Friday, September 21st 2012
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Specifications Detailed
Post the September 13 launch of GeForce GTX 660 and GTX 650, a wide performance gap between the two is more than evident, and we've known for a few weeks now that NVIDIA isn't stopping at the GTX 660, at harvesting its GK106 silicon. There are more sections of the media with plausible specifications of what is being referred to as the GeForce GTX 650 Ti, an SKU designed to let NVIDIA fill the US $130-$220 price-range, between the GTX 650 and GTX 660.
According to these new set of specifications, the GTX 650 Ti is indeed based on the GK106 silicon, but with an entire GPC disabled, resulting in a CUDA core count of 576, and TMU count of 48. The memory bus width appears to have been reduced to 128-bit, with a standard memory amount of 1 GB. With a memory clock speed of 1350 MHz (5.40 GHz GDDR5-effective), a memory bandwidth of 86 GB/s is achieved. The GPU is clocked at 960 MHz, there is no GPU Boost feature. With the given configuration, the GPU TDP is expected to be no more than 85W.
Sources:
ArabPCWorld, VideoCardz
According to these new set of specifications, the GTX 650 Ti is indeed based on the GK106 silicon, but with an entire GPC disabled, resulting in a CUDA core count of 576, and TMU count of 48. The memory bus width appears to have been reduced to 128-bit, with a standard memory amount of 1 GB. With a memory clock speed of 1350 MHz (5.40 GHz GDDR5-effective), a memory bandwidth of 86 GB/s is achieved. The GPU is clocked at 960 MHz, there is no GPU Boost feature. With the given configuration, the GPU TDP is expected to be no more than 85W.
20 Comments on NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Specifications Detailed
Obviously a rumor, but if 8800 is indeed 1792/1536 with 199 and 279 price tags, I would think it realistic 8700 would be roughly half that and the 8750 will be a response to this part...slighlty more ipc and slightly lower clock (and perhaps clock potential) causing them to be roughly similar. Considering how cheap the <200mm chips from amd tend to get fairly quickly (ex: juniper), I would think plausible that an 896sp 8770 replaces 7700 to compete with such a 768sp nvidia part at around 6870 performance and $120 real price (7850 and 7870 going to 140/160/180) and these are ~$100. Not a huge budget boon, but these parts rarely are.
This is my thinking: It can't beat 7850 (just as 660 can't beat 7870 and is relegated to being competition for 7850) clocked at 980mhz and this will beat 7770. Why make an sku out of gpus that possibly could be going to 660's, crowd the market, and lower profit margins when there is no competition? You don't.
It will likely come around the time the 8700 is launched. Knowing nvidia, probably clocked the smallest fraction faster at stock, because 8770/'655' will probably perform clock-per-clock very similar. (If 8770 is 1100mhz, it will be 1111mhz or something). If it comes earlier it will detract from 660 because it will need to be clocked higher so it isn't instantly made a joke by 8770.
Had they even released it as a GT650 (GK107), while this as the GTX650ti (GK106) it would have been less devious, but this is just plainly unscrupulous. Though I've learned to expect no less from green marketing... this is a new low! :shadedshu
GTX 560 SE / 560 / 560 Ti - GF114
GTX 560 TI OEM / 560 Ti 448 Core = GF110
...not that long ago surely?Hey, at least the GTX 680 and GTX 680M are both GK 104 silicon...HD 7970 owners get Tahiti, while HD 7970M owners get Pitcairn*, and I'm still waiting for an intelligent explanation for AMD's hybrid Crossfire marketing/naming scheme
* Oops, I forgot - owners of mobile systems don't count.
The real evil is when fraudsters slip 650 cards into 650Ti boxes (and 560 into 560Ti boxes, etc). This goes all the way back to fraudsters slipping 64-bit TNT2 (M64) cards into the 128-bit labeled boxes at least.
And yes mobile and OEM… I don’t worry all that much. Life too short to keep track of all the varmints in every pasture, but if you do that fine.
what's with the Ti name lately? An excuse to make a slower non-Ti version? (GTX650)
Man, nVidia, Intel and AMD all have idiots in their product naming division as far as I'm can tell...