Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 And 660 Review: Kepler At $110 And $230

[Yargnit]

Semi OT, but it showed up again here so I'll ask.

So what's up with the 670'a relative AA performance drop still being so much larger than the 6850/6870's? The 660/660ti make sense with their narrower memory bandwidths, but the 670 has the same bandwidth as the two AMD cards and still loses a significant amount of performance by percentage more than they do.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]Yargnit[/nom]Semi OT, but it showed up again here so I'll ask.So what's up with the 670'a relative AA performance drop still being so much larger than the 6850/6870's? The 660/660ti make sense with their narrower memory bandwidths, but the 670 has the same bandwidth as the two AMD cards and still loses a significant amount of performance by percentage more than they do.[/citation]

The 670 has more bandwidth and such, but the ratio of GPU to ROP/memory performance on the 670 is much more in favor of the CPU than it is on the 6800 cards. You can have more memory bandwidth but still be more memory bandwidth bottle-necked if the GPU is too fast. For example, an Athlon II x2 with dual-channel 667MHz DDR2 memory is less memory-bandwidth bottle-necked than an i7-3930K that has dual-channel DDR3-800MHz memory even though the i7 would probably have more performance because the ratio of processing power to memroy bandwidth is more focused on the processor.

 

[loops]

The 670 and now the 660 (non ti) seem like good cards for the money. Other than that, I am not seeing a whole lot to pick from Nvidia.

AMD seems like they have all the other spaces filled in terms of value.

A 660 looks like it is going for over 230. The 7850s are coming in as low as 200 and the 7870 250 (mir 230). The 7850 just seems to hold on to the value it has but based on the benchmarks a 660 is not a bad call.

What bothers me is that 3 way SLI is not an option. Based on the micro shutter findings, 3 way seems to be a good bet. So why not allow the 660 to 3 way sli?

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]JoeMomma[/nom]I like Nvidia because of the frequency of their driver updates.[/citation]

AMD has more driver updates than Nvidia. They were on a monthly cadence until very recently.

[citation][nom]JoeMomma[/nom]You have already decided that I am an idiotic jerk for merely stating an opinion. FORUM SUCK!I felt that saying that I was living in a bubble was disrespectful and highly unprofessional from a forum moderator. Ask you boss how they feel you handled someone with a differing opinion. You should be fired and your keys to the interwebs be taken away.[/citation]

Holy crap Joe, I never called you an idiot or a jerk. I think you might be a bit oversensitive and defensive, of that I'm guilty. I certainly don't agree that "Living in a bubble" is an insult, but I'm sorry that you took it as such.

As far as being fired and having my internet keys taken away, I've already discussed the matter with the President Of The Internet and he doesn't think the situation warrants it.
But you can plea your case to him if you like.

 

[jaquith]

Don,

In glancing you're putting A- to B+ settings on (entry/entry low) C to D+ GPUs. Show what it takes to have smooth and playable settings. I get the MSAA 'thing' (exploit) but that's only one form of AA, so please have a move towards the middle and be objective. If my frame rates where that unstable (all of the above) I'd yank out my GPU and run it over with my SUV. It would drive me nuts and make me dizzy. Otherwise I and so would you lower the settings.

Yeah, here any form of vSync is entirely useless.

Since I don't care about any of these GPU's that's all I care to say.

 

[spentshells]

GTX 650 is for suckers and it really offers nothing not already available.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]loops[/nom]The 670 and now the 660 (non ti) seem like good cards for the money. Other than that, I am not seeing a whole lot to pick from Nvidia. AMD seems like they have all the other spaces filled in terms of value. A 660 looks like it is going for over 230. The 7850s are coming in as low as 200 and the 7870 250 (mir 230). The 7850 just seems to hold on to the value it has but based on the benchmarks a 660 is not a bad call. What bothers me is that 3 way SLI is not an option. Based on the micro shutter findings, 3 way seems to be a good bet. So why not allow the 660 to 3 way sli?[/citation]

If you're willing to buy three 660s, then Nvidia probably figured that you'd be willing to buy three cards that are more expensive just as readily if they don't give you the option of buying three 660s. For example, going from about $700 for three 660s to about $900 for three 660 Tis is only an ~30% increase in price.

 

[jaquith]

three 660s ... three 660 Tis

2-WAY limit on any <GTX 670 that supports SLI (I've seen 3-WAY on TI's), GTX 670 3-WAY officially @ release but 4-WAY is supported, GTX 680 4-WAY and GTX 690 2-WAY (4-core limit).

More info - http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-660ti/specifications

 

[cleeve]

If my frame rates where that unstable (all of the above) I'd yank out my GPU and run it over with my SUV.

Not agreeing there. Extremely smooth game play at the settings as tested.

 

[jaquith]

Just an observation here, and I sincerely mean this politely, some folks can see stills with great clarity but cannot sense motion that well and sense as many frames. I can and as you're figuring out it has to be right, the feeling and frames must be smooth otherwise for 'me' it's a very miserable experience.

I can in seconds see the difference between 120Hz and 60Hz LCD.

I play Crysis (all of them) quite a bit and this - this would drive me bonkers:

I also play BF3 and the top (2) maybe:

 

[JoeMomma]

The president of the internet should take my keys away because I must be off of my medication.
Sorry if I am oversensitive. My troll detector has been working overtime lately because I am a beta tester.
Beta is hard work. The developers appreciate my efforts as do many other testers. But for every intelligent comment there are at least 10 mean ones.

My main point was that I have nothing against AMD. I said they make great products. I have been using Nvidia and I am happy with them and this new card looks like another nice unit.
Sorry if the AMD guys thought I was...

Let me just shut up, nobody cares what I think

 

[jimbaladin]

The 7870 can be had for $239 at newegg (after rebate...I know), but also comes with Sleeping Dogs free. That makes it a clear winner here - I think Nvidia needs to drop prices on the 660 by about $30-$40 in order to compete.

 

[fb39ca4]

Dang those PCBs are tiny.

 

[cleeve]

Sorry if I am oversensitive. My troll detector has been working overtime lately because I am a beta tester.
Beta is hard work. The developers appreciate my efforts as do many other testers. But for every intelligent comment there are at least 10 mean ones.

I hear you. No worries bro. Internet forum PR is a tough gig.

 

[Maxx_Power]

Well, I know Nvidia has never been that great on the mid to low range offers in the last few rounds, but this time in particular, they are terribly LATE.

 

[cleeve]

Just an observation here, and I sincerely mean this politely, some folks can see stills with great clarity but cannot sense motion that well and sense as many frames. I can and as you're figuring out it has to be right, the feeling and frames must be smooth otherwise for 'me' it's a very miserable experience.

I can in seconds see the difference between 120Hz and 60Hz LCD.

It's true everyone has unique sensitivities. I can also detect 60 Hz vs 120 Hz pretty instantly, but having said that 60 Hz doesn't bother me. I'm quite happy with 30 FPS minimum and 40 FPS average.

Then again, I find 120 Hz motion compensation on televisions irritating as hell when its applied to 24 FPS movies...

 

[nforce4max]

Look like I will be holding onto my 460, two gtx280, 9800gtx, and two 9800gt for a lot longer than I first thought. At first when I seen the first benches I was impressed until looking through the rest. A 550Ti keep beating the 650 in the majority of the benches and the 660 is meh. It would be nice when matching 560 non Ti prices then it would sell pretty well.

 

[mikenygmail]

[citation][nom]JoeMomma[/nom]Let me just shut up[/citation]
[citation][nom]cleeve[/nom]I find 120 Hz motion compensation on televisions irritating as hell when its applied to 24 FPS movies...[/citation]

My sentiments exactly.

and jacqui, enough with the benchmarks already, you're getting a bit carried away.


[citation][nom]JoeMomma[/nom]You should be fired[/citation]

First he accuses Cleave of insults, now he tries to mess with his job?

Why is such abuse permitted?

 

[JoeMomma]

nforcemax:
I agree for different reasons. I am currently using a GTX465 and it does everything I need it to do.
Do I want a GTX670, yes! Do I need one, not really, not yet.

When I do feel the need to upgrade, I am more likely to purchase another 465 for $100 to pair up in SLI.
If I could afford it I would buy a new card today, but I am not sure that I would be able to notice the improvement. My rule of thumb with any hardware purchase is to wait until the new item is at least double the speed of my old one. I don't want to have to read a benchmark test to tell the difference.
I want to be blown away.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]JoeMomma[/nom]nforcemax: I agree for different reasons. I am currently using a GTX465 and it does everything I need it to do.Do I want a GTX670, yes! Do I need one, not really, not yet. When I do feel the need to upgrade, I am more likely to purchase another 465 for $100 to pair up in SLI.If I could afford it I would buy a new card today, but I am not sure that I would be able to notice the improvement. My rule of thumb with any hardware purchase is to wait until the new item is at least double the speed of my old one. I don't want to have to read a benchmark test to tell the difference.I want to be blown away.[/citation]

If the GTX 465 supported quad SLI, it still wouldn't come close to a 670 if you compared quad SLI GTX 465 to a single 670. It wouldn't take benchmarks to see a huge difference between a single GTX 465 and a single GTX 670 because you could see it for yourself. I'd prefer a Radeon 7900 card over it, but that doesn't change the fact that the 670 is far ahead of the GTX 465. I'm not saying that you have to upgrade or even that you should upgrade unless you want to, but if you're truly considering it, then it might help to know just how much of an upgrade it would be.

 

[jaquith]

My sentiments exactly.

and jacqui, enough with the benchmarks already, you're getting a bit carried away.

Listen, clearly you're a noob, it took me maybe 30 seconds of looking at Don's first review for me to figure out he runs AMD. My best guess is he got them for free and feels an AMD loyalty, plus he discovered a long know fact that the nVidia has a weakness namely MSAA above x4 (8xMSAA serves no purpose). Truth being told I've gotten free ASUS, Intel and Corsair but I keep objective. So Don apparently decided to exploit this weakness to convince folks (noobs aka sheep in particular) with no working knowledge that nVidia sucks and AMD rules without telling you or showing you the other forms of AA which aren't nearly as impactful and work just as good if not better. Further, in higher nVidia's where Adaptive vSync makes a huge impact he flopped right over it; real world the average frame rates are much higher when employed and no tearing.

Now in games some are better in raw (bench only) for AMD and others for nVidia. That's the way it is, and some games receive AMD's influence and others nVidia for optimization.

I've been to a degree playing nice, and this response isn't directed in anyway at Don. So until you know a fraction of what I or Don know -- zip it and don't respond or quote me again.

Learn how to spell or copy/paste, it's Jaquith.

 

[blazorthon]

Listen, clearly you're a noob, it took me maybe 30 seconds of looking at Don's first review for me to figure out he runs AMD. My best guess is he got them for free and feels an AMD loyalty, plus he discovered a long know fact that the nVidia has a weakness namely MSAA above x4 (8xMSAA serves no purpose). Truth being told I've gotten free ASUS, Intel and Corsair but I keep objective. So Don apparently decided to exploit this weakness to convince folks (noobs aka sheep in particular) with no working knowledge that nVidia sucks and AMD rules without telling you or showing you the other forms of AA which aren't nearly as impactful and work just as good if not better. Further, in higher nVidia's where Adaptive vSync makes a huge impact he flopped right over it; real world the average frame rates are much higher when employed and no tearing.

Now in games some are better in raw (bench only) for AMD and others for nVidia. That's the way it is, and some games receive AMD's influence and others nVidia for optimization.

I've been to a degree playing nice, and this response isn't directed in anyway at Don. So until you know a fraction of what I or Don know -- zip it and don't respond or quote me again.

Learn how to spell or copy/paste, it's Jaquith.

I still disagree about 8xMSAA serving no purpose, but considering other types of AA in some tests doesn't seem unreasonable. I wonder how CSAA, SSAA, and others would change things up. TXAA when supported, also seems to be quite the advantage over MSAA for Nvidia, although it seems to be more of an equalizer rather than flipping the advantage to Nvidia over AMD.

 

[cangelini]

The irony in some of these posts is so thick...

 

[cleeve]

Listen, clearly you're a noob, it took me maybe 30 seconds of looking at Don's first review for me to figure out he runs AMD.

Actually, running a n i7-920 and 680 Lightning ATM. That doesn't mean I'm an AMD hater, either, it simply means it's the hardware I currently use in my main machine. I tend to swap graphics cards as the mood suits me.

My best guess is he got them for free and feels an AMD loyalty, plus he discovered a long know fact that the nVidia has a weakness namely MSAA above x4 (8xMSAA serves no purpose).

Your best guess sucks. Can you not acknowledge that other opinions are just as valid, even if they conflict with your own?

So Don apparently decided to exploit this weakness to convince folks (noobs aka sheep in particular) with no working knowledge that nVidia sucks and AMD rules without telling you or showing you the other forms of AA which aren't nearly as impactful and work just as good if not better. Further, in higher nVidia's where Adaptive vSync makes a huge impact he flopped right over it; real world the average frame rates are much higher when employed and no tearing.

That I find 8x MSAA more important than adaptive Vsync doesn't make me wrong, Jaquith. it doesn't make me biased, either. It means I disagree with you, and I find it interesting that you can't accept this without concocting a conspiracy theory.

I haven't once called you an AMD hater or an Nvidia lover because your opinion doesn't sync with mine. Why do you feel the need to do otherwise?

Do you feel that you can cheapen someone's counter-argument by suggesting they're biased, instead of arguing the topic?

I've made some very valid points why Vsync isn't all that important to me Jaquith, don't pretend they don't exist. They can mean less to you than they do to me, certainly, but baseless accusations of brand favoritism are lame.

When you're calling everyone who doesn't agree with you an Nvidia-hater and AMD-lover, it might be time to look in the mirror and ask yourself who truly has an unreasonable bias.

 

[sicom]

Only half a gig of RAM - that's a real problem for modding Skyrim with HD packs.