NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost Review: Bringing Balance To The Force
by Ryan Smith on March 26, 2013 8:00 AM ESTSynthetics
As always we’ll also take a quick look at synthetic performance to get a better look at our video cards' underpinnings. These tests are mostly for comparing cards from within a manufacturer, as opposed to directly comparing AMD and NVIDIA cards.
We’ll start with 3DMark Vantage’s Pixel Fill test, a mix of a ROP test and a bandwidth test to see if you have enough bandwidth to feed those ROPs.
3DMark Vantage’s pixel fill test confirms what we know from the specs of the GTX 650 Ti Boost: that it has received a massive boost in ROP performance and memory bandwidth. The 45% greater pixel throughput rate here doesn’t reach the kind of lofty goals that the theoreticals would put it at, but it’s clearly quite an improvement. Interestingly despite the equal ROP throughput and memory bandwidth of the GTX 660 and GTX 650 Ti Boost, the GTX 660 is still clearly in the lead here. We’ve never looked at the impact of GPCs here, so if our card is a 2 GPC model then this might explain what we’re seeing.
Moving on, we have our 3DMark Vantage texture fillrate test, which does for texels and texture mapping units what the previous test does for ROPs.
Texture fillrates on the other hand are really only benefitting from the higher clockspeeds of the GTX 650 Ti Boost over the GTX 650 Ti, and memory bandwidth to a much lesser extent. This is why despite the similarities between the GTX 650 Ti Boost and the GTX 660, the latter is still quite safe from the GTX 650 Ti Boost.
Finally we’ll take a quick look at tessellation performance with TessMark. We have everything turned up to maximum here, which means we're looking at roughly 11 million polygons per frame.
NVIDIA has always had a fairly ridiculous geometry throughput rate, and that doesn’t change on the GTX 650 Ti Boost. A score of 753 is second only to the GTX 660, and well ahead of the 7850, which is an interesting confluence of a 2 primative/clock rate, and its lower clockspeeds relative to the 7790 and GTX 650 Ti Boost.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
78 Comments
View All Comments
Oxford Guy - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
Hopefully only to be laughed out of the market.xdesire - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
Nvidia's last struggles with Kepler gen. :)Eugene86 - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
So this card beats out the slightly cheaper new 7790 in every game as well as the slightly more expensive 7850 in half of the games?Looks like a pretty good deal to me. What reason do people have to buy AMD again?
Zstream - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
I think the only game it won was in Shogun and bf3? I'm not sure on your statement or if you read the article or not.Eugene86 - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
Did you read the article? Because the only games (one game) that the nvidia card lost in is Dirt.aTonyAtlaw - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
I think you were looking at the GTX 660, friend. The 650 Ti Boost, the card under review, placed beneath the 7850 in nearly every test. They even talk about this on the conclusions page.Eugene86 - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
I was talking about the 7790, that's why.Warren21 - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
The comment you were replying to was challenging your statement of the 650 TiB beating the 7850 in "half". Two does not constitute half, it constitutes two.just4U - Wednesday, March 27, 2013 - link
Well Eugene, looking at your original statement you seem to be saying it beats the 7790 and the 7850.. (you added in the "as well as.." ) Anyway, no clue how the 2G 7790 does or how the 1G 650TIB does.. so it's all sorta moot. On paper if you ask me the 650 is the better card overall.EzioAs - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
Bundled games? HD7850 uses less power and overclocks better? AMD cuts the price of their cards way more resulting in better performance per dollar cards before Nvidia actually release one that could fight back?It's true the GTX650ti Boost does seem pretty good for a newly released card in terms of performance per dollar but your question just shows a little bit "fanboyism".