GTX 660 vs GTX 660 Ti vs GTX 670 vs GTX 760 vs GTX 960 benchmarks

[ratirt]

Well I will have to do that if the FPS is not sufficient or I will experience stuttering in games. It's just they way it is for now. I didn't wanted to spend more cash for a card that will last maximum a year with me.
I shall try the titles mentioned in the link. I can say that Shadow of Mordor is a real vram consumer though.

Thanks

 

[Melvis]

Im very happy with the GTX 670 I just bought for $66 AUS ($40 USA) total bargin compared to a $200+ GTX 960.

 

[Zyll Goliat]

I had my GTX 660 TI(MSI PE OC)and I was thinking maybe to get the GTX 960....but as I love to OC and do some test´s myself...I had some excellent results and after seeing this....hmm now I am in dilema....

 

[peche]

well since got a new card the idea of sell my loved 680 still aches my heart.. what a video card

 

[Vario]

well since got a new card the idea of sell my loved 680 still aches my heart.. what a video card

I love my GK104 Kepler 770. Runs at 1254 core 1800 mem, never gets over 60 degrees, still works fine for 1440P, I just tweak the settings down. Might take me all the way to 2018. I should have bought the 4GB for $25 more, oh well.

 

[Zyll Goliat]

I love my GK104 Kepler 770. Runs at 1254 core 1800 mem, never gets over 60 degrees, still works fine for 1440P, I just tweak the settings down. Might take me all the way to 2018. I should have bought the 4GB for $25 more, oh well.

My memory on 660 TI is on 1835Mhz and core bosting on 1215Mhz....smooth as butter so far......Anyway I was thinking about GTX770 but it is a bit power hungry....not sure if my 500W PSU will handle that easily.....

 

[peche]

I love my GK104 Kepler 770. Runs at 1254 core 1800 mem, never gets over 60 degrees, still works fine for 1440P, I just tweak the settings down. Might take me all the way to 2018. I should have bought the 4GB for $25 more, oh well.

got a hot hot hot hot pretty hot deal on a GTX 980 4GB so its time for the loved 680 to serve someone else!

My memory on 660 TI is on 1835Mhz and core bosting on 1215Mhz....smooth as butter so far......Anyway I was thinking about GTX770 but it is a bit power hungry....not sure if my 500W PSU will handle that easily.....

GTX 770 its a quite solid card, when i oc'ed my clocks a my 680 could reach stock 770...

Regards,

 

[BlueFalcon]

I had my GTX 660 TI(MSI PE OC)and I was thinking maybe to get the GTX 960....but as I love to OC and do some test´s myself...I had some excellent results and after seeing this....hmm now I am in dilema....

You love wasting $? 960 is mediocre compared to everything else that's out there. A stock RX 470 is nearly 50% faster at 1080p. Just spend another $40-50 and get at least an RX 470 4GB. These cards are freely available for $150 on Newegg right now with a free Hitman game.

In modern games such as Rise of the Tomb Raider, RX 470 is 2X faster than a GTX960. It's also important to recognize that RX 470 4GB can deliver 50-60 fps in many AAA titles of 2016, while cards like GTX1050Ti/960 are doing 30-40 fps in the same games.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/gigabyte_geforce_gtx_1050_ti_g1_gaming_oc_review,12.html

On December 12th, Newegg will have $20 off $100 with Visa Checkout. It'll be possible to purchase an RX 470 4GB for $130 in just 4 days from now, but you'd better be quick.
https://slickdeals.net/f/9498864-20...sa-checkout?src=SiteSearchV2_SearchBarV2Algo1

Once overclocked RX 470 4GB becomes 60% faster than a GTX960 and crucially this performance levels comes in very close to a stock GTX1060/RX 480, cards that generally cost $200-250. That's a lot of value for a low-end videocard that most of the market is dismissing as NV's marketing means the hype is centered around the inferior GTX1050Ti and the much more expensive GTX1060 6GB.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_rx_470_4gb_review_powercolor,33.html

AMD also just released brand new Crimson drivers packed with the latest features, and AMD ReLive is faster than NV's ShadowPlay.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_Crimson_ReLive_Drivers/

There is no point buying a GTX960 level card as it's already outdated for 1080p gaming barely providing a gaming experience above PS4 non-Pro. Even at $90-100, the GTX960 isn't worth it when RX 470 4GB is going to be $130-150 because once 2017 games launch, 960 doesn't have any reserve headroom as it's already struggling in 2016 games.

If you prefer going NV route, then at least wait until 2017 when Pascal refreshes show up and you can pick up GTX1060 for cheaper.

well since got a new card the idea of sell my loved 680 still aches my heart.. what a video card

Why? One of the worst videocards of the last 5 years, outperformed by HD7970Ghz as of June 2012. Since then perfomrance took a nose dive and now the 680 is lucky to compete with an HD7870/R9 270X, and is even handily outperformed by the R9 380/285/HD7950 V2. The entire Kepler generation turned to be a failure after late 2014 when every GTX600-700 card fell off a cliff. It's gotten so bad in modern games that an HD7870Ghz = aka R9 270X is barely slower than a GTX770, while HD7970Ghz = aka R9 280X is right on the heels of the GTX780, a card that cost close to double in the year it was released with R9 280X.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/24.html

NV has long forgotten about Kepler driver support/optimizations, and it's prudent o move over to Pascal or GCN for anyone who wants to play games at 1080p over the next 2-3 years. It's why cards like GTX670 2GB sell for $40-50. No one wants them. The 680 was not only overpriced throughout its generation, had no architectural future-proofing built into it, but long ago NV has abandoned driver improvements for it unlike AMD that still supports GCN 1.0-1.2 7970 cards. To make matters worse, 680 couldn't make $ with mining, and was VRAM gimped as most gamers bought the 2GB version. In hindsight for those who bought the 670/680 instead of 7950/7950V2/7970/7970Ghz, these NV cards turned out to be some of the worst buys of 2012.

 

[Vario]

Why? One of the worst videocards of the last 5 years, outperformed by HD7970Ghz as of June 2012. Since then perfomrance took a nose dive and now the 680 is lucky to compete with an HD7870/R9 270X, and is even handily outperformed by the R9 380/285/HD7950 V2. The entire Kepler generation turned to be a failure after late 2014 when every GTX600-700 card fell off a cliff. It's gotten so bad in modern games that an HD7870Ghz = aka R9 270X is barely slower than a GTX770, while HD7970Ghz = aka R9 280X is right on the heels of the GTX780, a card that cost close to double in the year it was released with R9 280X.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/24.html

NV has long forgotten about Kepler driver support/optimizations, and it's prudent o move over to Pascal or GCN for anyone who wants to play games at 1080p over the next 2-3 years. It's why cards like GTX670 2GB sell for $40-50. No one wants them. The 680 was not only overpriced throughout its generation, had no architectural future-proofing built into it, but long ago NV has abandoned driver improvements for it unlike AMD that still supports GCN 1.0-1.2 7970 cards. To make matters worse, 680 couldn't make $ with mining, and was VRAM gimped as most gamers bought the 2GB version. In hindsight for those who bought the 670/680 instead of 7950/7950V2/7970/7970Ghz, these NV cards turned out to be some of the worst buys of 2012.

Because the 680 was a good card for what he needed. No need to be an asshole.

 

[Recon-UK]

670 here rekts every game i throw at it unless i am Vram starved.

 

[Zyll Goliat]

You love wasting $? 960 is mediocre compared to everything else that's out there. A stock RX 470 is nearly 50% faster at 1080p. Just spend another $40-50 and get at least an RX 470 4GB. These cards are freely available for $150 on Newegg right now with a free Hitman game.

In modern games such as Rise of the Tomb Raider, RX 470 is 2X faster than a GTX960. It's also important to recognize that RX 470 4GB can deliver 50-60 fps in many AAA titles of 2016, while cards like GTX1050Ti/960 are doing 30-40 fps in the same games.

Well sure I am very well aware of RX 470 and how GREAT that card is...but this card is new and it cost 220€ in my country(4gb version)and I can get used GTX 960 2Gb(1 year old)for around 100€-120€...so thats like half of the price you know.....
Some things that you said about 600 series is true...however not everything is correct...

 

[Recon-UK]

Now i paired a GTX 580 up for PhysX this never drops below 60...

PhysX hogs CPU cycles in FO4.

 

[Zyll Goliat]

Now i paired a GTX 580 up for PhysX this never drops below 60...

PhysX hogs CPU cycles in FO4.

Wow....but 580 can pull some power...your electric bill may surprise you is it worth to be used just for that?

 

[Recon-UK]

You love wasting $? 960 is mediocre compared to everything else that's out there. A stock RX 470 is nearly 50% faster at 1080p. Just spend another $40-50 and get at least an RX 470 4GB. These cards are freely available for $150 on Newegg right now with a free Hitman game.

In modern games such as Rise of the Tomb Raider, RX 470 is 2X faster than a GTX960. It's also important to recognize that RX 470 4GB can deliver 50-60 fps in many AAA titles of 2016, while cards like GTX1050Ti/960 are doing 30-40 fps in the same games.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/gigabyte_geforce_gtx_1050_ti_g1_gaming_oc_review,12.html

On December 12th, Newegg will have $20 off $100 with Visa Checkout. It'll be possible to purchase an RX 470 4GB for $130 in just 4 days from now, but you'd better be quick.
https://slickdeals.net/f/9498864-20...sa-checkout?src=SiteSearchV2_SearchBarV2Algo1

Once overclocked RX 470 4GB becomes 60% faster than a GTX960 and crucially this performance levels comes in very close to a stock GTX1060/RX 480, cards that generally cost $200-250. That's a lot of value for a low-end videocard that most of the market is dismissing as NV's marketing means the hype is centered around the inferior GTX1050Ti and the much more expensive GTX1060 6GB.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_rx_470_4gb_review_powercolor,33.html

AMD also just released brand new Crimson drivers packed with the latest features, and AMD ReLive is faster than NV's ShadowPlay.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_Crimson_ReLive_Drivers/

There is no point buying a GTX960 level card as it's already outdated for 1080p gaming barely providing a gaming experience above PS4 non-Pro. Even at $90-100, the GTX960 isn't worth it when RX 470 4GB is going to be $130-150 because once 2017 games launch, 960 doesn't have any reserve headroom as it's already struggling in 2016 games.

If you prefer going NV route, then at least wait until 2017 when Pascal refreshes show up and you can pick up GTX1060 for cheaper.



Why? One of the worst videocards of the last 5 years, outperformed by HD7970Ghz as of June 2012. Since then perfomrance took a nose dive and now the 680 is lucky to compete with an HD7870/R9 270X, and is even handily outperformed by the R9 380/285/HD7950 V2. The entire Kepler generation turned to be a failure after late 2014 when every GTX600-700 card fell off a cliff. It's gotten so bad in modern games that an HD7870Ghz = aka R9 270X is barely slower than a GTX770, while HD7970Ghz = aka R9 280X is right on the heels of the GTX780, a card that cost close to double in the year it was released with R9 280X.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/24.html

NV has long forgotten about Kepler driver support/optimizations, and it's prudent o move over to Pascal or GCN for anyone who wants to play games at 1080p over the next 2-3 years. It's why cards like GTX670 2GB sell for $40-50. No one wants them. The 680 was not only overpriced throughout its generation, had no architectural future-proofing built into it, but long ago NV has abandoned driver improvements for it unlike AMD that still supports GCN 1.0-1.2 7970 cards. To make matters worse, 680 couldn't make $ with mining, and was VRAM gimped as most gamers bought the 2GB version. In hindsight for those who bought the 670/680 instead of 7950/7950V2/7970/7970Ghz, these NV cards turned out to be some of the worst buys of 2012.

Whilst it is true a 960 is a bad purchase (depending on cost) you have taken this way too far and just decided to slam someone for their purchase choice.

My 670 was 70 shipped GBP whereas a closest competitor a 7950 or 7970 are both above 100 GBP in the UK.

My 670 is performing around the R9 280 / x level thanks to the 7ghz memory overclock and core at 1189mhz, Kepler was not nerfed, if anything it performs impressively for how old it is and it only has 2GB Vram.
I could bench a lot of games that favor Nvidia hardware and there will be a massive disparity towards my 670, i can also showcase level performing games where it matches or beats a Radeon 7970.

I don't need to though as that was not the reason for buying a 670, it was very cheap, and nothing comes even close to it's performance for the price i paid.

Lay off the kool aid and benchmarks, it's gone to your head.

 

[Recon-UK]

Wow....but 580 can pull some power...your electric bill may surprise you is it worth to be used just for that?

It's a spare GPU i have so put it to some use.

In Borderlands games using ultra PhysX there is an improvement of +80%.

Undervolted to 1v and 700mhz clock.. it's a EVGA SSC FTW HC2.

 

[Vario]

I bought a 7970, it was very unstable, RMA'd it 3x no good, sold it to a bitcoiner, bought a brand new 770 with the proceeds and had some cash left over, the 770 because that was available at the time. The 770 exceeded the 7970's performance. 7970s were very expensive at the height of the litecoin bubble, they were over $500. 680 and 770 were $300. Keep that in mind. I am glad they were poor performers at mining because it kept them affordable. Too bad it hasn't aged as well as the 7970 but I think I made the right decision, the 770 has given me many hours of gaming with few crashes and its very smooth.

 

[Recon-UK]

I want to point something out.

The 7970 and 280x 3GB cards don't have a leg up vs the 680 in Video ram by much.. if anything.

The very few games where that extra 1GB is helpful are games that run better on NV cards.

Batman Arkham Knight, my 670 can only use low textures.

But it looks like this and at 50-70FPS and very smooth. (i guess they patched it well)

The 7970 will allow you to use the "normal texture setting" which adds almost nothing to texture resolution, it has a very small effect on some close up details. Whislt overall your Radeon card is missing Gameworks stuff the 670 handles really well like Enhanced rain and Light shafts, which are enabled in the images.


Another game where "2GB" should be gimped. See that resolution? lol

 

[Artas1984]

Now i paired a GTX 580 up for PhysX this never drops below 60...

PhysX hogs CPU cycles in FO4.

Hard to imagine someone uses a dedicated Physix card these days.. It was relevent with GTX280 using 9600GT for Physix. But now? What benefits do you get from GTX580? Sure the GTX670 can handle Physix without FPS loss on it's own? Right or not?

Im very happy with the GTX 670 I just bought for $66 AUS ($40 USA) total bargin compared to a $200+ GTX 960.

You are joking here obviously. GTX960 is not worth a 120 bucks these days. 200 dollars is the bargain price for GTX1060 3 GB, which is 80 - 90 % faster than GTX960. GTX960 is not relevant any more as a new card. It's always hard to compare prices US vs EU. Everything in EU is 25 % more expensive. I recently bought GTX670 for my spare PC for a 90 EU (95 $) and am very happy with it. That would be like buying it for 66 EU (70 $) in the US due to economic differences.

 

[Recon-UK]

Hard to imagine someone uses a dedicated Physix card these days.. It was relevent with GTX280 using 9600GT for Physix. But now? What benefits do you get from GTX580? Sure the GTX670 can handle Physix without FPS loss on it's own? Right or not?

LMAO no not even a GTX 1080 could run ultra PhysX in Borderlands 2 or The Presequel and maintain 60FPS.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/com...nce_in_borderlands_2/?st=iwhnxb44&sh=8687f41e

 

[Artas1984]

LMAO no not even a GTX 1080 could run ultra PhysX in Borderlands 2 or The Presequel and maintain 60FPS.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/com...nce_in_borderlands_2/?st=iwhnxb44&sh=8687f41e

Can you write how much FPS difference was it for you with GTX580 for Physix vs single GTX670 for Physix?

 

[Recon-UK]

Can you write how much FPS difference was it for you with GTX580 for Physix vs single GTX670 for Physix?

With no actual Physics going on teh game plays normal like there is no PhysX in use, as soon as you start shooting enemies.. easily tank as low as 11FPS.

The 580 as PhysX keeps frames above 80 FPS at all times and reaching high's of 130FPS.

 

[CAPSLOCKSTUCK]

I had a GTX 680 and HD 7970 at the same time.

I kept the 7970 because of the 3 gb vram. Unfortunately it wrecked my lap times in Project Cars because it is Nvidia optomized game and i am 3-4 seconds a lap round Nords slower in Formula A with the AMD card. I do see the benefits in GTA V though.



UK prices
HD 7970 .........£ 90.00
GTX 680...........£ 130.00

 

[Recon-UK]

Really thinking of grabbing a RX 480 though... Nvidia mid range just don't do anything for me, and well if i buy a 1070 i need to buy a 1440P screen.

 

[CAPSLOCKSTUCK]

Being price conscious and performance orientated, GTX 970 is the last GPU i will upgrade to on my Xeon system.



UK prices
GTX 680......£ 130.00
GTX 970.......£ 150.00

when i can afford it im going to get GTX 970

 

[Recon-UK]

Being price conscious and performance orientated, GTX 970 is the last GPU i will upgrade to on my Xeon system.



UK prices
GTX 680......£ 130.00
GTX 970.......£ 150.00

when i can afford it im going to get GTX 970

That's an excellent upgrade and not far from the cost of your 680.
I got mega lucky with my 670 so i'm an outlier and it's the only reason i have one, i would have chosen a GCN GPU over it too for the Vram.. but using the 670... it's a fast card for how old it is and not really limiting me too much despite it's Video ram flaw.