_will_launch_on_february_15_at_279/

 

[PeterScott]

More evidence. Videocardz has a screen cap from a board partner presentation, showing: "One More Thing New GTX Turing" and the picture shows GTX 166, before the number is cut off:
https://videocardz.com/newz/nvidia-gtx-turing-teased-by-leaked-photograph

 

[mohit9206]

Very interested to see the performance of the 1650,1660 and 1660Ti. Is there any word on how much vram they will have? Maybe 6gb for Ti and 4gb for 1650 and 1660? I better hope Nvidia doesn't put 3gb on 1660 else that would be DOA.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Good to see it won't include any RTX garbage, so the die should be a lot smaller/cheaper.

Why is it garbage?

 

[AtenRa]

Why is it garbage?

Because you pay for hardware that is not usable by 99% of current games.

 

[PeterScott]

Because you pay for hardware that is not usable by 99% of current games.

Well on the 2060, you get better than GTX 1070Ti, or Vega 56 conventional performance, and better price performance than them before you even consider the RT/Tensor HW, so the the extra HW is essentially a free bonus feature.

 

[happy medium]

Very interested to see the performance of the 1650,1660 and 1660Ti. Is there any word on how much vram they will have? Maybe 6gb for Ti and 4gb for 1650 and 1660? I better hope Nvidia doesn't put 3gb on 1660 else that would be DOA.

1660ti 6gb gddr6 very close to a gtx 1070 for $279
1660 6gb and 3gb gddr5 about 12% slower than the 1660ti or rx590 speed for $229

 

[mohit9206]

Because you pay for hardware that is not usable by 99% of current games.

Yes that is true but when DX11 and tesselation was new, not many games supported it but within about a couple of years many games supported it so maybe we should give a couple of years for this tech to be adopted.

 

[EXCellR8]

Yea it's more of a hardware feature that isn't that useful at the moment.

 

[Furious_Styles]

Still hoping we get an 1180ti. I don't want to waste money on RTX features I don't care about but would like performance at/near 2080 ti levels.

 

[AtenRa]

Well on the 2060, you get better than GTX 1070Ti, or Vega 56 conventional performance, and better price performance than them before you even consider the RT/Tensor HW, so the the extra HW is essentially a free bonus feature.

It would be free bonus feature only if MSRP of RTX2060 was at the same price as GTX1060

Yes that is true but when DX11 and tesselation was new, not many games supported it but within about a couple of years many games supported it so maybe we should give a couple of years for this tech to be adopted.

In the past we had new features added for free (no added price per segment). RT cores came with double the price over previous segments (example : GTX 1080Ti vs RTX 2080Ti). So essentially we are paying extra for hardware that is not usable by 99% of games.

 

[mohit9206]

It would be free bonus feature only if MSRP of RTX2060 was at the same price as GTX1060



In the past we had new features added for free (no added price per segment). RT cores came with double the price over previous segments (example : GTX 1080Ti vs RTX 2080Ti). So essentially we are paying extra for hardware that is not usable by 99% of games.

Are we paying extra for the hardware or lack of competition? I believe the latter so if amd had competitive cards then the RTX hardware would be free as well.

 

[AtenRa]

1660ti 6gb gddr6 very close to a gtx 1070 for $279

Out of curiosity, if performance is close to GTX1070 why get the 6GB 1660ti at $279 over the 8GB GTX 1070 currently found at newegg at $299 ???

 

[AtenRa]

Are we paying extra for the hardware or lack of competition? I believe the latter so if amd had competitive cards then the RTX hardware would be free as well.

The reason is irrelevant to the consumer, the end result is what counts. And currently the consumer is asked to pay extra for the RT hardware for a feature 99% of games doent use.

 

[PeterScott]

Still hoping we get an 1180ti. I don't want to waste money on RTX features I don't care about but would like performance at/near 2080 ti levels.

IMO there is Zero chance of that happening. NVidia is all in on RT. Lower end cards are the exception because functional RT HW would just blow the transistor budget in that chips in that price range.

 

[happy medium]

Well on the 2060, you get better than GTX 1070Ti, or Vega 56 conventional performance, and better price performance than them before you even consider the RT/Tensor HW, so the the extra HW is essentially a free bonus feature.

It would be free bonus feature only if MSRP of RTX2060 was at the same price as GTX1060



In the past we had new features added for free (no added price per segment). RT cores came with double the price over previous segments (example : GTX 1080Ti vs RTX 2080Ti). So essentially we are paying extra for hardware that is not usable by 99% of games.

the 1660 will be priced at $229 and be 11% faster than the $260 gtx 1060 or $299 FE edition.

The $279 1660ti will be 22% faster than a $260/$299 FE gtx1060 6gb. it fills the massive 29% gap between the 1060 and 1070

The 1660 seems to be the replacement for the 1060 to beat a $279 rx590 for less money.

 

[mohit9206]

Out of curiosity, if performance is close to GTX1070 why get the 6GB 1660ti at $279 over the 8GB GTX 1070 currently found at newegg at $299 ???

That might not last long. Once the stock is over then your options are limited to Vega 56 and 1660.

the 1660 will be priced at $229 and be 11% faster than the $260 gtx 1060 or $299 FE edition.

The $279 1660ti will be 22% faster than a $260/$299 FE gtx1060 6gb. it fills the massive 29% gap between the 1060 and 1070

The 1660 seems to be the replacement for the 1060 to beat a $279 rx590 for less money.

What about 1650? As fast as 1060 3gb/570?

 

[happy medium]

Out of curiosity, if performance is close to GTX1070 why get the 6GB 1660ti at $279 over the 8GB GTX 1070 currently found at newegg at $299 ???

Touring has much better memory compression you wont need more than 6gb at 1080p/1440p.
Noticed I said NEED, not how much a game will utilize . in other words you will not see stutter in frametimes.

Why compare a 1070 fire sale, after rebate sale ? A old gpu with a $400 msrp?
We could buy a 2%slower gtx 980ti for $320 2 years ago but we bought the gtx 1070 for $350 when it was on sale because smart buyers knew that like today the 1070 beats a 980ti in every benchmark in any game made in the past 15 months by 10% or more.


I'd be willing to bet a rtx 2060 will be faster than a gtx 108 in a year, its only 6% slower now.
A 1660ti will be faster than a gtx 1070 also next year.


.

 

[happy medium]

That might not last long. Once the stock is over then your options are limited to Vega 56 and 1660.What about 1650? As fast as 1060 3gb/570?

Roughly rx480/570 $179

 

[happy medium]

.View attachment 2706[/QUOTE]
mistake

 

[Mopetar]

1660ti 6gb gddr6 very close to a gtx 1070 for $279
1660 6gb and 3gb gddr5 about 12% slower than the 1660ti or rx590 speed for $229

I can see a cut-down 1660 Ti going for $230, but surely a 3 GB GDDR5 card would be less than $229. That card would struggle even now in some games.

Might be a bit more than 12% below the 1660 Ti as well since according to the videocardz article it has 2 compute clusters (256 CUDA cores) disabled from the full 12 (1536 CUDA cores) of the 1660 Ti. Add on the slower memory and performance will be worse than just 12% slower.

The low-rent 1060 or 1030 models didn't have higher clocks (The DDR4 1030 had lower base clocks) to compensate, so there's no indication that NVidia will do that here.

 

[happy medium]

I can see a cut-down 1660 Ti going for $230, but surely a 3 GB GDDR5 card would be less than $229. That card would struggle even now in some games.

Might be a bit more than 12% below the 1660 Ti as well since according to the videocardz article it has 2 compute clusters (256 CUDA cores) disabled from the full 12 (1536 CUDA cores) of the 1660 Ti. Add on the slower memory and performance will be worse than just 12% slower.

The low-rent 1060 or 1030 models didn't have higher clocks (The DDR4 1030 had lower base clocks) to compensate, so there's no indication that NVidia will do that here.

Your right i'll put it this way....
The 1660 will be 10% faster than the gtx1060 or at rx590 levels and the 1660ti will be 25% faster than a gtx1060.

Honestly I think the 1650 will be 1024 cores ,4 clusters cut, 4gb ,128 bit
,is that even possible ? :] That would be very close to rx 470/480 speeds.
I don't see the point of a 1660 3gb.