I wondered about that myself. I was really puzzled, given the performance difference, that the 1660 and 1660Ti both had a 120W TDP.The GTX 1650 is still the 75W king.
GTX 1650 Super is rated at 100W TDP, which sort of breaks the PCIe slot barrier.
I find the 1660 Super to be more interesting. It's a 1660 with 75% faster memory.
Is the vanilla 1660 really so unbalanced that simply speeding up the VRAM will have a significant impact?
If it does make a difference then the 1660 Super will be close to the 1660 Ti in performance (and the 1660 can be seen as a poor design).
They use different type VRAM, which should explain why the Ti can be more energy efficient.I wondered about that myself. I was really puzzled, given the performance difference, that the 1660 and 1660Ti both had a 120W TDP.
Change in memory type (1660 to 1660 Super) allows more speed at lower power. Power consumption should be close between Super and Ti.While I can't imagine Nvidia doing this, I'd be a little surprised if the 1660 Super wound up using MORE power than the 1660Ti.
1650 Super will be faster than the 1650, obviously. Power efficiency could be (marginally) better than 1650 and 1660 because of GDDR6, question is if the significantly increased VRAM speed will be seen in a corresponding performance increase.If the 1650 Super is a 100W card, what is it going to perform like? And, is it going to be inefficient relative to the 1660/1660Ti given that they are 120W cards?