• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

660ti or a 7950 for 1920*1200 gaming?

thedoc46

thedoc46

thedoc46

Soldato
Joined
18 Jan 2003
Posts
5,995
Location
Expat in the USA
I know the 7950 has more overall grunt, but at that res isn't the 660ti slightly better?

Isn't it only at the higher res that the 660ti starts to lose out.

I already have a 7950 in my main machine, this is for my secondary machine, that is a 3570k and currently running 5770'x x-fired. I want to switch those out, and not able to decide whether to go with nVidia for a change on the 660ti, or stick with what i know, the 7950.

I only ever game at 1920 x 1200

COD series
SF Arcade Edition.
& Whatever other FPS's or games are on a steam sale. :p
 
Basically if you tend to have a preference for AMD, get a 7950. If you have a preference for NVidia get a 660ti... in actual games there's a few fps either way so it comes down to whether you tend which you prefer

I'd wait a few weeks either way as there will definitely be price drops on the 660 and no doubt amd will drop prices to compete
 
thedoc46 said:
I know the 7950 has more overall grunt, but at that res isn't the 660ti slightly better?

Isn't it only at the higher res that the 660ti starts to lose out.

I already have a 7950 in my main machine, this is for my secondary machine, that is a 3570k and currently running 5770'x x-fired. I want to switch those out, and not able to decide whether to go with nVidia for a change on the 660ti, or stick with what i know, the 7950.

I only ever game at 1920 x 1200

COD series
SF Arcade Edition.
& Whatever other FPS's or games are on a steam sale. :p
Click to expand...

You will be taking a 15% step down going to GTX 660ti, even i would be stepping down from my 7870.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/geforce-gtx-660-ti-benchmark-review,review-32505-17.html

7970 = 141.3%
GTX 670= 126.5%
7950= 120.5%
7870= 110.7%
GTX 660ti = 107.4%
GTX 580 = 100%

Andnd Tech used factory overclocked GTX 660ti's against reference stock Radeon's, completely skewing the results in the GTX 660ti's favour.

Don't do it, you would kill your Gaming performance, the GTX 660ti only has 24 Rop's and a miserable 192Bit memory bus strangling its own GPU
 
Last edited:
Humbug you're absolutely clueless mate. You keep posting the same thing all over the forum while completely ignoring the overall average analysis that CAT THE FIFTH did. I don't know if you're upset that your card is slower than a 660Ti or something...

Here is how the 660Ti actually performs:

GTX660TIrelativeperformance.png


Try to argue that the review you keep quoting is more reliable than all the reviews averaged out. I would love to see you try.

Ignore Humbug's nonsense above... he thinks that 2GB of VRAM isn't enough even while numerous users (including myself, whyscotty and oweneades) have proved it is and you need 3 graphics cards to max out 2GB of VRAM. People like this aren't generally worth paying much attention to.
 
Last edited:
Rusty0611 said:
Humbug you're absolutely clueless mate. You keep posting the same thing all over the forum while completely ignoring the overall average analysis that CAT THE FIFTH did. I don't know if you're upset that your card is slower than a 660Ti or something...

Here is how the 660Ti actually performs:

GTX660TIrelativeperformance.png


Try to argue that the review you keep quoting is more reliable than all the reviews averaged out. I would love to see you try.

Ignore Humbug's nonsense above... he thinks that 2GB of VRAM isn't enough even while numerous users (including myself, whyscotty and oweneades) have proved it is and you need 3 graphics cards to max out 2GB of VRAM. People like this aren't generally worth paying much attention to.
Click to expand...

You need to read Tom's link. http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/geforce-gtx-660-ti-benchmark-review,review-32505.html

Where is the review where that picture came from?

Andand review cards used:

Radeons: all reference.

GTX 660ti all factory overclocked, namely.

GTX 660 Ti SC at 980MHz for the base clock and 1059MHz for the boost clock (+10%)

GeForce GTX 660 Ti AMP at 1033MHz for the base clock and 1111MHz for the boost clock (+11%)

Like Zotac Gigabyte is pushing the base clock to 1033MHz and the boost clock to 1111MHz, representing a sizable 118MHz (13%) base overclock and a 131MHz (13%) boost overclock respectively.

Tom's had ALL cards at reference, the way it should be done for a proper review. Radeon's and Nvidia cards all have factory overclocked cards to different degrees.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6159/the-geforce-gtx-660-ti-review

----

Reference for reference looks like this.

7970 = 141.3%
GTX 670= 126.5%
7950= 120.5%
7870= 110.7%
GTX 660ti = 107.4%
GTX 580 = 100%

According to the settings we chose on a per-game basis, picked to maximize visual quality at playable frame rates, the GeForce GTX 660 Ti is close to, if not slightly slower than a Radeon HD 7870. We already know this runs counter to Nvidia's expectations, which put the new card between AMD's Radeon HD 7870 and 7950. However, after comparing lab results, the outcome of our testing appears tied to the way we picked settings for each game, likely taxing the 660 Ti's memory bandwidth more than less-demanding options would.

Perhaps our settings favour the Radeon cards. Perhaps theirs favour the GeForce-based boards. And maybe the most real-world outcome lies somewhere in between. But, I believe the truth is that GeForce GTX 660 Ti performs within 5%, plus or minus, of the Radeon HD 7870.

Frankly, a few percentage points doesn't sway our opinion one way or the other. Here's the real bottom-line: using our benchmark suite and settings, the GeForce GTX 660 Ti and Radeon HD 7870 trade blows. That fact alone justifies Nvidia's £250 price tag.

Your choice comes down to strengths, weaknesses, and features, then. If you don't tend to use anything more than 4x MSAA, the GeForce GTX 660 Ti will perform better than many of our results indicate, since you won't be taxing its memory subsystem as hard. Conversely, if you're a fan of lots of anti-aliasing, the Radeon cards
Click to expand...

The GTX 660ti in the real world is as good as the 7870. not better, and certainly not as good as the 7950.
 
Last edited:
^

You find one review, I'll counter it with another...

... wasn't intended as an argument.;)


Reviews are getting worse these days, they all get sponsored in one form or another, go figure who sponsors who with all the differing results using similar hardware/drivers.:(



@Op you use AMD, if your happy enough, then a clocked 7950 is a no brainer and it takes the vram dilema clean out the equation.

You need to be stark raving mad to go 660 over the custom His on offer @£240 if you don't need 3D Surround/work(Cuda).

If you change yearly, fair enough 2Gb will suffice.

If you keep a hold of your gpu for a few years, regardless of gpu grunt, I'd pay a ~£40(high end gpu) premium for peace of mind that £40 may get me 2xAA(or more if I was lucky) on top of what the 2Gb gpu could achieve, or just buy a similar priced 79 series with 3Gb.

Rusty0611 said:
you need 3 graphics cards to max out 2GB of VRAM
Click to expand...

:confused:

I can blooter 2Gb and hit a wall with 1 gpu@1080p, doesn't matter to me if it's unoptimised or not, if I want to add on mod after mod then more than 2Gb is what I'd aim for!;)

Right now, today, on stock titles, 2Gb is not a problem(if you mod up games then go figure, you'll soon find out;)), who knows what tomorrow brings.



:)
 
Last edited:
Humbug: if you'd actually read my post you'd see that is the average of all reviews. It's entertaining to keep seeing you revert back to the Tom's review. I'm not saying its invalid I'm saying that the average of all reviews is a far better barometer.

If you have issues with it I suggest you take it up with CAT THE FIFTH as he took the time to compile them.
 
Either will destroy SFIV and CoD games so a moot point to an extent! But I'd say 7950 purely for the fact you already have one so could crossfire it the minute you find a game you can't play on your main rig.
 
tommybhoy said:
F3 + NV can blooter it too, Witcher 2 mod tools are inbound also, let's see what happens there...

:p;):)
Click to expand...

That'll be nice (Witcher 2 mods). Really like the game and it's superb in 3D.

At the end of the day it's up to the user to decide what's more important: paying a large price premium for an extra 2GB (rip off prices I think actually from Nvidia); getting the AMD equivalent (if it has higher VRAM; or not running the unofficial mods.

I know what I'd do but I know as I say that it's down to individual users to decide :)

I'm sure you'll agree.
 
Last edited:
:eek:
Looking forward to witcher 2 mods :)

Already has some of the best textures I have ever seen in a game, great game too :)
I'm looking forward to maxxing out my vram on this game, hopefully somebody WL make a 4k texture pack :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom