The GeForce GTX 660 Ti Review, Feat. EVGA, Zotac, and Gigabyte
by Ryan Smith on August 16, 2012 9:00 AM ESTIt’s hard not to notice that NVIDIA has a bit of a problem right now. In the months since the launch of their first Kepler product, the GeForce GTX 680, the company has introduced several other Kepler products into the desktop 600 series. With the exception of the GeForce GT 640 – their only budget part – all of those 600 series parts have been targeted at the high end, where they became popular, well received products that significantly tilted the market in NVIDIA’s favor.
The problem with this is almost paradoxical: these products are too popular. Between the GK104-heavy desktop GeForce lineup, the GK104 based Tesla K10, and the GK107-heavy mobile GeForce lineup, NVIDIA is selling every 28nm chip they can make. For a business prone to boom and bust cycles this is not a bad problem to have, but it means NVIDIA has been unable to expand their market presence as quickly as customers would like. For the desktop in particular this means NVIDIA has a very large, very noticeable hole in their product lineup between $100 and $400, which composes the mainstream and performance market segments. These market segments aren’t quite the high margin markets NVIDIA is currently servicing, but they are important to fill because they’re where product volumes increase and where most of their regular customers reside.
Long-term NVIDIA needs more production capacity and a wider selection of GPUs to fill this hole, but in the meantime they can at least begin to fill it with what they have to work with. This brings us to today’s product launch: the GeForce GTX 660 Ti. With nothing between GK104 and GK107 at the moment, NVIDIA is pushing out one more desktop product based on GK104 in order to bring Kepler to the performance market. Serving as an outlet for further binned GK104 GPUs, the GTX 660 Ti will be launching today as NVIDIA’s $300 performance part.
| GTX 680 | GTX 670 | GTX 660 Ti | GTX 570 | |
| Stream Processors | 1536 | 1344 | 1344 | 480 |
| Texture Units | 128 | 112 | 112 | 60 |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 | 24 | 40 |
| Core Clock | 1006MHz | 915MHz | 915MHz | 732MHz |
| Shader Clock | N/A | N/A | N/A | 1464MHz |
| Boost Clock | 1058MHz | 980MHz | 980MHz | N/A |
| Memory Clock | 6.008GHz GDDR5 | 6.008GHz GDDR5 | 6.008GHz GDDR5 | 3.8GHz GDDR5 |
| Memory Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit | 192-bit | 320-bit |
| VRAM | 2GB | 2GB | 2GB | 1.25GB |
| FP64 | 1/24 FP32 | 1/24 FP32 | 1/24 FP32 | 1/8 FP32 |
| TDP | 195W | 170W | 150W | 219W |
| Transistor Count | 3.5B | 3.5B | 3.5B | 3B |
| Manufacturing Process | TSMC 28nm | TSMC 28nm | TSMC 28nm | TSMC 40nm |
| Launch Price | $499 | $399 | $299 | $349 |
In the Fermi generation, NVIDIA filled the performance market with GF104 and GF114, the backbone of the very successful GTX 460 and GTX 560 series of video cards. Given Fermi’s 4 chip product stack – specifically the existence of the GF100/GF110 powerhouse – this is a move that made perfect sense. However it’s not a move that works quite as well for NVIDIA’s (so far) 2 chip product stack. In a move very reminiscent of the GeForce GTX 200 series, with GK104 already serving the GTX 690, GTX 680, and GTX 670, it is also being called upon to fill out the GTX 660 Ti.
All things considered the GTX 660 Ti is extremely similar to the GTX 670. The base clock is the same, the boost clock is the same, the memory clock is the same, and even the number of shaders is the same. In fact there’s only a single significant difference between the GTX 670 and GTX 660 Ti: the GTX 660 Ti surrenders one of GK104’s four ROP/L2/Memory clusters, reducing it from a 32 ROP, 512KB L2, 4 memory channel part to a 24 ROP, 384KB L2, 3 memory channel part. With NVIDIA already binning chips for assignment to GTX 680 and GTX 670, this allows NVIDIA to further bin those GTX 670 parts without much additional effort. Though given the relatively small size of a ROP/L2/Memory cluster, it’s a bit surprising they have all that many chips that don’t meet GTX 670 standards.
In any case, as a result of these design choices the GTX 660 Ti is a fairly straightforward part. The 915MHz base clock and 980MHz boost clock of the chip along with the 7 SMXes means that GTX 660 Ti has the same theoretical compute, geometry, and texturing performance as GTX 670. The real difference between the two is on the render operation and memory bandwidth side of things, where the loss of the ROP/L2/Memory cluster means that GTX 660 Ti surrenders a full 25% of its render performance and its memory bandwidth. Interestingly NVIDIA has kept their memory clocks at 6GHz – in previous generations they would lower them to enable the use of cheaper memory – which is significant for performance since it keeps the memory bandwidth loss at just 25%.
How this loss of render operation performance and memory bandwidth will play out is going to depend heavily on the task at hand. We’ve already seen GK104 struggle with a lack of memory bandwidth in games like Crysis, so coming from GTX 670 this is only going to exacerbate that problem; a full 25% drop in performance is not out of the question here. However in games that are shader heavy (but not necessarily memory bandwidth heavy) like Portal 2, this means that GTX 660 Ti can hang very close to its more powerful sibling. There’s also the question of how NVIDIA’s nebulous asymmetrical memory bank design will impact performance, since 2GB of RAM doesn’t fit cleanly into 3 memory banks. All of these are issues where we’ll have to turn to benchmarking to better understand.
The impact on power consumption on the other hand is relatively straightforward. With clocks identical to the GTX 670, power consumption has only been reduced marginally due to the disabling of the ROP cluster. NVIDIA’s official TDP is 150W, with a power target of 134W. This compares to a TDP of 170W and a power target of 141W for the GTW 670. Given the mechanisms at work for NVIDIA’s GPU boost technology, it’s the power target that is a far better reflection of what to expect relative to the GTX 670. On paper this means that GK104 could probably be stuffed into a sub-150W card with some further functional units being disabled, but in practice desktop GK104 GPUs are probably a bit too power hungry for that.
Moving on, this launch will be what NVIDIA calls a “virtual” launch, which is to say that there aren’t any reference cards being shipped to partners to sell or to press to sample. Instead all of NVIDIA’s partners will be launching with semi-custom and fully-custom cards right away. This means we’re going to see a wide variety of cards right off the bat, however it also means that there will be less consistency between partners since no two cards are going to be quite alike. For that reason we’ll be looking at a slightly wider selection of partner designs today, with cards from EVGA, Zotac, and Gigabyte occupying our charts.
As for the launch supply, with NVIDIA having licked their GK104 supply problems a couple of months ago the supply of GTX 660 Ti cards looks like it should be plentiful. Some cards are going to be more popular than others and for that reason we expect we’ll see some cards sell out, but at the end of the day there shouldn’t be any problem grabbing a GTX 660 Ti on today’s launch day.
Pricing for GTX 660 Ti cards will start at $299, continuing NVIDIA’s tidy hierarchy of a GeForce 600 at every $100 price point. With the launch of the GTX 660 Ti NVIDIA will finally be able to start clearing out the GTX 570, a not-unwelcome thing as the GTX 660 Ti brings with it the Kepler family features (NVENC, TXAA, GPU boost, and D3D 11.1) along with nearly twice as much RAM and much lower power consumption. However this also means that despite the name, the GTX 660 Ti is a de facto replacement for the GTX 570 rather than the GTX 560 Ti. The sub-$250 market the GTX 560 Ti launched will continue to be served by Fermi parts for the time being. NVIDIA will no doubt see quite a bit of success even at $300, but it probably won’t be quite the hot item that the GTX 560 Ti was.
Meanwhile for a limited period of time NVIDIA will be sweeting the deal by throwing in a copy of Borderlands 2 with all GTX 600 series cards as a GTX 660 Ti launch promotion. Borderlands 2 is the sequel to Gearbox’s 2009 FPS/RPG hybrid, and is a TWIMTBP game that will have PhysX support along with planned support for TXAA. Like their prior promotions this is being done through retailers in North America, so you will need to check and ensure your retailer is throwing in Borderlands 2 vouchers with any GTX 600 card you purchase.
On the marketing front, as a performance part NVIDIA is looking to not only sell the GTX 660 Ti as an upgrade to 400/500 series owners, but to also entice existing GTX 200 series owners to upgrade. The GTX 660 Ti will be quite a bit faster than any GTX 200 series part (and cooler/quieter than all of them), with the question being of whether it’s going to be enough to spur those owners to upgrade. NVIDIA did see a lot of success last year with the GTX 560 driving the retirement of the 8800GT/9800GT, so we’ll see how that goes.
Anyhow, as with the launch of the GTX 670 cards virtually every partner is also launching one or more factory overclocked model, so the entire lineup of launch cards will be between $299 and $339 or so. This price range will put NVIDIA and its partners smack-dab between AMD’s existing 7000 series cards, which have already been shuffling in price some due to the GTX 670 and the impending launch of the GTX 660 Ti. Reference-clocked cards will sit right between the $279 Radeon HD 7870 and $329 Radeon HD 7950, which means that factory overclocked cards will be going head-to-head with the 7950.
On that note, with the launch of the GTX 660 Ti we can finally shed some further light on this week’s unexpected announcement of a new Radeon HD 7950 revision from AMD. As you’ll see in our benchmarks the existing 7950 maintains an uncomfortably slight lead over the GTX 660 Ti, which has spurred on AMD to bump up the 7950’s clockspeeds at the cost of power consumption in order to avoid having it end up as a sub-$300 product. The new 7950B is still scheduled to show up at the end of this week, with AMD’s already-battered product launch credibility hanging in the balance.
For this review we’re going to include both the 7950 and 7950B in our results. We’re not at all happy with how AMD is handling this – it’s the kind of slimy thing that has already gotten NVIDIA in trouble in the past – and while we don’t want to reward such actions it would be remiss of us not to include it since it is a new reference part. And if AMD’s credibility is worth anything it will be on the shelves tomorrow anyhow.
| Summer 2012 GPU Pricing Comparison | |||||
| AMD | Price | NVIDIA | |||
| Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition | $469/$499 | GeForce GTX 680 | |||
| Radeon HD 7970 | $419/$399 | GeForce GTX 670 | |||
| Radeon HD 7950 | $329 | ||||
| $299 | GeForce GTX 660 Ti | ||||
| Radeon HD 7870 | $279 | ||||
| $279 | GeForce GTX 570 | ||||
| Radeon HD 7850 | $239 | ||||
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
313 Comments
View All Comments
TheJian - Sunday, August 19, 2012 - link
For one there are 6 superclocked 660TI cards on newegg today available at $319 or less DEFAULT. They are fully warranted at those speeds:http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
1032 core/1111mhz boost.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
1019/1097 for $299.
Can you do that with a 7950?
How hot and noisy is yours. I can see what AMP speeds do here at anandtech. How many watts will yours use doing what you said? Just look at the boost edition here and scores around the web at 1920x1200 and you realize it's getting whipped. GTX680?
Lets just get who can go faster totally out of the way at ridiculous overclocks:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/07/30/msi_gefo...
GTX680 MSI Lightning $580 review at hardocp vs. Sapphire 7970 OC $460 at 1280GPU/1860memory at 1.300v! all @2560x1600 min/avg 680 1st 7970 2nd
Max Payne 3
41/86.2 vs. 42/79.7
battlefield 3
29/52.8 vs 32/50.6
Batman Arkham
42/68 vs. 29/57
Witcher 2 enhanced
22/51.5 vs 21/50.3
battlefield 3 multiplayer 1920x1200 (sorry multi isn't run at higher)
59/78.7 vs. 50/64.2
So based on avg framerate,
Batman >19% faster for gtx
Witcher2=Wash based on min/max either way
battlefield multi >22% faster for gtx
Battlefield3 singleplayer wash I guess based on min max
Maxpayne 3 >8% faster
Bottom line from hard OCP conclusion:
"The video card also one of the fastest out-of-box operating speeds. It even went head to head with one of our fastest overclocked AMD Radeon HD 7970's and swept the floor with it."
If you can find a better review of these two GPU's clocked faster let's see it. I mean any GTX 680 vs. any 7970, where both are ridiculously OC'd like these here. You mentioned 1.15 for 7970, well they got it to 1280! And it got the snot knocked out of it anyway. Sorry Russian. Note they got the mem to 7.44ghz (I'd say a bit lucky draw) vs. the GTX 680 mem hit a wall at 7.05ghz. I'm guessing there will be a few cards do quite a bit better in GTX 680 land here. IT's just a luck of the draw either way, but the sapphire came with a good mem draw for their particular samples so consider the sapphire a great score and still swept. Max scores (check the article) were worse. I tend to think avg is a better rating, you live there mostly. Min/max are rarely hit. Just4u already said it. 680 wins. It's either a wash or landslide depending on games and having cash as no obstacle I'd go gtx 680.
More regarding all 600 series:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/05/29/galaxy_g...
"Since the introduction of the GeForce GTX 680 we have seen the launch of the GeForce GTX 690 and GeForce GTX 670 all providing the best performance and value in their class."
Same article bottom line on $535 cards in SLI:
"These cards are a beast in SLI, providing us the best performance possible at 5760x1200. There is no question these also beat Radeon HD 7970 CrossFireX to the punch at every turn."
Smack...As an AMD fanboy I hold little hope for AMD. They are fighting with billions in debt (junk bond status credit, think of them as Spain/Greece, hard to borrow and gets worse and worse), little to invest, lots of interest on the debt, vs. NV with 3bil in the bank in CASH, no DEBT, no Interest on NO debt. I believe the age of AMD catching Intel or Nvidia is over. Bummer. Our only hope is NV buying AMD once they plummet enough (after losing billions more no doubt), and getting back some CPU competition as NV could invest in cpu design to get this game going again. I could see IBM or Samung pulling this off too (maybe even better as I think both have far more cash, and both have fabs). IBM/Samsung could really put the hurt on Intel with AMD buyouts. It would be a fair fight on cpu for sure. NV may be able to pull off both gpu and cpu as they have no fabs to keep up (which can kill you quickly if you screw up). Interesting thoughts about all that roll around in my head...LOL. For now though, NV is on a path to get 10bil in the bank by 2014 xmas I'd say if not at least by 2015. Like NV or not, they're CEO is smarter with money and never loses it unless he hurts someone else for doing it. He never prices their products at a loss like AMD. He makes smarter moves and thinks further ahead with a bigger picture in mind.
Motleyfool.com thinks they're the next 100bil company :) The Gardner brothers are NOT STUPID. I will be piling my money in this stock until it goes over $20. They're getting close to returning to the profits of old when it was $35 in 2007 and no dilution in the stock since then, with another 1.5bil of buyback scheduled last I checked. Same cash as 2007 and much stronger company with acquisitions since 2007. AMD is going the other way and investors are scared sh1tless :( Bankruptcy or bought by 2014 xmas. You heard it here :) Unfortunately. I cringe as I say it, but at this point it may help our future cpu cheap prices to just get this over with and get them bought by someone who can help AMD before there's nothing left and they're cpu's are even worse, while gpu's are starting to show desperation too. The 7950boost is just that. A company with money in the bank would have dev'd a lower wattage/cooler less noisy version for less cost, rather than all 3 going up to try to spoil a launch. OUCH. As much as Ryan etc try to help them, there's no getting around the facts (despite page titles like "that darn memory"...LOL...Yet better performance anyway...why even title pages like that?). Despite attempting to make this a 2560 discussion when only 2% of the world uses it according to steampowered.com hardware survey. Even then, if you look at updated games you could argue it's still a no brainer. Toss out warhead (from 2008) and replace with Crysis 2 you get a 660 victory instead of a loss. Hmmm...
2GB a hindrance? 4GB do anything? :
"The 4GB -- Realistically there was not one game that we tested that could benefit from the two extra GB's of graphics memory. Even at 2560x1600 (which is a massive 4 Mpixels resolution) there was just no measurable difference."
http://www.guru3d.com/article/palit-geforce-gtx-68...
Funny I thought the 4GB version sucked after reading their review but whatever :) I'd rather have a FASTER 2GB than same speed 4GB costing a lot more. I'd call the measurable difference the MONEY for nothing.
Galidou - Sunday, August 19, 2012 - link
Nice results there, just too bad these are almost all the games that works better on Nvidia. They forbid themselves from adding portal 2 so it doesn't look too much biased.TheJian - Monday, August 20, 2012 - link
Including the useless Warhead isn't enough? Screaming the entire time about it having bad bandwidth wasn't enough?Skyrim is in there too..Just forgot to mention it
Again, 680 SLI vs. 7970sli
78fps to 62fps (avg. to avg).
Heck even the single beat it with 72fps..
"GALAXY GTX 680 GC SLI was 26% faster than AMD Radeon HD 7970 CFX at 8X MSAA + FXAA."
Skyrim not good enough too? So what game would you like me to point to? I'm sorry it's difficult to point to a winner for AMD. :)
So lets see, it's biased in your mind on Skyrim, Batman AC, Witcher2, Battlefield3, Battlefield 3 Multiplayer, Portal 2, max payne 3...That rules out HardOCP I guess. Anand added a few more, Shogun 2 (another landslide for 660 TI, even against 7970), Dirt3 used here anand - Wash (though minimums do show Nvidia as Ryan points out)...
Civ5, landslide again at 1920x1200 here anandtech...Metro2033 here anandtech, <5% win for Nvidia %1920x1200 (I call it a wash I guess)...
So which game can I point to that will be OK to you? I'm running out of games to find a victory for AMD, so just give me what you want to see...IT's kind of hard as you can see to give you the viewpoint you want which is apparently "nothing will make me happy until AMD wins"...Am I wrong, or at what point do you accept reality?
Galidou - Wednesday, August 22, 2012 - link
Yet another result before the big driver improvements, poor fanboys, they lack on informations and they're totally uninformed about drivers enhancements. A while ago AMD said they were changing their tactics about drivers development. That was like 3-4 months ago I think. Since then, we see really big improvements from the drivers.Last 12,8 catalyst brings:
•Up to 25% in Elder Scrolls: Skyrim
•Up to 3% in Battlefield 3
•Up to 6% in Batman: Arkham City
•Up to 3% in Dues Ex: Human Revolution
•Up to 6% in Crysis 2
•Up to 15% in Total War: Shogun
•Up to 8% in Crysis Warhead
•Up to 5% in Just Cause 2
•Up to 10% in Dirt 3
All in one driver realesed in august, any review prior to gtx 660 ti is then flawed. And there's probably much more to come considering Nvidias fanboys have been whining about their drivers for years. Their team focused on the good way to improve drivers, how much will they be able to improve them? They were SO bad at making drivers than anyone buying an AMD card couldn't even play the slightest game without it crashing, overheating the card and making you cry to your mother to buy an Nvidia card..... Imagine!!
CeriseCogburn - Thursday, August 23, 2012 - link
A lot of reviewers have very recently commented on how crappy amd drivers are - and this just past release came out with - NO DRIVERS for amd...Then 5 top review sites had half the games crash on amd, and had to toss some out of the reviews.
do you have AMNESIA ? are you sick ? a little under the weather, or just a fanboy liar who plays only one game Skyrim ( ROFL) except for the other games you said you play the prior page - and you're just an overclocker...
So just an overclocker and 2x6850 and they suck for OC
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4002/amd-radeon-hd-6...
Way to go... LOL I mean the scaling is pathetic. your not a very smart Ocer.
Galidou - Thursday, August 23, 2012 - link
And then again with the attacks and hatred on my choice, attacking my personnal life once again.''do you have AMNESIA ? are you sick ?''
''your not a very smart Ocer. ''
I did not buy them for ocing, I got them because I had an opportunity and I paid them like, dirt cheap. But still you attack me lacking of respect not even knowing the reasons why I did that. And again with the crashing, I changed to 12,8 driver on my 6850 and it did improve my skyrim performance and none of my other games crashed. Sorry for those reviewers.
CeriseCogburn - Thursday, August 23, 2012 - link
Ok, so in other words, you're the noob, that knows very little to nothing.BTW- knowing your an amd fanboy means we all KNOW you scrinched and scrunched (at least in your own stupid head) every little tiny "penny" in your purchase of the AMD videocard...LOL - THAT'S A GIVEN DUMMY.
Ok, so, in light of that STUPIDITY - you have that same crappy set in WATER COOLING,- DUAL WC...
And.... "I don't even know why you got them".
ROFL - dude, either you're lying an awful lot, or you actually needed my help back then, desperately.
So you waggled up your big water overlcock OC manness, and now we find out... LOL
This is not happening ! (x-files quote)
CeriseCogburn - Thursday, August 23, 2012 - link
newegg verified owner most helpful 660Ti link from thejian" Pros: Runs very quiet and overclocks like a champ. My card hits 1330 core and is completely stable. "
LOL
OUCH.
Oh well, no more OC whiny whine ... tsk tsk how painful
ROFL
Galidou - Sunday, August 19, 2012 - link
And there's even twice Battlefield 3(single and multi) LOL @ the bias :)CeriseCogburn - Thursday, August 23, 2012 - link
5760x1080 you losehttp://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/08/16/nvidia...
1300+ 660Ti core, you lose again
7000+ memory, you lose a third time