Final Words

Bringing our review of the first GK106-based video card to a close, it’s difficult not to sound like a broken record at times. The launch of the GeForce GTX 660 and the accompanying GK106 GPU is very much a by-the-numbers launch. This is by no means a bad thing, but it does mean that it’s a launch with very few surprises.

As far as NVIDIA’s execution goes, GK106 and the GTX 660 is exactly what they’ve needed to start filling in the gap between $100 and $300. Truth be told we would have liked to see the GTX 660 come in at $200 so that NVIDIA had a clear $200 contender – an always-popular price point – but given the performance of the GTX 660 that’s being a bit wishful on our part. Furthermore NVIDIA would still need to leave enough room for the eventual launch of the next GK106 part, which will be whatever goes between GTX 650 and GTX 660. So much like the GTX 460 1GB two years before it, the GTX 660 launches at $229.

To that end NVIDIA has done their launch planning well, and for $229 it’s hard to argue that they haven’t hit the right balance of price and performance. GeForce GTX 660 offers around 88% of the performance of the GTX 660 Ti at 1920x1200, making it a strong performer in its own right and the logical follow-up to the GTX 660 Ti. However on that note I think this is going to be one of the more unusual launches due to how inconsistent the performance gap between NVIDIA’s cards is, as the GTX 660 offers anywhere between 80% to 100% of the performance of the GTX 660 Ti, owing to the much different shader-to-ROP ratio of the GTX 660. In the right scenario the GTX 660 is every bit as fast as the GTX 660 Ti, though these scenarios are admittedly few and far between.

The real question of course isn’t how the GTX 660 compares to the GTX 660 Ti, but rather how it compares to the Radeon HD 7870 in the face of AMD’s earlier price drops. Even with a more balanced shader-to-ROP ratio for GTX 660, the question of who wins remains to be heavily dependent on the game being tested. AMD controls their traditional strongholds of Crysis, DiRT, and Civilization V, while NVIDIA controls Battlefield 3, Starcraft II, and Portal 2. The end result is that the GTX 660 is on average 4% ahead of the 7870, but once again this is an anything-but-equal scenario; even swapping out a single game could easily shift the balance, reiterating the importance of individual games when relative performance is so inconsistent.

Meanwhile when it comes to physical metrics like power consumption, temperature, and noise, NVIDIA does have a clear edge thanks to another efficient rendition of the Kepler architecture with GK106. GK106 doesn’t enjoy nearly the same advantage over Pitcairn that GK104 did over Tahiti, but it’s still enough to get the same job done with less power consumed and less noise generated. It’s also just enough to make GTX 660 the preferable card over 7870 (at least as far as reference cards go) though by no means is 7870 suddenly a poor choice.

The real wildcard for today’s launch is going to be the prevalence of factory overclocked cards, which are going to be showing up at the same $229 price point as reference cards. Factory overclocked cards will sacrifice GTX 660’s edge in power consumption, but of course they’ll extend the GTX 660’s performance lead. For major launch articles we’re always going to base our advice on reference clocked cards since those are by definition the bare minimum level of performance you can expect, but you’ll want to come back later today for our companion article that takes a look at some of the $229 factory overclocked cards launching today.

Ultimately how well the GTX 660 is received is up to AMD more than it is NVIDIA. The 7870 is already priced close enough to the GTX 660 that the price difference is negligible, and meanwhile AMD and their partners could easily trim another $10 or $20 off of the card’s price to match or beat NVIDIA’s pricing (all the while still offering a bundled game), at which point the sweet spot would once again shift back to AMD. Otherwise AMD is still not in a bad position, even if the GTX 660 is technically the better card.

Wrapping things up, as we briefly discussed earlier NVIDIA’s biggest hurdle isn’t AMD so much as it is themselves. The GTX 660 is a clear multi-generational upgrade over particularly old cards like the 9800GT and GTX 260, but compared to the Fermi cards of the last two years the performance jump isn’t quite as grand. Contrasting the launch of the GTX 660 to the launch of the GTX 460 1GB two years ago, NVIDIA is actually doing far better in this respect thanks to the fact that the GTX 660 offers an impressive 75% jump in performance over the GTX 460 1GB. But at the same time we’re now approaching a more frugal market segment; enthusiasts gamers can justify spending $300+ every 2 years for a next-generation video card even if the gains are only 50%, but mainstream gamers need a bigger jump. GTX 660 is unquestionably a meaningful upgrade to an aging Fermi card – these days Fermi is going to have a hard time hitting playable framerates at 1920 with a high degree of quality – but given the fact that we’re still on the Direct3D 11 generation of video cards holding on to Fermi for one more generation wouldn’t be hard to justify for the cash-strapped mainstream gamer.

OC: Gaming Performance
Comments Locked

147 Comments

View All Comments

  • Amgal - Friday, September 14, 2012 - link

    A little off topic, but does anandtech have an article explaining TU's, SMXes, ROPs, shader clock, etc- basically explaining the new age graphics card architectures? I really enjoy their informative articles, and am having some trouble finding one on that area that isn't littered with incomprehensible computer science macroes. Thanks.
  • pattycake0147 - Friday, September 14, 2012 - link

    If the majority of cards available for sale have custom coolers, why are noise measurements taken for only the reference card? Especially when you've stated that you have custom cards in the lab.
  • Jad77 - Friday, September 14, 2012 - link

    but shouldn't AMD be releasing their next generation sometime soon?
  • Patflute - Friday, September 14, 2012 - link

    Months from now.
  • rarson - Friday, September 14, 2012 - link

    Can we please stop pretending that Nvidia's supply issues are anybody's fault but their own? Is it just a coincidence that Fermi and Kepler both were huge, horrible misfires or is it possible that Nvidia has struggled to design things that actually yield decently? Can we stop ignoring the fact that AMD has had an entire lineup of 28nm parts since March (you know, like 2 months before Kepler ever appeared in reasonable quantities)? Yeah, 28nm IS constrained, but other companies are still putting out parts. Nvidia can't put out parts because they have to throw them away. They're eating the wafers (they must be eating a lot of them if it took them this long to bring out a $300 part).

    I hope Nvidia can pull it together because at this rate, AMD's going to start launching a generation ahead of them (they already have all of the console business).
  • CeriseCogburn - Thursday, November 29, 2012 - link

    nVidia dropped it production purchased spots, so you amd fanboys could blow giant dollars on nearly unavailable amd crap overpriced crashing non pci-e3 gen compliant video card trash
    you did so
    Well not you, but you know what I mean
    Then nVidia released and 2 days before amd "magically" had supply in the channels.
    If you're too stupid to know that - well - sorry since it's obvious
    Then amd crashed it's prices 4 times, and amd fanboys were left raped
    Then amd fired 10% more and now 15% more
    I hope the amd golden parachutes for the criminal executives pleased you
    What's your guess on the amd buyout rumors ?
    My guess is that 3G of ram you fools tried to lie about having an advantage with the totaled and incapable gpu choking on dirt below it at frame rates no Skyrim player could possibly stand, won't be recieving "driver updates" for that "glorious future" when "new games" that "can make use of it" "become available" !
    right fan boy ?
    RIGHT
    LOL
    Have a nice cry, err I meant day.
  • Lepton87 - Friday, September 14, 2012 - link

    This card is obviously slower than 7870.

    http://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_660_Twin_Frozr_I...

    Just look at performance summaries from other sites. But the most glaring flaw of this review is NOT comparing it to OC'ed AMD cards. After OC even 7850 is going to obliterate this overpriced card with almost no clock headroom.
  • Lepton87 - Friday, September 14, 2012 - link

    Unfortunately Anandtech is playing favourites. It's the only site that I know that has somewhat decent reputation that just couldn't admit that 7970GE is simply a faster card than GTX680 and now this....
  • CeriseCogburn - Thursday, November 29, 2012 - link

    Oh come on quarky, Crysis Warhead and Metro first on every review doesn't do it for you ?
    The alphabet here goes A for amd first, then C, the jumps to M, for amd , again and again.
    Why so sour, because amd is almost toast ?
  • CeriseCogburn - Thursday, November 29, 2012 - link

    100%, vs 103%, at a single resolution, the 1920x1200, when 1920x1080 shows another story, and the 7850 is down low at 85%.

    LOL - yeah amd fanboy, you sure are telling this amd fanboy site..

    Can we count how CRAPPY amd drivers are ? Can we count no adaptive v-sync on amd crap cards, can we count no 4 monitors out of the box on amd cards, can we count no auto overclocking, can we count amd slashing it's staff and driver writers aka catalusy maker issues ?
    Can we count any of that, or should we just count 3% ? LOL
    Oh wait fair and above it all amd fanboy, I know the answer...
    We will just count 3 more frames per 100 frame rate, at a single resolution, at your single link, and ignore everything else.
    LOL
    Thank you for your support.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now