The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Review, Feat. EVGA XC GAMING: Turing Sheds RTX for the Mainstream Market
by Ryan Smith & Nate Oh on February 22, 2019 9:00 AM ESTTotal War: Warhammer II (DX11)
Last in our 2018 game suite is Total War: Warhammer II, built on the same engine of Total War: Warhammer. While there is a more recent Total War title, Total War Saga: Thrones of Britannia, that game was built on the 32-bit version of the engine. The first TW: Warhammer was a DX11 game was to some extent developed with DX12 in mind, with preview builds showcasing DX12 performance. In Warhammer II, the matter, however, appears to have been dropped, with DX12 mode still marked as beta, but also featuring performance regression for both vendors.
It's unfortunate because Creative Assembly themselves have acknowledged the CPU-bound nature of their games, and with re-use of game engines as spin-offs, DX12 optimization would have continued to provide benefits, especially if the future of graphics in RTS-type games will lean towards low-level APIs.
There are now three benchmarks with varying graphics and processor loads; we've opted for the Battle benchmark, which appears to be the most graphics-bound.
Rounding out our look at game performance is Total War: Warhammer II.
Here, the GTX 1660 Ti lags behind the RTX 2060 and GTX 1070 FE more than in the other games, offering only somewhere around 80% of the RTX 2060 speed and 90% of the GTX 1070. In turn, it doesn't improve as much upon the GTX 1060 6GB and GTX 960, though practically speaking it has rendered its RX 590 competition as last-generation performance, given that it's neck-and-neck with the GTX 1060 6GB FE.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
157 Comments
View All Comments
Oxford Guy - Saturday, February 23, 2019 - link
"The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Review, Feat. EVGA XC GAMING: Turing Sheds RTX for the Mainstream Market"The same idea, restated:
"NVIDIA Admits, With Its GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Turing, That RTX Isn't Ready For The Mainstream"
just6979 - Saturday, February 23, 2019 - link
Why disable all AMD or NVidia specific settings? Any using those cards would have those settings on... shouldn't the number reflect exactly what the cards are capable of when utilizing all the settings available. You wouldn't do a Turing Major review without giving some numbers for RTX ON in any benchmarks that supported it...CiccioB - Monday, February 25, 2019 - link
Yes, the test could be done with specific GPU features turned on, but you have to clearly say what are the advantage of each particular addition on the final image quality.Because you can have (optional) effects that cuts frame rate but increase the quality a lot. So looking only at the mere final number you may conclude that a GPU is better than another because it is faster (or just costs less), but in reality you are comparing two different kind of quality results.
It's not different than testing two cards with different detail settings (without stating which they are) and then trying to understand which is the better one only based on the frame rate results (which is the kind of results that everyone looks at).
jarf1n - Sunday, February 24, 2019 - link
load power consuption is wrong,if you want see only gpu measured,measured only gpu like techpowerup doing.its clear if you measure total load,its not show it right.
134W 1660ti
292W vega 56
source:techpowerup
its clear that gtx 1660 ti is much much better gpu for at least FHD and QHD also.
huge different.
CiccioB - Monday, February 25, 2019 - link
Well, that however does not tell the entire story.The ratios versus the total consumption of the system is also important.
Let's say that for a gaming PC you already have to use 1000W. A card that suck 100W more just wastes 10% more of your power. Meanwhile if your PC is using 100W, such a card will be doubling the consumption. As you see the card is always using 100W more, but the impact is different.
Let's make a different example: your PC uses about 150W in everyday use. You have to buy an SSD. There are some SSD that consumes twice the power of others for the same performances.
You may say that the difference is huge.
Well, an SSD consumes between 2 and 5W. Buying the less efficient (5W) is not really going to have an impact on the total consumption of your PC.
ilkhan - Sunday, February 24, 2019 - link
Coming from a GTX970 and playing on a 2560x1600 monitor, which card should I be looking at?Ryan Smith - Monday, February 25, 2019 - link
You'd likely want an RTX 2060, if not a bit higher with the RTX 2070.https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2148?vs=23...
Mad Maxine - Monday, February 25, 2019 - link
Price is still crap for the performance. We live in a age now that sees Hardware and software no longer growing. And a GPU from 2012 Can still run all modern games today. Market is not going to be huge for Overpriced GPUs that are really not that much of a improvement from 2012.Oxford Guy - Monday, February 25, 2019 - link
Telemetry is growing. You are "your" data.bhanavi - Tuesday, February 26, 2019 - link
Thanks you so much for the informationhttps://apkmabbu.com
https://apkmabbu.com/gbwhatsapp-apk/
https://apkmabbu.com/ac-market-apk/
https://apkmabbu.com/lucky-patcher-apk/