HARDOCP reviews the GTX 660 Ti 2gb and 3gb OC'd versions

Check it out-

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/08/16/galaxy_geforce_gtx_660_ti_gc_3gb_video_card_review/14

Looking pretty tasty.

3GB version? Never saw that coming...

3GB version is a bit strange, usually they just double the VRAM. I wonder if they were told not to, by nVidia.C_Rule

maybe the extra gig was too expensive to put on

Is the voltage locked on these 660Ti's?

Just curious, would 660 TIs in SLI provide a performance boast over GTX480s in SLI? I mean, don't get me wrong, I can max out every game out there with 60+ frames per second, but I wouldnt mind having slightly newer video cards with better temps and better overclock. Brean24

my understanding is that the 660ti is still slower than the 7950 ghz edition by a small chunk. Not to mention, AMD was preparing to drop prices on the 7950 $20-$30 but now it may not have to. Good Job nvidia, you really screwed up this time.

my understanding is that the 660ti is still slower than the 7950 ghz edition by a small chunk. Not to mention, AMD was preparing to drop prices on the 7950 $20-$30 but now it may not have to. Good Job nvidia, you really screwed up this time.

blaznwiipspman1

I'll wait for the 700 series, still rocking 460's in sli.

my understanding is that the 660ti is still slower than the 7950 ghz edition by a small chunk. Not to mention, AMD was preparing to drop prices on the 7950 $20-$30 but now it may not have to. Good Job nvidia, you really screwed up this time.

blaznwiipspman1

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

my understanding is that the 660ti is still slower than the 7950 ghz edition by a small chunk. Not to mention, AMD was preparing to drop prices on the 7950 $20-$30 but now it may not have to. Good Job nvidia, you really screwed up this time.

Brean24

I think this explains how nvidia got 2gb of memory on the GTX 660 Ti. Traditionally the card would of only had 1.5GB of ram or 3GB.

Anandtech- "For the GTX 660 Ti in 2012 NVIDIA is once again going to use their asymmetrical memory technique in order to outfit the GTX 660 Ti with 2GB of memory on a 192bit bus, but theyre going to be implementing it slightly differently. Whereas the GTX 550 Ti mixed memory chip density in order to get 1GB out of 6 chips, the GTX 660 Ti will mix up the number of chips attached to each controller in order to get 2GB out of 8 chips. Specifically, there will be 4 chips instead of 2 attached to one of the memory controllers, while the other controllers will continue to have 2 chips. By doing it in this manner, this allows NVIDIA to use the same Hynix 2Gb chips they already use in the rest of the GTX 600 series, with the only high-level difference being the width of the bus connecting them.

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

my understanding is that the 660ti is still slower than the 7950 ghz edition by a small chunk. Not to mention, AMD was preparing to drop prices on the 7950 $20-$30 but now it may not have to. Good Job nvidia, you really screwed up this time.

Brean24

the version of the card is the overclocked 660ti. Its not a fair comparison unless you compare it with the 7950 ghz edition. Overall the 7950 is faster than the 660ti. I was thinking the 660ti would be 10% faster so it would force AMD to drop prices on the 7950 $30 or so to approximately $300, and $250 after rebate on some special sales, but nvidia doesn't seem to care about that too much.

[QUOTE="Brean24"][QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

my understanding is that the 660ti is still slower than the 7950 ghz edition by a small chunk. Not to mention, AMD was preparing to drop prices on the 7950 $20-$30 but now it may not have to. Good Job nvidia, you really screwed up this time.

blaznwiipspman1

the version of the card is the overclocked 660ti. Its not a fair comparison unless you compare it with the 7950 ghz edition. Overall the 7950 is faster than the 660ti. I was thinking the 660ti would be 10% faster so it would force AMD to drop prices on the 7950 $30 or so to approximately $300, and $250 after rebate on some special sales, but nvidia doesn't seem to care about that too much.

I don't understand why memory buses are getting smaller. My understanding is that a larger bus means more bandwidth, so why give the 660ti 192 bit when my old GTX 275 has 448 bit?

I don't understand why memory buses are getting smaller. My understanding is that a larger bus means more bandwidth, so why give the 660ti 192 bit when my old GTX 275 has 448 bit?

kraken2109

width x mhz

While your 275 was 448 bits wide it was only capable of doing 127 GB/s

the 192 bit wide 660 Ti is capable of 140GB/s

This is due to faster ram.

and 192 bit is a lot cheaper to implement.

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

I don't understand why memory buses are getting smaller. My understanding is that a larger bus means more bandwidth, so why give the 660ti 192 bit when my old GTX 275 has 448 bit?

GummiRaccoon

width x mhz

While your 275 was 448 bits wide it was only capable of doing 127 GB/s

the 192 bit wide 660 Ti is capable of 140GB/s

This is due to faster ram.

and 192 bit is a lot cheaper to implement.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

I don't understand why memory buses are getting smaller. My understanding is that a larger bus means more bandwidth, so why give the 660ti 192 bit when my old GTX 275 has 448 bit?

kraken2109

width x mhz

While your 275 was 448 bits wide it was only capable of doing 127 GB/s

the 192 bit wide 660 Ti is capable of 140GB/s

This is due to faster ram.

and 192 bit is a lot cheaper to implement.

It's only part of the equation. And it is quite possible that the 275 had much more memory bandwidth than the GPU needs.

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

width x mhz

While your 275 was 448 bits wide it was only capable of doing 127 GB/s

the 192 bit wide 660 Ti is capable of 140GB/s

This is due to faster ram.

and 192 bit is a lot cheaper to implement.

GummiRaccoon

It's only part of the equation. And it is quite possible that the 275 had much more memory bandwidth than the GPU needs.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="kraken2109"] I see. Interesting how the 660ti is so much better than my card but only have 10GB/s more memory bandwidth.kraken2109

It's only part of the equation. And it is quite possible that the 275 had much more memory bandwidth than the GPU needs.

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

It's only part of the equation. And it is quite possible that the 275 had much more memory bandwidth than the GPU needs.

C_Rule

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

It's only part of the equation. And it is quite possible that the 275 had much more memory bandwidth than the GPU needs.

C_Rule

It would still be down 8 ROPs, right? Or would those be gained back with the memory bus?