GTX 660Ti Reviews

[blastingcap]

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.

Feel free to read the rest of that old thread if you want more, ahem, context. http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=33485225

It was one of those rare threads where RS and I disagreed.

RS adamantly declared Kepler's architectural superiority over GCN, even in the face of real-life data that contradicted his claims re: tessellation (actual game runs at HardOCP as well as synthetics), and re: anti-aliasing (even though the evidence is mixed on that front). It wasn't so much about compute.

The Catalyst 12.7 Betas had not come out yet, though, true. And he was still using anomalous results from some MMORPG I hadn't ever heard of and talking up Kepler's more advanced architecture and how the gap would only widen over time between the 7850 and 670.

That may still come to pass, but I think that an oc'd 7850 will age surprisingly gracefully due to the ever-increasing consolification we're seeing (e.g., http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2236601&page=1). Graphics have stagnated. RS mocked me for saying what I did about tessellation, etc., yet he has made similar statements about diminishing returns (major fps hit for minor improvement in IQ = why not just turn it off if it's bogging you down?):
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33850247&postcount=102

We aren't the only ones who know that you reach diminishing returns quickly and that it's okay to not max everything out if it kills your framerate:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2264800

Neither of us disagreed on how it's foolish to try to futureproof and how buying midrange every generation or two is more efficient.

 

[Mistwalker]

Feel free to read the rest of that old thread if you want more, ahem, context. http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=33485225#post33485225

It was one of those rare threads where RS and I disagreed.

That...is a lot of context.

A lot of good points made on both sides, backed with actual data, reasoning, understandable assumptions under the GPU landscape back in May, and now concessions from both sides given the current state of things. Crazy how quickly things change! My favorite part is how you both addressed (or at least attempted to address) the data presented and responded with your own, with nary a derogatory personal attack throughout.

I agree with tviceman:

It's nice to see people having intelligent conversations without breaking down into fanboy-based accusation rants.

It truly is. For sad contrast, see: the last two pages of this thread.

At least these new card launches are never boring!

 

[Silverforce11]

The entire 28nm lineup except for the 7850 was a steaming pile at launch, way overpriced and many ppl including myself have stated as such, but really now when u can get a 7950 for ~$300 that does 50% OC or more? No contest, sorry for the NV fans.

 

[destrekor]

The entire 28nm lineup except for the 7850 was a steaming pile at launch, way overpriced and many ppl including myself have stated as such, but really now when u can get a 7950 for ~$300 that does 50% OC or more? No contest, sorry for the NV fans.

This is a problem for us thanks to marketing and the balance between competition, profit-maximization, and to an extent supply.

28nm has proven difficult to produce in large quantities for numerous products. That sadly factors into other considerations.

AMD had a very disappointing launch with chosen pricing, and Nvidia maximized profit while offering roughly level competition.

Nvidia has the products to compete, but they have failed to make them attractively priced. And essentially all their desktop products are the same chip, just different bins.

And thus, we get a generation that, thus far, doesn't provide a large enough performance bump for the price they want.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[B-Riz]

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

At this point, I think you need an honorary guest column on AnandTech about the economics of enthusiast computing, post something every week for people to read.

 

[amenx]

So we now know that the 680 was a glorified 660 all along. And to think of all the angst it caused some here when it was first suggested.

 

[blastingcap]

So we now know that the 680 was a glorified 660 all along. And to think of all the angst it caused some here when it was first suggested.

"Now"? We've known this for a long time. Even the mainstream news has known this for a long time.

http://www.techpowerup.com/162901/Did-NVIDIA-Originally-Intend-to-Call-GTX-680-as-GTX-670-Ti-.html

http://vr-zone.com/articles/how-the...-prime-example-of-nvidia-reshaped-/15786.html

 

[cmdrdredd]

The entire 28nm lineup except for the 7850 was a steaming pile at launch, way overpriced and many ppl including myself have stated as such, but really now when u can get a 7950 for ~$300 that does 50% OC or more? No contest, sorry for the NV fans.

Although for some, a single card isn't enough and dual card setups have their own set of issues and things to think about which may change the direction someone goes.

So we now know that the 680 was a glorified 660 all along. And to think of all the angst it caused some here when it was first suggested.

It still doesn't matter. People looking for performance above the 7870/660ti will buy what?

Likely a 7950 or 670 right? The performance difference is large enough IMO that people won't buy a 660 and say "Ha, I have the same GPU as a 680". It's not like the 6950 and 6970 where a simple BIOS change gave you a more expensive card for free provided you did the proper overclocking.

 

[Vesku]

I'm a bit miffed at all the flak I took being practical regarding the 28nm transition.

Took Nvidia so long to come out with the 28nm version of the 580. Wasn't expecting the memory interface to only be 192-bit though. I had thought by May-June I could pick up a $300 decent performing 28nm GPU, but didn't happen until August.

"If it's just GTX 580 performance then it's a fail. I expect a die shrunk 580 on 28nm, which would mean higher clocks and more OC headroom. $300, you have until Monday NVIDIA. You must prove the 7970 is an underwhelming waste of money in a timely fashion." - A post I made in January 2012

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=32916192&postcount=44

 

[blastingcap]

I'm a bit miffed at all the flak I took being practical regarding the 28nm transition.

Took Nvidia so long to come out with the 28nm version of the 580. Wasn't expecting the memory interface to only be 192-bit though. I had thought by May-June I could pick up a $300 decent performing 28nm GPU, but didn't happen until August.

"If it's just GTX 580 performance then it's a fail. I expect a die shrunk 580 on 28nm, which would mean higher clocks and more OC headroom. $300, you have until Monday NVIDIA. You must prove the 7970 is an underwhelming waste of money in a timely fashion." - A post I made in January 2012

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=32916192&postcount=44

Vote with your wallet. Don't buy it if you don't wanna.

 

[railven]

Vote with your wallet. Don't buy it if you don't wanna.

I voted with my wallet and far I've been incredibly happy. Granted, I'd have love to save the $150-200 people are saving now, but I bought back in March.

 

[Vesku]

Can't buy it before anyone has it for sale. I did buy a ~$320 Radeon 7950 this month, later than even my conservative estimate of May-June. I can rightly blame the launch timings of Nvidia for having to wait longer.

Vote with your wallet. Don't buy it if you don't wanna.

 

[Siberian]

So we now know that the 680 was a glorified 660 all along. And to think of all the angst it caused some here when it was first suggested.

Imagine what the true 680 would have been like

 

[chimaxi83]

Imagine what the true 680 would have been like

Too bad NV couldn't get their sh*t together and make it, huh?

 

[toyota]

Too bad NV couldn't get their sh*t together and make it, huh?

very true and they probably would have another hot power hungry card even worse than the gtx480 was at release. they got lucky that AMD not did set the bar that high. they probably had a nice chuckle too being able to use gk114 for their high end card.

 

[chimaxi83]

very true and they probably would have another crap card like the gtx480 anyway. they got lucky that AMD not did set the bar that high. they probably had a nice chuckle too being able to use gk114 for their high end card.

Define "crap". You used 480, so I'm assuming you mean hot and power hungry? Some of us don't really care about that

 

[toyota]

Define "crap". You used 480, so I'm assuming you mean hot and power hungry? Some of us don't really care about that

I was editing that but yes power hungry and hot. and I am sorry but I think there has to be something wrong with people that knowingly buy hot noisy power sucking cards. I guess thats proof that some people will buy anything no matter what though.

 

[Siberian]

Too bad NV couldn't get their sh*t together and make it, huh?

It's too bad for us that they did not need to make it. The 7970 was so slow they were able to just go with their midrange chip and make a ton of money. I think AMD screwed us all.

 

[chimaxi83]

It's too bad for us that they did not need to make it. The 7970 was so slow they were able to just go with their midrange chip and make a ton of money. I think AMD screwed us all.

Pretty sure your head is filled with confusion, bro. AMD cards are now faster overall, and as an added bonus, cheaper.

I was editing that but yes power hungry and hot. and I am sorry but I think there has to be something wrong with people that knowingly buy hot noisy power sucking cards. I guess thats proof that some people will buy anything no matter what though.

Yea, but I wouldn't have minded a beast of a card even if it was GTX 470 SLI-like in it's power draw and heat lol. My rig is water cooled and dumps its heat outside, and power is very cheap for me too. I know people who don't really care are the minority though.

 

[Keysplayr]

Pretty sure your head is filled with confusion, bro. AMD cards are now faster overall, and as an added bonus, cheaper.

I think there were more than a few people who were disappointed in the performance of the 7970 when launched, and even more so about the price tag.
I'm pretty sure he meant that it was sad that a faster card than the GTX680 "wasn't" needed.

And that last bit, are you talking about the 7970 GHz edition?

 

[Borealis7]

what do you mean "AMD didn't set the bar high enough"? a 7970 GE is as fast, and on average faster, as last gen's dual card! (6990) at 1920x1200 and 2560x1600

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GTX_660_Ti_Jet_Stream/28.html

plus, we have yet to see a dual card in the 7-series and nVidia already have their dual card out. AMD has a chance to score a K-O there after gaining more points with today's price announced cuts.

 

[AnandThenMan]

This generation is very close in terms of perf/watt, perf/dollar. Some might claim that in perf/watt AMD is getting beat up badly, but looking at the comparison graphs showing all resolutions, this is not the case.

Given the fact that the 7xxx cards are much better in compute and generally have more memory on a wider bus, this hardly seems like a fail to me. From an engineering perspective this is impressive IMO.

 

[zaydq]

Considering amd aimed to beat the gtx 5 series with their hd 7000 series I'd more so say that nvidia dropped the ball this round. Arguably, the hd 7000 series trades fair blows with the gtx 6 series in a. Number of games, resolutions and tasks. Nvidia had the time to do more damage but they just didn't. I'd hand it to amd for getting their product out earlier, and still competes quite well.

I honestly can say I'm happy with my hd 7950. At stock it was plenty fast, and now at a 50% on the core, its explosive.

 

[Borealis7]

the only gripe i have with the 79XX cards is stock and overclocked power consumption, it's too high for my taste, and that's why i'm aiming for a nice 7870 post price cuts or second hand next year.

 

[antef]

This generation is very close in terms of perf/watt, perf/dollar. Some might claim that in perf/watt AMD is getting beat up badly, but looking at the comparison graphs showing all resolutions, this is not the case.

Given the fact that the 7xxx cards are much better in compute and generally have more memory on a wider bus, this hardly seems like a fail to me. From an engineering perspective this is impressive IMO.

I'm sorry, I see those charts, but can you explain how AMD is not doing poorly regarding power consumption when the 7950 has a 225W TDP and the 660 Ti has a 150W TDP? I'm coming from an 8800 GTS 512 from 2008, and it has a 135W TDP. Frankly I'm not impressed with any increased performance when the card may use at max the equivalent of an entire Sandy Bridge CPU more worth of power than my old card.

I'm genuinely interested in your answer, because I'm having a tough time picking between a 660 Ti, a 670, or a 7950. Given the 7950 is already down to $320, I think sub-$300 prices is likely in the next couple months, but I'm not sure I want to pick it over the 150W 660 Ti or the 170W 670. Plus I'm not sure how much the compute performance or extra memory bandwidth matters. I want to keep this card for around 4 years so I do have to consider what may matter in the future.