tweaktown review GTX660Ti

[Anarchist420]

I was thinking this was going to just have one more SMx disabled than the 670, but thats not the way it turned out. 24 rops that can't even do full speed rgba16 blending is pretty damn weak.

Im guessing Kepler is performing badly on older games due to the lack of full hw scheduling and that the performance could be increased via driver update.

What they should ve done was go with rops that could do full speed rgba16 blending and a 512bit memory controller clocked at like 4 GHz. They also shouldve just used fewer Cuda cores and not taken out the hardware scheduler, the extra read only data cache, and made sure it had theoretical dp performance of not less than 320gflops.

Nvidia and amd need to try without govt contracts and without ip because they are really lacking.

 

[futurefields]

24 rop's is how they define the card as midrange. They intentionally hamstring the performance, or else there would be no reason for people to buy the more expensive card.

Why would they release a card that outpeforms its own sibling for less money?

If it had 32 it would be the perfect no brainer buy nothing else in the geforce lineup would sell.

 

[Anarchist420]

24 rop's is how they define the card as midrange. They intentionally hamstring the performance, or else there would be no reason for people to buy the more expensive card.

Why would they release a card that outpeforms its own sibling for less money?

If it had 32 it would be the perfect no brainer buy nothing else in the geforce lineup would sell.

Not necessarily because one less enabled than the 670 would still be midrange and it would just cost more.

 

[tviceman]

24 rop's is how they define the card as midrange. They intentionally hamstring the performance, or else there would be no reason for people to buy the more expensive card.

Why would they release a card that outpeforms its own sibling for less money?

If it had 32 it would be the perfect no brainer buy nothing else in the geforce lineup would sell.

If they had disabled an SMX core and slapped slower memory on it, then it would have had similar performance without high quality AA. ROP's are not the only defining difference between tiers of graphics cards.

 

[tviceman]

I was thinking this was going to just have one more SMx disabled than the 670, but thats not the way it turned out. 24 rops that can't even do full speed rgba16 blending is pretty damn weak.

Im guessing Kepler is performing badly on older games due to the lack of full hw scheduling and that the performance could be increased via driver update.

What they should ve done was go with rops that could do full speed rgba16 blending and a 512bit memory controller clocked at like 4 GHz. They also shouldve just used fewer Cuda cores and not taken out the hardware scheduler, the extra read only data cache, and made sure it had theoretical dp performance of not less than 320gflops.

Nvidia and amd need to try without govt contracts and without ip because they are really lacking.

Could you provide examples and links of old games that are "performing badly" on Kepler? To my knowledge there isn't anything "performing badly" on the gtx670 and gtx680.

 

[Phynaz]

http://videocardz.com/34265/geforce-gtx-660-ti-unboxing-video-gallery-and-bf3-benchmark

Ugh. 3.5 times the number of transistors as my 5770, and less than twice the fill rate. Looks like it's going to be a 7850 again.

I really wish Nvidia would give me the opportunity to leave AMD.

 

[RussianSensation]

So now we are judging by average price? So, 680 2gig cards run from $500-$600. It's a $550 card?The 4gig versions? By your logic they must be selling like hotcakes. The price is through the ceiling, averaging $600. Quick everyone, go out and buy a 680 for $600. I know the price is high, but that's because they are just so awesome that everyone else is buying them!

Exactly. AMD is selling a quiet 1100mhz HD7970 for $470 with free games but NV's AIBs are charging $620 for a 680 with a core clock of 1137mhz that still can't even beat an 1050mhz 7970.

So I guess that means people will pay $150 extra for the NV brand name? Maybe that's why AMD has to keep lowering prices to sell anything. Last 3 generations they severely undercut NV and couldn't win, now they are undercutting nV and offering more performance and they still can't sell cards. Tells us a lot about the loyalty of NV buyers.

 

[Hypertag]

Exactly. AMD is selling a quiet 1100mhz HD7970 for $470 with free games but NV's AIBs are charging $620 for a 680 with a core clock of 1137mhz that still can't even beat an 1050mhz 7970.

So I guess that means people will pay $150 extra for the NV brand name? Maybe that's why AMD has to keep lowering prices to sell anything. Last 3 generations they severely undercut NV and couldn't win, now they are undercutting nV and offering more performance and they still can't sell cards. Tells us a lot about the loyalty of NV buyers.

Or you could just compare it to this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814125423 GTX 670 that is $400 and performs like a stock GTX 680. I guess that wouldn't be in your interest though, since you don't want to acknowledge that this card exists. Instead, you would just like to continuously attack the GTX 680 4GB "UBER OVEPRICED" editions since those have such horrible performance per dollar ratios.

 

[AnandThenMan]

So I guess that means people will pay $150 extra for the NV brand name?

Yes, 100%. Brand recognition and perceived value is extremely important. People buy T-shirts with the Coca Cola logo on them, better than free advertising. Marketing at its best.

 

[RussianSensation]

Or you could just compare it to this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814125423 GTX 670 that is $400 and performs like a stock GTX 680. I guess that wouldn't be in your interest though, since you don't want to acknowledge that this card exists.

The card I linked is a 2GB 680 btw, not a 4GB. The point I am making a 1137mhz core preoverclocked 680 can't beat the 7970 GE and yet costs $150 more? Crap Daddy said that AMD needs to drop prices because no one wants their cards. The question is why? When I turn my computer off, I don't care if it has a GTX680 or 7970 or Matrox card in it. If Intel released a videocard that beat both AMD and NV, I'd get that. So why is it that NV can sell slower cards for $150 more?

Also, I fully realize that GTX670 models exist that performs near 680. But so does a $428 1000mhz HD7970. That card can be further overclocked to 1.15ghz and beat an overclocked 670 card.

At 1920x1080 4AA, a 1050mhz 7970 is already 5% ahead of the 680 ~ Factory preoverclocked 670 and by 2560x1600 4AA, that lead extends to 12%. That means a factory preoverclocked 670~680 still wouldn't be able beat a 1000mhz $420 7970 Windforce. Thing is that card has another 150-200mhz room left for overclocking and that 670 is almost out of it.

And if someone likes using a lot of MSAA, 7970/7970GE pull away even more from an overclocked 670~680 using the latest drivers:

1920x1080 - see link above for data testing

Batman AC - 8AA
680 = 59
7970 stock = 61.9
7970 GE = 69.5 (+18%)

Alan Wake - 8AA
680 = 47.7
7970 = 59.2
7970 GE = 66.8 (+40%)

ARMA II - Reinforcements 4AA
680 = 30
7970 = 35.8
7970 GE = 39.9 (+33%)

SKYRIM - 8AA
680 = 52.6
7970 = 58
7970 GE = 63.9 (+21%)

Dirt Showdown 8AA
680 = 44.6
7970 = 53.2
7970 GE = 57.8 (+30%)

Metro 2033 - 4AA
680 = 32.7
7970 = 39.7
7970 GE = 44.3 (+35%)

7970 GE also leads the 680 by 9% in Risen 2 (FXAA), by 8% in Witcher 2 (FXAA) and Sniper Elite V2. That means a 1000mhz 7970 won't really be any slower overall than a $400 GTX670 ~ 680. When games get really demanding, that's exactly when 7970/7970 GE perform the best.

Now the games where 680 wins:

Trackmania 2 - approaching 100 fps!
7970 = 92.5
7970 GE = 102.5
680 = 105

BF3
7970 = 55.3
7970 GE = 62.9
680 = 65.2 (+18%) - good win for NV, but 1050mhz 7970 is just 2.3 fps behind....

Crysis 2 FXAA
7970 = 44
7970 GE = 48.6
680 = 55 (+25%) - very good win here

Dragon Age 2 4AA
7970 = 44.5
7970 GE = 48.2
680 = 55.2 (+24%)

Max Payne 3
7970 = 33
7970 GE = 36.5
680 = 43.4 (+32%)

Project Cars 4xSSAA
7970 = 43.6
7970 GE = 48
680 = 67.8 (+56%) - Huge win here

I guess it depends on what games you play. Overall, even a 1137mhz GTX680 can't beat a 1050mhz 7970. Add another 100-150mhz on that 7970 and it'll beat an overclocked 670. The 670 is still a great overall (lower power consumption, does well in some popular games, costs $400) but it's not a faster card against the 7970 once both are overclocked.

 

[Crap Daddy]

The 670 is still a great overall (lower power consumption, does well in some popular games, costs $400) but it's not a faster card against the 7970 once both are overclocked.

It can't be, it wasn't meant to be and it will not be faster than the 7970. It was launched as a direct competition to the 7950 while being 10-20$ more expensive and outperforming the aforementioned card. The 680 was launched as direct competition to the 7970 at a similar price while outperforming it. The 660Ti will be launched at a similar or slightly higher price than the 7870 while outperforming it. This is the logic that drives NV business. If the prices don't come down on these NV cards it means they are selling, again simple logic here. If AMD lowers the prices to an extent that it effectively kills some of their own cards (7870 at $280 is dead when you can buy 7950 at around $300 and 7850 at around $240) it means that they have trouble selling their parts.

 

[SirPauly]

Imho,

Hey, a post that makes a lot of sense! And nVidia desires to try to do a bit more with features like TXAA, PhysX, 3d vision, Ambient Occlusion, developer relations -- things of this nature and hopefully the market may deem nVidia worthy of a modest premium. nVidia's pro-active nature is not for free -- there is a modest premium for the abilities. Some may feel these things are worthless -- choice is great -- market decides.

nVidia isn't just competing with AMD but not to cannibalize their own price-points and sku's.

 

[Anarchist420]

Could you provide examples and links of old games that are "performing badly" on Kepler? To my knowledge there isn't anything "performing badly" on the gtx670 and gtx680.

I thought the tweak town review said they were at least on the 660 ti.

 

[Crap Daddy]

Imho,

Hey, a post that makes a lot of sense! And nVidia desires to try to do a bit more with features like TXAA, PhysX, 3d vision, Ambient Occlusion, developer relations -- things of this nature and hopefully the market may deem nVidia worthy of a modest premium. nVidia's pro-active nature is not for free -- there is a modest premium for the abilities. Some may feel these things are worthless -- choice is great -- market decides.

nVidia isn't just competing with AMD but not to cannibalize their own price-points and sku's.

Don't remind some of the posters here about PhysX or TXAA. They will get really mad. And be prepared to be reminded that the 670 cannibalized the 680 and that it doesn't matter that AMD has 3 cards between 240$ and 300$. In fact son there will be 4, the 7950 "BIOS update edition".

 

[Anarchist420]

Imho,

Hey, a post that makes a lot of sense! And nVidia desires to try to do a bit more with features like TXAA, PhysX, 3d vision, Ambient Occlusion, developer relations -- things of this nature and hopefully the market may deem nVidia worthy of a modest premium. nVidia's pro-active nature is not for free -- there is a modest premium for the abilities. Some may feel these things are worthless -- choice is great -- market decides.

nVidia isn't just competing with AMD but not to cannibalize their own price-points and sku's.

That was pretty much it and amd has not had good image quality in the past, so I'm hesitant to try them again.
Performance seems to be pretty lacking on kepler though.

 

[AnandThenMan]

People understandably grow tired of reading the same thing over and over again, often verbatim.

 

[SirPauly]

Don't remind some of the posters here about PhysX or TXAA. They will get really mad. And be prepared to be reminded that the 670 cannibalized the 680 and that it doesn't matter that AMD has 3 cards between 240$ and 300$. In fact son there will be 4, the 7950 "BIOS update edition".

Indeed!

A new PhysX trailer for Boderlands 2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6y-cMnbgx30

 

[f1sherman]

Don't remind some of the posters here about PhysX or TXAA. They will get really mad. And be prepared to be reminded that the 670 cannibalized the 680 and that it doesn't matter that AMD has 3 cards between 240$ and 300$. In fact son there will be 4, the 7950 "BIOS update edition".

That was VERY-VERY-NAUGHTY of you.

 

[RussianSensation]

It can't be, it wasn't meant to be and it will not be faster than the 7970. It was launched as a direct competition to the 7950 while being 10-20$ more expensive and outperforming the aforementioned card. The 680 was launched as direct competition to the 7970 at a similar price while outperforming it. The 660Ti will be launched at a similar or slightly higher price than the 7870 while outperforming it.

Ya, that's a good point. NV probably didn't anticipate that AMD would drop prices on their line-up so fast. If you look at current prices on Newegg:

HD7870 for $250, $255, $265. HD7950 can be found for $310-330, depending on the model.

If GTX660Ti comes in at $299, I guess the consumer will decide, but based on current pricing, the $299 price would be much closer to the 7950 than it is to the 7870s. NV would probably love to position the 660Ti against the 7870 but I don't think that's how it's going to be. There is a solid $35-50 price difference between 7870 and 660Ti, but just $20-30 between the 7950 and the 660Ti. Someone looking at a $200-250 card is probably deciding between an HD7850/7870, but if someone is looking to spend $300, cards priced at $310-330 are more likely to be a consideration imo. $300+ is also not mainstream price. Maybe NV will be more aggressive and put this card at $279, which would undercut 7950 enough to make 660Ti a clear choice.

 

[Crap Daddy]

Maybe NV will be more aggressive and put this card at $279, which would undercut 7950 enough to make 660Ti a clear choice.

We'll have to see what is really the performance of this card. They certainly could afford to sell the card even for less than $280 (same small cheap PCB as the reference 670) but I'm not sure they want to.

 

[Vesku]

Keep in mind AMD likely has a larger supply of chips at this point. They have been months ahead in good yields on 28nm. Only part of AMD pricing is due to Nvidia competition. Part of the chip business is moving large volumes and one effective way to sell more of something is to lower the price. Plus they are coming down off of some sole retail 28nm GPU price inflation, hehe.

 

[RussianSensation]

That was pretty much it and amd has not had good image quality in the past, so I'm hesitant to try them again.
Performance seems to be pretty lacking on kepler though.

AMD has had superior AA all the way until GeForce 8 when NV improved things. Even today some say color quality in 2D on the desktop is slightly better for AMD. My 8800GTS had far worse image quality for text and colors than my GTX470 did. So I think by now it's splitting hairs but for years NV had worse 2D sharpness and 2D colors. This goes back each time when I owned GF6 and GF8. Furthermore, NV had god awful texture filtering and AF with FX5000 series and even 6800 series was inferior to X800 series. Actually historically, NV has had inferior AA going back as far as 9700Pro. You always needed to raise NV 1 level higher to match AMD's IQ of say 4xMSAA. After GF8, NV has caught up and SSAA in older games was a nice bonus. If you are talking about PhysX, then yes, NV has the edge there. Too bad, outside of Batman AC/Alice hardly any game has used it effectively. Things like particles in Mafia 2 made the game looks worse, not better. Considering how so few games have PhysX, it's hard to call it a selling feature when a 1-2 games use it a year. Actually Red Faction Guerilla has better physics than any game with PhysX ever made.

 

[SickBeast]

There is no way that there is any difference in 2D quality with today's cards. It's a 100% digital connection. Back in the day, nVidia used to use crappy components for their analog connections, so ATi and Matrox were superior, but this is going back a *long* time, back when most of us were on crappy CRT displays and such.

I notice no difference whatsover between my GTX 460 and my AMD 7850 in terms of visual quality, 2D or 3D. The only difference I notice is driver quality, with nVidia being noticeably better.

 

[RussianSensation]

I notice no difference whatsover between my GTX 460 and my AMD 7850 in terms of visual quality, 2D or 3D. The only difference I notice is driver quality, with nVidia being noticeably better.

Then why hasn't NV fixed their performance in these titles:

- Alan Wake
- Anno 2070
- BulletStorm
- Serious Sam 3
- Metro 2033
- Dirt Showdown
- Sniper Elite V2
- Arma II

but AMD fixed performance in these:

- Dirt 3
- SKYRIM
- BF3
- TrackMania 2
- Batman AC

I really don't see how NV's drivers are better for single cards when the company isn't fixing performance issues in games while AMD actually is. It took NV 4 months to fix Shogun 2.

 

[SickBeast]

Then why hasn't NV fixed their performance in these titles:

- Alan Wake
- Anno 2070
- BulletStorm
- Serious Sam 3
- Metro 2033
- Dirt Showdown
- Sniper Elite V2
- Arma II

but AMD fixed performance in these:

- Dirt 3
- SKYRIM
- BF3
- TrackMania 2
- Batman AC

I really don't see how NV's drivers are better for single cards when the company isn't fixing performance issues in games while AMD actually is. It took NV 4 months to fix Shogun 2.

Performance is secondary. With my 7850 at launch I was getting BSODs and my entire system would hang whenever it entered sleep mode. These types of issues are unacceptable IMO. The only other time I have *ever* had issues like that were with my 8800GTS under Vista when it first came out.

It's taken up until the latest 12.7 betas for all my issues to be worked out. My GTX 460 OTOH was flawless from the start, even in SLI for the most part. In fact, my GTX 460s in SLI were more stable than my single 7850 when it first came out.