GTX 660.

[spixelspixel]

ughgh ok i went off on one there
I just feel like these cards should be about 150 and the ti should be in this 180-200 price range.

That would be in an ideal world (for buyers).. but remember there's lots of other cards in lower price ranges. If they drop the price of these mid range cards then lower range ones will have to be dropped accordingly which wouldn't make sense for nvidia/amd

Considering the 660 offers 570/580ish performance while using lower power and costing half the price of a 580 at release date, I think its priced alright.

 

[D13]

This is nvidia they don't give a damn as they rule the top end market which is where the big money is.

yeah all these big corp dont give a damn about nothing but their bottom line.

What i really hate looking ta these reviews, is a lot of games the 660 is on par with ti but certain games it just falls to pieces.

e.g look at the hardware canuck (i like them as they show minimum fps)

arkam city and witcher, the 660 sucks ass compared to a ti.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...views/56674-nvidia-gtx-660-2gb-review-10.html

So i say hmm ok performance wise I cant be buying one of these 660 no way in hell. SO I need to fork out that extra for the ti, just ****es me off. Especially when people are in general spending much less due to low employment etc..

 

[Mei]

ive never understood that benchmark, no one plays batman^^
the bf3 benchmark there more interesting to me
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...views/56674-nvidia-gtx-660-2gb-review-11.html
7870 winning on the lows

 

[Spenty]

The mid range is where the big money is, due to volume of sales.

I'm afraid you're wrong, if the mid range meant that much there is no way in hell nvidia would have let the 7850's dominate that market for 6 months.

 

[humbug]

Most places seem to imply its fairly priced... but a bit high to be a clear recommendation as its priced exactly the same as the 7870 while offering the same level of performance in general.

It a better pricing strategy from nvidia this time, its £60 cheaper than the GTX 660ti while managing to be only 8% slower than the 7870, but is 17% slower than the GTX 660ti, at the res most use them for (1920 x 1080P) its 9% slower than the 7870.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_660/27.html

And faster in all cases than the GTX 570, thank you!

Not bad, the 7870 and 7950 still make more sense to me but unlike everything above GTX 660 it it's no longer so black and white.

Yet AMD look like they are in for yet another round of price drops.
If the 7870 loses another £10 / £15 and the 7950 another £20 / £30..... it suddenly becomes an easy choice again.

 

[psychodil]

I'm afraid you're wrong, if the mid range meant that much there is no way in hell nvidia would have let the 7850's dominate that market for 6 months.

The enthusiast market is small in comparison to the thousands of OEM computers that are built with GPU's inside. Most of these are low-mid end GPU's.

In terms of profit/unit then yes, the high end is the most profitable. but in terms of total profit, the mid range is where the money is.

Nvidia were late to the party this generation, in terms of high end, mid range and low range.

Example: Aston martin make much more profit per car than say a ford focus. But overall due to sheer number of sales, the focus is the more profitable car.

 

[FoxEye]

660 non ti is on another level than the 460 tbh (in general)

Here's the deal:

The 460 cost £150 two years ago. The 660 is a 50-70% improvement, two years later, and for £180.

Now the 460 can still play games with medium/high settings and no AA. I know because I still use one

For £180, you may or may not be able to have 2x/4x AA and use high/max settings, depending on the game. But you certainly won't be getting 60FPS in modern games. So you still have to settle for no AA or lower the settings.

So what are you really getting for £180? Well, 70% more FPS at your current settings. But it doesn't translate to being able to max out demanding games or use a lot of AA.

And £180 is a ton of money in this current climate (for low paid people, it seems this forum isn't typical of earners in the UK at this time).

 

[Spenty]

The enthusiast market is small in comparison to the thousands of OEM computers that are built with GPU's inside. Most of these are low-mid end GPU's.

In terms of profit/unit then yes, the high end is the most profitable. but in terms of total profit, the mid range is where the money is.

Nvidia were late to the party this generation, in terms of high end, mid range and low range.

Example: Aston martin make much more profit per car than say a ford focus. But overall due to sheer number of sales, the focus is the more profitable car.

I think you'll find the enthusiast market still takes a good share overall. Many people while not buying the top card e.g. 680 will buy the 670 which is still classed as top end.

 

[Mei]

The enthusiast market is small in comparison to the thousands of OEM computers that are built with GPU's inside. Most of these are low-mid end GPU's.

In terms of profit/unit then yes, the high end is the most profitable. but in terms of total profit, the mid range is where the money is.

Nvidia were late to the party this generation, in terms of high end, mid range and low range.

Example: Aston martin make much more profit per car than say a ford focus. But overall due to sheer number of sales, the focus is the more profitable car.

yeh if you take that to the mobile market, all the 640s and 650s in laptops/macs

 

[psychodil]

I think you'll find the enthusiast market still takes a good share overall. Many people while not buying the top card e.g. 680 will buy the 670 which is still classed as top end.

Its still small fry compared to the numbers of pre built PC's and laptops that are assembled for businesses and for dell, PC world etc. Which all have mostly low-mid end cards.

 

[Spenty]

Its still small fry compared to the numbers of pre built PC's and laptops that are assembled for businesses and for dell, PC world etc. Which all have mostly low-mid end cards.

Well low end is around equal share between AMD and Nvidia I'd say anyway. Both cheap and do what they're supposed to do. AMD rule mid range, Nvidia rule top end so it balances itself out I think. That's why Nvidia aren't interested in price matching AMD in my opinion.

 

[Rusty0611]

But the 660Ti is faster than the 7870 so your figures don't add up.

 

[humbug]

Well low end is around equal share between AMD and Nvidia I'd say anyway. Both cheap and do what they're supposed to do. AMD rule mid range, Nvidia rule top end so it balances itself out I think. That's why Nvidia aren't interested in price matching AMD in my opinion.

I think they will have to change that stance at some point due to the fact that the 7970 is the same price as a GTX 670 and faster, certainly when overclocked, even the 7950 can get so close to the GTX 670 overclock vs overclocked it make very little difference, the 7950 seems to have sold very well since its price drop.

nvidia don't like to match AMD on price, what they try and do instead is pretend they are much better and worth more, in most cases a lot more money.

As a result nvidia don't have a step up range (as such), every card from the GTX 660ti to the GTX 680 are within about 20% of eachother and priced from the top silly price to the GTX 660ti being just overpriced.

Its just a cluster of roughly similar performing cards, and all very expensive.

It's a good strategy as most are not in the know and buy into it, but it keeps GPU prices very much inflated.

It's a good job we have AMD who just use the (undercut them) strategy, and i hope they keep going like as the last thing i want to see is both sides taking the nvidia strategy. We will all end up with overpriced similar performing cards.

 

[Rusty0611]

I think they will have to change that stance at some point due to the fact that the 7970 is the same price as a GTX 670 and faster, certainly when overclocked, even the 7950 can get so close to the GTX 670 overclock vs overclocked it make very little difference, the 7950 seems to have sold very well since its price drop.

nvidia don't like to match AMD on price, what they try and do instead is pretend they are much better and worth more, in most cases a lot more money.

As a result nvidia don't have a step up range (as such), every card from the GTX 660ti to the GTX 680 are within about 20% of eachother and priced from the top silly price to the GTX 660ti being just overpriced.

Its just a cluster of roughly similar performing cards, and all very expensive.

It's a good strategy as most are not in the know and buy into it, but it keep GPU prices very much inflated.

It's a good job we have AMD who just use the (undercut them) strategy, and i hope they keep going like and as the last thing i want to see is both sides taking the nvidia strategy.

While that may be true now a lot of people bought their nVidia cards when they were cheaper than their AMD perfomance equivalent.

Buying now is completely different to buying when the 670/680 was released.

What about the masses of people who bought 7*** cards when they were, I quote: 'expensive' as well? Are AMD really blameless in this high prices "culture"? You're making them out like they're Robin Hood when they're just as bad. They just chose to drop prices now.

 

[FoxEye]

Yet AMD look like they are in for yet another round of price drops.If the 7870 loses another £10 / £15 and the 7950 another £20 / £30..... it suddenly becomes an easy choice again.

Sadly Gibbo has been on record to say this isn't going to happen

 

[psychodil]

But the 660Ti is faster than the 7870 so your figures don't add up.

make sense to me.

660 is 8% slower than a 7870.
660 is 17% slower than a 660TI.

Therefore a 660TI is faster than a 7870.

(all stock clocks of course)

 

[Rusty0611]

make sense to me.

660 is 8% slower than a 7870.
660 is 17% slower than a 660TI.

Therefore a 660TI is faster than a 7870.

(all stock clocks of course)

You're right I misread. Too many 6's flying around .

 

[psychodil]

I partly disagree with Humbug. I think now that the 680 and the 660TI are a bit out of place in the market in terms of price/performance, but the 660 and 670 are in a good place in terms of stock performance/price.

The nvidia cards do have a little premium, and its up to the individual whether thatds worth it. Some people want the physx, folding at home power, etc etc and are prepared to pay a small premium for it.

 

[psychodil]

You're right I misread. Too many 6's flying around .

Stop looking at your scalp in the mirror then

 

[humbug]

While that may be true now a lot of people bought their nVidia cards when they were cheaper than their AMD perfomance equivalent.

Buying now is completely different to buying when the 670/680 was released.

Yeah, i agree. AMD are no angles, there 7970 price on release was insane!

But, i hope AMD do knock another £20 / £30 off the 7950 to force this GPU price inflation to an end.

@ psychodil, Physx can be codded into any game without the need for such a thing. BF3 has it in abundance and no Physx. AMD are now doing something which to me is far more important, like using OpenCL Direct Compute to render AA and lighting effects.

That's AMD's Physx if you like.