GeForce GTX 650 Ti Final Specifications Out

[btarunr]

Sources among retailers confirmed what could be the finalized specifications of NVIDIA's upcoming GeForce GTX 650 Ti graphics processor. Some of these specifications were first leaked when Newegg.com accidentally listed Galaxy GTX 650 Ti GC. According to the sources, the GTX 650 Ti, which is based on the 28 nm GK106 silicon, will carry the ASIC label "GK106-220," it will be configured with 768 CUDA cores (and not 576, as earlier believed).

GeForce GTX 650 Ti will have a narrower 128-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, holding 1 GB of memory. The source also revealed NVIDIA-reference clock speeds to be 925 MHz core, with 1350 MHz (5.40 GHz GDDR5-effective) memory, churning up 86.4 GB/s memory bandwidth. The chip's TDP is rated at 110W, and cards based on it feature one 6-pin PCIe power connector. According to older reports, the GTX 650 Ti is slated for October 9.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Ikaruga]

110W sounds way too high for that card, I expect much lower numbers from reviews.

 

[Hustler]

Too many cards, too many model numbers....all of them overpriced.

 

[Fourstaff]

Too many cards, too many model numbers....all of them overpriced.

There is a gaping hole between 650 and 660, and everything 660Ti and above (and 7850 for AMD) are priced very competitively compared to last generation, so I am not sure what you are talking about.

 

[_Flare]

expensive and bottlenecked

Maybe Expensive and surely bottlenecked, like the GTX660 is. Where is the powerconsumption-advantage here?

I will buy a 2GB 7850 or 7850 before the 650Ti Release because the Prices will go up after that.

 

[Ikaruga]

There is a gaping hole between 650 and 660, and everything 660Ti and above (and 7850 for AMD) are priced very competitively compared to last generation, so I am not sure what you are talking about.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. I think that - if you are a gamer - everything about Kepler is truly awesome so far, except one thing and that's the price.

 

[Benetanegia]

What's the price anyway. I see people complaiing and not a single price figure anywhere.

And GTX660 bottleneck? Not at all. The 660 Ti is bottlenecked in some situations, 660 is not. GTX650 will be bottlenecked? Maybe, but not as sure as 660 Ti:

660 Ti SP to MC ratio - 1344 / 192 bit = 7
650 Ti SP to MC ratio - 768 / 128 bit = 6
670 - 1344 / 256 = 5.2
680 - 1536 / 256 = 6

Same ratio as the GTX 680. Now is the 680 bottleneck? hmmmmm yeeeeah. Did that small bottleneck prevent it from being highly competitive? Nope.

 

[Fourstaff]

Sorry, but I have to disagree. I think that - if you are a gamer - everything about Kepler is truly awesome so far, except one thing and that's the price.

Price compared to? A random arbitrary number like MSRP doesn't mean anything if you don't compare it with another. Its all relative. Also, you will have to take account of various other bits like inflation, exchange rate etc.

 

[okidna]

So what kind of performance we might expect from this card? Something between GTX560 and 560Ti?

 

[Fourstaff]

So what kind of performance we might expect from this card? Something between GTX560 and 560Ti?

Judging by specs, I would say about 75% of 660, so about 560Ti performance. I think there is a very good chance board makers will bump the clocks upwards, giving closer to 80% performance of 660, or about 6950 (and just under 7850).

 

[Ikaruga]

Price compared to?

cards based on AMD chips with "similar" performance or targeting the same market segment.

 

[KainXS]

should be about GTX560Ti performance, does not look that bad though, wish its TDP was lower though but if its 16 rops unlike most of the other cards in the kepler series I don't see the sm's and rops bottlenecking eachother which is nice.

 

[Benetanegia]

wish its TDP was lower though

I like it the way it is. This is not Fermi, I think that most if not all Kepler cards have shown lower than TDP typical power consumption so a relatively high TDP is not bad and 110w is not really high. The reason I don't mind relatively high TDPs is because, remember what TDP really is and what it's for. High TDP "forces" manufacturers to use a bigger cooler and fan, instead of those tiny and whiny fans that we're used to seing in low-end cards.

 

[Fourstaff]

cards based on AMD chips with "similar" performance or targeting the same market segment.

Lets take a look (newegg prices, cheapest):
7750 $89
650 $117
7770 $120
You are paying 31% more for same performance (7750 vs 650), or
negligible more for +23% performance (7770, 650)
Hands down AMD wins here, 77x0 has been around for ages, so this is expected

7850 $175
660 $230
7870 $245
660Ti $300
+31% for +13% (7850, 660) AMD wins again
+6.5% for +5.7% (660, 7870) too close to call, esp when individual games are taken to account
+22% for 9.8% (7870, 660Ti) AMD wins again (see next bit)

7950 $300
660Ti $300
670 $380
7970 $390
680 $480
7970 Ghz $450
0% for +1% (7950, 660Ti) same
2.6% for +2.6% (670, 7970) same
23% for 6% (7970, 680) we have firmly arrived in diminishing returns here, so take a look at the next before passing judgement
-6.7% for +2.4% (680, 7970 GHz) AMD wins this one

Interesting bits:
For 660/7850, 660Ti/7950 Nvidia is not losing price/perf.
For the rest AMD has a slim to clear lead.

It is worth noting that 6950 $180 is still around, but is slightly less powerful and price efficient than 7850. Also, GTX 570 can be had for $230, and is more or less equal to GTX 660.

Conclusion
AMD is cheaper, but only on certain products. The only lemon in the bunch is the new 650, and Nvidia's holes in the lineup. GTX 680 is also disappointing, but not as bad. So unless you are buying budget stuff (7770 and below), or going for the best of the best (7970 Ghz), going either company will do you not much wrong. Power consumption figures are close enough not to matter, but Nvidia seems to hold a slight edge most of the time. Also, AMD's lineup has been around for longer than Nvidia's, so situation might change slightly in the future, or when 8000 series comes out.

 

[Crap Daddy]

Lets take a look (newegg prices, cheapest):
7750 $89
650 $117
7770 $120
You are paying 31% more for same performance (7750 vs 650), or
negligible more for +23% performance (7770, 650)
Hands down AMD wins here, 77x0 has been around for ages, so this is expected

7850 $175
660 $230
7870 $245
660Ti $300
+31% for +13% (7850, 660) AMD wins again
+6.5% for +5.7% (660, 7870) too close to call, esp when individual games are taken to account
+22% for 9.8% (7870, 660Ti) AMD wins again (see next bit)

7950 $300
660Ti $300
670 $380
7970 $390
680 $480
7970 Ghz $450
0% for +1% (7950, 660Ti) same
2.6% for +2.6% (670, 7970) same
23% for 6% (7970, 680) we have firmly arrived in diminishing returns here, so take a look at the next before passing judgement
-6.7% for +2.4% (680, 7970 GHz) AMD wins this one

Interesting bits:
For 660/7850, 660Ti/7950 Nvidia is not losing price/perf.
For the rest AMD has a slim to clear lead.

It is worth noting that 6950 $180 is still around, but is slightly less powerful and price efficient than 7850. Also, GTX 570 can be had for $230, and is more or less equal to GTX 660.

Conclusion
AMD is cheaper, but only on certain products. The only lemon in the bunch is the new 650, and Nvidia's holes in the lineup. GTX 680 is also disappointing, but not as bad. So unless you are buying budget stuff (7770 and below), or going for the best of the best (7970 Ghz), going either company will do you not much wrong. Power consumption figures are close enough not to matter, but Nvidia seems to hold a slight edge most of the time. Also, AMD's lineup has been around for longer than Nvidia's, so situation might change slightly in the future, or when 8000 series comes out.

Nice comparison stuff. Now, if we look at the performance hierarchy for the cards in the 600 and 7000 series things look like this:

680 - 7970
670 - 7950
660Ti - 7870
660 - 7850
650Ti -7770
650 - 7750

In each comparison Nvidia wins hands down. But then AMD's successive price cuts come into effect changing completely the situation as we now compare the 670 to 7970, 7950 to the 660Ti and so on. Nvidia seems happy with their prices, they know their business so I'm not commenting but this situation makes many AMD cards from this generation more appealing today.

 

[Benetanegia]

Nvidia seems happy with their prices

And of course they are. And of course they have 0 pressure on lowering prices, more so its partners. You just have to take a look at this to understand:

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

DX11 cards

GTX 670 1.6% +0.25%
vs
HD 7970 0.6% +0.0%
vs
GTX 680 1.24% +0.24%

GTX 660 Ti 0.50% +0.50%
vs
HD 7950 0.46% +0.10%
vs
HD7870 0.48% +0.14

I mean really in just 1 month 660 Ti has catched up with AMD cards that have been 9 months in the market*. It's simply no contest there.
And I'd say it's all AMD's fault an no one else's, AMD is better value NOW, no doubt, but at launch of all those Nvidia cards, Nvidia's value was much much better and you just can't let the brand with strongest recognition have such an impact on reviews.

*It's also significative that 20%+ of AMD cards' volume has happened this past month, that is, after price reductions.

 

[Ikaruga]

Lets take a look (newegg prices, cheapest):
7750 $89
650 $117
7770 $120
You are paying 31% more for same performance (7750 vs 650), or
negligible more for +23% performance (7770, 650)
Hands down AMD wins here, 77x0 has been around for ages, so this is expected

7850 $175
660 $230
7870 $245
660Ti $300
+31% for +13% (7850, 660) AMD wins again
+6.5% for +5.7% (660, 7870) too close to call, esp when individual games are taken to account
+22% for 9.8% (7870, 660Ti) AMD wins again (see next bit)

7950 $300
660Ti $300
670 $380
7970 $390
680 $480
7970 Ghz $450
0% for +1% (7950, 660Ti) same
2.6% for +2.6% (670, 7970) same
23% for 6% (7970, 680) we have firmly arrived in diminishing returns here, so take a look at the next before passing judgement
-6.7% for +2.4% (680, 7970 GHz) AMD wins this one

Interesting bits:
For 660/7850, 660Ti/7950 Nvidia is not losing price/perf.
For the rest AMD has a slim to clear lead.

It is worth noting that 6950 $180 is still around, but is slightly less powerful and price efficient than 7850. Also, GTX 570 can be had for $230, and is more or less equal to GTX 660.

Conclusion
AMD is cheaper, but only on certain products. The only lemon in the bunch is the new 650, and Nvidia's holes in the lineup. GTX 680 is also disappointing, but not as bad. So unless you are buying budget stuff (7770 and below), or going for the best of the best (7970 Ghz), going either company will do you not much wrong. Power consumption figures are close enough not to matter, but Nvidia seems to hold a slight edge most of the time. Also, AMD's lineup has been around for longer than Nvidia's, so situation might change slightly in the future, or when 8000 series comes out.

Just to make things clear I favor Kepler when it comes to video cards. I'm not an Nvidia fanboy, I would buy AMD cards if they were better, but I'm an avid gamer and they offer better value for me (e.g.: Ambient occlusion, Physx, tweaking).
However I was talking about (just like the context of this thread) the segment of the 650ti, where (and generally all around low end cards) AMD is clearly cheaper. You jumping at me with comparing the entire market, but I don't understand why.

ps.: and about the comparison: what resolution and with what settings may I ask, 8xAA and ultra high res is not for Kepler for example, so usage and situation matters.

 

[btarunr]

What's the price anyway.

Rumored to be $149.99.

 

[Crap Daddy]

However I was talking about (just like the context of this thread) the segment of the 650ti, where (and generally all around low end cards) AMD is clearly cheaper. You jumping at me with comparing the entire market, but I don't understand why.

Low end means 7770 and 7750 from AMD. NV has the GTX650 out which is slightly faster than the 7750 and costs 10$ more. In a few days the 650Ti will be launched at a rumored price of 150$. Based on last leaked specs this card will be closer to the 180$ 7850 than to the 120$ HD7770. I don't see "clearly cheaper" option here from AMD.

 

[Benetanegia]

the segment of the 650ti[/B], where (and generally all around low end cards) AMD is clearly cheaper

You are correct, but we are talking about two cards really GTX 650 and GTX660.

With 650 it boils down to GK107 sucks and Nvidia doesn't give a flying fuck about how many of them they sell on retail, because they are selling them like hotcakes to OEMs and any extra sales beyond meeting those contracts would only lead to them having to compromise (even further) the wafer allocation for the much more profitable GK104 and GK106.

And then GTX 660. Only reason AMD is better is because they cut prices significantly before its launch, with old prices 660 would top them. AMD finally did what it was required. I don't expect Nvidia to lower prices for the same reason other Nvidia cards are still on launch prices. They sell, they sell extremely well, probably as fast as TSMC can make them.

 

[Ikaruga]

Low end means 7770 and 7750 from AMD. NV has the GTX650 out which is slightly faster than the 7750 and costs 10$ more. In a few days the 650Ti will be launched at a rumored price of 150$. Based on last leaked specs this card will be closer to the 180$ 7850 than to the 120$ HD7770. I don't see "clearly cheaper" option here from AMD.

You have a valid point there, but you have to look price figures the same way how the target segment would look at it when they are buying cards, and not by the numbers we enthusiasts watch and care about.
If you look up all the reviews about the GTX 650 (here on TPU for example), you will find that all the conclusion have the very same line which states: "Price too high to make it competitive" as a con. And that's not a reviewer mistake, those cards should be cheaper because people will pick cheaper AMD cards in that segment.

Now that I know about the $150 btarunr just mentioned, that's a very good one indeed. The question is now that how much AMD will cut off from their prices, and how faster this card will be compared to the 7770-7850 ones.

You are correct, but we are talking about two cards really GTX 650 and GTX660.

With 650 it boils down to GK107 sucks and Nvidia doesn't give a flying fuck about how many of them they sell on retail, because they are selling them like hotcakes to OEMs and any extra sales beyond meeting those contracts would only lead to them having to compromise (even further) the wafer allocation for the much more profitable GK104 and GK106.

And then GTX 660. Only reason AMD is better is because they cut prices significantly before its launch, with old prices 660 would top them. AMD finally did what it was required. I don't expect Nvidia to lower prices for the same reason other Nvidia cards are still on launch prices. They sell, they sell extremely well, probably as fast as TSMC can make them.

I think that the 650 is another example how good Kepler really is, that TPU's MSI GTX 650 test showed some truly remarkable low-end capabilities of the chip

I agree with the rest

 

[Fourstaff]

Just to make things clear I favor Kepler when it comes to video cards. I'm not an Nvidia fanboy, I would buy AMD cards if they were better, but I'm an avid gamer and they offer better value for me (e.g.: Ambient occlusion, Physx, tweaking).
However I was talking about (just like the context of this thread) the segment of the 650ti, where (and generally all around low end cards) AMD is clearly cheaper. You jumping at me with comparing the entire market, but I don't understand why.

ps.: and about the comparison: what resolution and with what settings may I ask, 8xAA and ultra high res is not for Kepler for example, so usage and situation matters.

Anything lower than 7850-660 (~$200) is not really bang for buck at the moment, and doesn't even have a complete lineup, for example you get 7750 just under $100 and then 7770 at $120, and then nothing until 7850 at $175. Nothing at $150 point, the sweet spot has moved upwards to about $200 so things appear to be more expensive. Same story for Nvidia, in fact they only have 650 (overpriced), and then nothing else in the $100-200 category other than last gen 560 to fill in the gaps.

 

[Casecutter]

Well a GK160 with that one "odd man out" GPC cut... and that un-need memory controller axed necessitating 128-Bit, color me surprised!

I think reference these will be right at a 560Ti, and while better performance/watt I think it will be closure to a 7770, while not as good as the 7870. MSRP for reference $180 if anyone actually releases something in such trim. What you see is the typical marketing and promoting of "Über clocked customs", which will proliferate with all kind of wild shrouds and box’s.

The catch is AMD's AIB's will be all releasing 1Gb 7850 and they will end up priced better and will outshine. Then in a couple of months AMD will have their Oland GPU ready, and Nvidia will have to relinquish their price by 25-30% to stay competitive in Christmas buying season.

 

[EpicShweetness]

My only input is that were gonna see some SKU (650LE, GTS 640), something to fill that gap between the 650 and 660 (even 650ti for that matter). The performance difference and price difference make no sense. Even with 768 (or for that matter 576) the performance of GK106 is FAR more then GK107 could hope to achieve. So idk, 650 need to drop like $20 or more! A 768 Keplar based Core, is gonna blow a 7770 out the water, and give A 7850 a run for it money, and we already know the 650 is dreadfully behind a 7770, so wtf?

 

[Casecutter]

fill that gap between the 650 and 660

Ah this is it. Though you are probably right they still may try... (650LE, GTS 640), but I'd say they'd pull out a GTX655 SE!