Reviews: GeForce GTX 1660 Ti testing Galore - MSI, ASUS and Palit

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Feb 22, 2019.

  1. HardwareCaps

    HardwareCaps Master Guru

    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    154
    GPU:
    x
    Redesign GCN or focus on viable markets like the mid range. it's not like HBM made Vega efficient, it was still hot and inefficient.
    so you basically suffer from HBM downsides while still having TDP issues. it just makes no sense for me.

    IMO AMD should have scaled Polaris to bigger chips, using GDDR5/5X and while being less efficient than the competition
    offer a product that doesn't suffer from availability issues and can be priced very aggressively.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 26, 2019
  2. Noisiv

    Noisiv Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,783
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    GPU:
    2070 Super
    And where would that get you when you are TDP limited?

    1.5x RX 580 is right around 1660 Ti +10% perf.
    Alternatively take Vega 64 and subtract 10% (because of higher DDR power draw) and again you are barely faster than 1660 Ti, while requiring significant care with power circuitry/cooling.

    These are some of the smartest ppl on the planet. Don't think for a sec. you can tell them something they don't already know thousand times over - especially tech/design wise.
     
    carnivore and Embra like this.
  3. HardwareCaps

    HardwareCaps Master Guru

    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    154
    GPU:
    x
    1660Ti makes no sense as it is a 2019 product. The power saves on HBM do not justify the hardships it brings.
    RX 480 consumes only 150W, you have a lot of TDP headroom to scale the core up. so scaling to around 3,500 stream processors(basically V56) with GDDR5X at 300W~.
    but much much cheaper than V56.
    sounds like a great card for people that don't mind high TDP. V56 performance back in 2016 is a very strong product. don't forget Vega was late and was on low availability at launch because of HBM

    AMD doesn't have the resources to work on multiple architectures for consumer products.
    I think Ryzen shows it best, AMD is using the same architecture for everything now with chiplets or "sticking cores together".
    so a ryzen 7 2700 is just additional CCX's of the same design.
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2019
  4. The Commenter

    The Commenter Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    Sapphire Fury Tri X x2
    What are the control panel settings for each card while benchmarking? No reviewer ever shows that and it means a lot when benchmarking a card

     

  5. Noisiv

    Noisiv Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,783
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    GPU:
    2070 Super
    Lets see... You'd have to sell your V56 at lower price because
    1. no HBM2 allure
    2. worse power draw
    3. requiring more intricate power/cooling (which in turn means slight BoM increase)
    By going ballz to the wall with TDP, you'd also make your partners very unhappy by killing any hopes for custom/pricier/OC-ed models.
    And you'd end up even worse off in high-margin mobile world, where power is the king. AMD does not have infinite man*hours at their disposal to simply flip between chip/HBM2/DDR designs, so you are stuck with DDR.
    Also you are worse off in pro segment where BoM matters even less.

    All this offset by "cheaper" to produce. And more readily available (??) - it's not like AMD can not fulfill their orders, regardless of HBM2.

    All in all - I'd say that DDR Vega would have been a baad idea.

    PS

    Oh and what about Radeon VII aka Vega 20 on GDDR6?
    GDDR6 would shave ~30% of its bandwidth.
    Great! It's a 280W card to begin with, and you just killed the single thing R7 has going for itself and knocked down god-knows how much performance.
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2019
  6. Noisiv

    Noisiv Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,783
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    GPU:
    2070 Super
    You leave it at NV/AMD defaults - is how it's done.
     
    airbud7 likes this.
  7. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,835
    Likes Received:
    4,744
    GPU:
    pny gtx 1060 xlr8
    This^

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    fantaskarsef likes this.
  8. sverek

    sverek Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,073
    Likes Received:
    2,953
    GPU:
    NOVIDIA -0.5GB
    Oh yes, it can match Vega64 performance. "Red Dragon" is something the infamous "dysney" did and it consumed spectacular amount of electricity.
    Again, for someone who want to customize video card and have fun with it while not bothering with running costs, Vega54 is great.

    [​IMG]
     
    vbetts likes this.
  9. vbetts

    vbetts Don Vincenzo Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,115
    Likes Received:
    1,690
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti
    HBM did though, heat and power with a different memory and we would have r9 290 problems or worse. That was the whole point in investing in HBM, a memory source that did not add to the already high power cost of Vega.

    What TDP issues by the way? Vega does use more power yes, but in no way is it an issue. That's something you expect from AMD. Compared to Nvidia, power draw is a little higher.
    But that's basically what Vega is, blown up GCN which is what you would have with Polaris. Polaris on the lower end was decent with power draw at lower clocks, but look at the RX 590's power draw just by pushing clocks up on Polaris. 245w average for full load with peaks of up to 300w. Mind you, that's the same 12nm Polaris with high clocks pulling that much. Radeon VII was designed as a 300w card, given that I'm willing to bet a chunk of Polaris's power draw is memory alone. Vega64 is designed to be a 300w card, and at 300w it still puts out more performance than the RX 590, and can still be undervolted to save on power draw.
    Pascal despite not being the main focus of Nvidia anymore is still very strong performance, and also came out in 2016. Vega looks to be in the same boat right now, so on the higher end we're still fighting to get some traction from previous gen. On the higher end Pascal side, this is proving to be tough. On Vega end, this is proving to be tough. On say Polaris though, it's pretty much maxed out at the RX 590 and still under the Vega 56. Hell let's even take Maxwell, an older GPU arch where the 980 ti is still hard to beat.
     
  10. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,804
    Likes Received:
    3,359
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    @vbetts : You are right. It is kind of hard to think why would AMD scale Polaris Big again. As that would be Another Vega in terms of gaming, just taking bit less space at cost of having worse compute. Inherent 64CU limitation is thing where AMD failed with GCN. And Fact that they did not deliver Navi year Ago... At least they are working on it.
    As for Polaris maxed out in form of RX-590. It is not performing to fullest. It would be performing 10~15% faster if paired with GDDR6.
    Would it be good investment for AMD? No. RX-590 life span will be likely as short as that of HD6930/50/70. If AMD redesigned IMC for Polaris 20 (RX-580), then it would make sense as that is memory bandwidth limited too.

    But then one should interpolate reasons why they did not do redesign even while they were aware of limitations...
    1) They expected to replace those cards sooner. RX-580 as rebrand with higher clock and bit better power efficiency than RX-480 was likely meant to be replaced directly by Navi.
    2) Likely, RX-590 should have never come.
    3) Cost. At any point AMD has to look at what they have and if it will sell without additional investment.

    Guys, don't you all think that it is time to put GCN to its rest? Is there point on beating AMD that they were not able to deliver replacement earlier? We have seen final state of gaming capability of GCN in Fury X. Rest had only minor gaming improvements (on technological level) and better clock did main job. Any GCN card will be more of a function of manufacturing process allowing certain clock than how you scale it. 1st GCN card had just 1/2 of CUs than biggest possible (32 against 64 limit). There's no magic if you can't scale beyond such limitation... Just Clock, which hits power draw limits.
     
    vbetts likes this.

  11. HWgeek

    HWgeek Master Guru

    Messages:
    441
    Likes Received:
    315
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 6200 Turbo Fotce @500/600 8x1p
    I see now Asrock RX 570 8GB dropped down to $139 and the RX 580 8GB down to $169(saw on today's GN video), for simlpe 1080P monitors- those are really great deals (plus 2 games), It must be GTX 1660Ti affect.
     
    airbud7 and fantaskarsef like this.
  12. warlord

    warlord Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,761
    Likes Received:
    927
    GPU:
    Null
    GTX 1660 Tis equal cheapest RTX 2060s prices in my country(~330). I am gonna crap on PC nolife hobby with these prices in some countries like mine. This is unfair. Who the hell is gonna buy these? Are they searching for victims?
     
  13. King Mustard

    King Mustard Member

    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    GeForce RTX 2080
    If it helps, this is where the relative performance lies (with current pricing):

    RTX 2080 Ti (£1,070, 2 free games)
    RTX 2080 (£635, 2 free games)
    RTX 2070 (£460, 1 free game)
    GTX 1080 Ti
    RTX 2060 (£320, 1 free game)
    Radeon VII (£700, 3 free games)
    GTX 1080
    GTX 1070 Ti (£395)
    Radeon RX Vega 64 (£370, 3 free games)
    Radeon RX Vega 56 (£250, 3 free games)
    GTX 1660 Ti (£260)
    GTX 1070 (£270)
    RX 590 (£235, 3 free games)
    GTX 1060 (£195)
    RX 580 (£150, 2 free games)
    RX 570 (£140, 2 free games)
    GTX 1050 Ti (£145)
    GTX 1050 (£110)
    RX 560 (£120)
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
  14. RzrTrek

    RzrTrek Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,516
    Likes Received:
    712
    GPU:
    RX 580
    I still can't decide which one to buy: 1) ASUS ROG STRIX OC 2) MSI GAMING X 6G 3) or play AMD's 7nm waiting game?

    I've only heard good things about the new MSI cards, but having had 2 in the past (both with coil whine) makes me very cautious?
     
  15. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,793
    Likes Received:
    1,148
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    The price you will pay for either of those cards just spend the extra $30 and get the founders edition RTX2060.
     
    airbud7 likes this.

  16. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,161
    Likes Received:
    1,274
    GPU:
    -
    Blame your country, no one else.
     
  17. warlord

    warlord Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,761
    Likes Received:
    927
    GPU:
    Null
    Economy doesn't work like this pal. Nvidia's fault for a such tiny difference in lower mid range cards. They could give this trash gpu even cheaper. but now, anything NVidia logo'ed is GOLD.
     
  18. RzrTrek

    RzrTrek Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,516
    Likes Received:
    712
    GPU:
    RX 580
    110 for said graphics card with the same cooler (already checked with my preferred retailer) and I don't want to make the same mistake as with my RX 580 by cheaping out on the cooling.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
  19. Noisiv

    Noisiv Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,783
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    GPU:
    2070 Super
    Don't...

    GTX 1660 Ti is only 30-35% faster than your RX 580.
    Get RTX 2070 which is 80%/90% faster at HD/4K.

    If your game was running at 50 fps, 1660Ti will get you 65fps (meh)
    2070 will get you 90fps (YESSS!)


    Spending 300 euros for _almost_ similar performance is a no-no
     
    carnivore and Xtreme1979 like this.
  20. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,835
    Likes Received:
    4,744
    GPU:
    pny gtx 1060 xlr8
    you need to think about what he said!.....
    nvm...I thought you lived in the us
     
    RzrTrek likes this.

Share This Page