Review Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super Review: Ti-Like Performance for Less

[Admin]

Nvidia’s latest Super card continues the trend of offering better performance at a lower price than previous offerings. Does it make the 1660 Ti obsolete?

Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super Review: Ti-Like Performance for Less : Read more

 

[WildCard999]

Pretty good for the money although I was hoping Nvidia would of released a dual fan reference version like the other Super cards.

 

[hannibal]

Well... Nvidia is actually redusing prices... Good! Competition is good!

 

[TJ Hooker]

I don't know if I've ever seen a TH graphics card review that had so few cards being compared. Leaving out the 1660 non-super seems odd, as does the lack of RX 590 (and 580). Even a Vega 56 would have been a good addition IMO.

 

[WildCard999]

I don't know if I've ever seen a TH graphics card review that had such few cards being compared. Leaving out the 1660 non-super seems odd, as does the lack of RX 590 (and 580). Even a Vega 56 would have been a good addition IMO.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1935-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super/

Covers a good amount of GPU's & games for 1080P/1440P.

 

[King_V]

I don't know if I've ever seen a TH graphics card review that had such few cards being compared. Leaving out the 1660 non-super seems odd, as does the lack of RX 590 (and 580). Even a Vega 56 would have been a good addition IMO.

I think it's because of the new testing platform, thus the results on the new platform don't correspond correctly with the results from the previous platform?

 

[TJ Hooker]

I think it's because of the new testing platform, thus the results on the new platform don't correspond correctly with the results from the previous platform?

Ah, yeah that makes sense. Looking at the RX 5700 XT Nitro+ review they did the same thing there.

 

[hussainali88]

I think there is a mistake on the first page. The Memory Capacity for all 1660 all variants should be 6GB not 8GB.

 

[King_V]

I'm actually relieved to find out that it actually uses about the same, or slightly less power, than the 1660Ti. It seems like the 120W rating of the 1660Ti was slightly understated, and the 125W rating of the 1660 Super is about spot on. Maybe the 1660Ti should've been listed with a 130W rating?

In any case, it does seem like the performance/price lands solidly in favor of the Super, and they're about tied in efficiency.

 

[RodroX]

HI, I think on the table by the first page of the article, were it said 8GB, shouldn't be 6GB instead?