Results 1 to 20 of 31
20-11-2012, 06:31 AM #1
Upgrading my GPU, 5850 to a 660Ti or...?
well, it's seems to be time for me to upgrade my trusted 5850, who has served me well. I'm playing at 1080p and some games are beginning to tax the 5850 beyond its limits at this resolution (with eyecandy).
So I thought of upgrading. Found a, imo, pretty good deal for a MSI GTX660Ti PE http://se.msi.com/product/vga/N660Ti-PE-2GD5-OC.html for ~ 220€
The MSI model should be a good performer with a near silent cooling system: review http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/M...Power_Edition/
As I'm not planning on going to play at any higher resolution, this GPU should suffice. 7950s start at ~270€ here and don't seem to come with a more noisy cooling system.
So the 660Ti seems to be a pretty good bang-for-buck?
20-11-2012, 11:23 AM #2
- Join Date
- Jun 2012
Looking at that review, I seriously don't understand why these things never compare the performance to older cards in the charts... What good is it to someone with a card that needs replacing to see how it compares to only other brand new cards...
I'd suggest you go for the gtx670 if you can afford it.
They gimped the bus width on the 660ti (and the bus width and therefor bandwidth on the 670-680 wasn't stellar to begin with for cards with this much calculating grunt)
As you can see the bandwidth bottleneck can and will rear it's ugly head even at 1200p compared to cards with better bandwidth (like the 7870).
Minimum framerate should always be your focus when looking at an upgrade, you won't notice or care for when the framerate goes over 60 on your 60hz monitor, but every frame under 60 , let alone 30 will be painfully noticable in the form of slowdown/stutter.
I really don't understand why nvidia decided to gimp their entire 6xx line like this, I guess it's so they have something to hype when they push gk110 next year:\
One of the key features and reasons to get an nvidia card these days (other than driver stability and compatibility obviously) is SGSSAA supersampling support, the magic pill that turns the ugly jaggies and moiree glitchyness of those deferred rendering engines into actual respectable image quality. You can't get this on AMD, but it does require a lot more bandwidth, which nvidia chose not to give the 660Ti.
If you buy a powerful modern card it will be to use sgssaa in most games (else these cards are overkill for the majority of console ports and pc games and your 5850 is still fine) , so there is little use for a card that is bottlenecked like this.
hand it to Nvidia to design a card around looking good on review benchmarks (dynamic overclocking, nice average fps at 1080p) instead of something that caters to the needs of high end users.
Last edited by Finicky; 20-11-2012 at 11:26 AM.
20-11-2012, 12:13 PM #3
gtx660ti vs gtx580
guess which one is cheaper and has double the performance?
20-11-2012, 12:37 PM #4
- Join Date
- Jun 2012
580 is way more power hungry and runs way hotter, does better at high res with AA, 660ti is a 1080p no AA only card that performs similar to a gtx 580 at that resolution (but is bottlenecked with AA), neither are a smart buy.
Last edited by Finicky; 20-11-2012 at 12:40 PM.
20-11-2012, 03:19 PM #5
Power hungry? Perhaps, if you have a 400w psu. Does not run hot though, in fact it has lower temps than my old gtx280. The 580 was a phenomenal card and a huge comeback for nvidia after the gtx480 fiasco (perhaps you are remembering accounts of that card)
20-11-2012, 05:01 PM #6
20-11-2012, 05:42 PM #7
20-11-2012, 01:19 PM #8
As I said, I'm not going to be playing anything in a resolution above 1080p any time soon.
As for the GTX670, the cheapest I found at the moment available here, is about 345€ which is about 120€ more. Is the performance gain that big, considering the resolution I play at?
The 580, as said is more power hungry, runs hotter, seems to be noisier and from what I gathered isn't that much faster. Plus the shop prices here start at about 270€ for the cheapest 580 and the aftermarket, well, if one can find a model, then it's price wise almost in the 200€ region, they ask about 180€ for the 570 used.
The next generation Nvidia, Maxell, was pushed to 2014 and 2013 should only see a Kepler refresh, don't know if that's worth waiting for. AMD Tahiti LE should be out soon, will have to see how that turns out.
20-11-2012, 01:46 PM #9
GTX 670 is perhaps a bit overkill for 1080p. How about a Radeon HD 7950? Should be noticeably cheaper and AMD have their whole bundle thing going on as well.
20-11-2012, 01:50 PM #10
7950s are atleast 60€ more expensive, and that's for the cheapest model, getting one of the better models jacks the price even more.
20-11-2012, 02:03 PM #11
20-11-2012, 04:05 PM #12
- Join Date
- Jun 2012
The gtx 580 is a 270W gpu, the gtx 660 ti is a 150W gpu (170W for the 670), For once nvidia have power efficient gpus again, it's a miracle.
Gtx 580 and 670 are not even close in heat, noise and power consumption. (and power bills)
Skipping a process node and going straight from 40 to 28 nm + a brand new more efficient architecture equals significant power efficiency gains, who'd ve thunk.
It's good that the dark ages of the 40nm era are finally over and we have gone back to gpus that don't need a leafblower to keep them cool. At least for 6 more months, until nvidia releases GK110 and the 512mm^2 die and crazy clocks madness can start all over.
The gigabyte version of the gtx 670 with the 3 fan 'windforce' (what a terrible name) cooler is even supposed to be quiet under load.
If your benchmark for noise and heat is a gtx 280 then idk what to say... why not compare it to a geforce 6800 ultra, or a category F tornado, or the tsar bomba.
gtx580 may have been a fast card (and still is) but buying one now is madness.
@Sakkura, but what is the point of upgrading just to play at 1080p with no AA? He doesn't really need an update that badly then unless he wants to play planetside 2 (can't think of a single other game that wouldn't run well enough on a 5850 at 1080p no AA)
If he goes with the AMD card... no SGSSAA support...
It's just crazy, nvidia has a good AA solution but no bandwidth, amd cards have mem bandwidth in spades but dogshit AA support and no SGSSAA.
I'm an AMD user and the AMD SSAA solution works for very few games for me (at a way bigger performance hit too).
Downsampling is an option on AMD, but idk what monitor he has and if it supports it (mine doesn't).
Also as amd user and amd fan for over 10 years, my personal opinion: stay the fuck away from amd, their drivers are shit.
Please don't make me write down a list of the many many many games that had huge performance issues (nasty stutter, low fps regardless of settings, shadow glitches and missing shadows) on AMD cards these past few years.
If prices weren't so stupid right now and nvidia didn't gimp their memory bus then I'd be buying a 660 ti (well no cos of the memory bus) , or 670 myself.
Last edited by Finicky; 20-11-2012 at 04:14 PM.
20-11-2012, 04:55 PM #13
20-11-2012, 06:20 PM #14
That chart basically ranks GPUs according to their performance and puts similar performancing GPUs together. As it stands, the 5850 is just as powerfull as the GTX650 (not the TI version). THe 660 ti is just as powerfull as a 7870
Personally, I don't see why you want to upgrade the thing, as it stands, the 5850 is still a wonderfull piece of hardware, but it's your call, and looking at the charts above, and the chart I linked, it's a noticable upgrade.
Personally, I would wait till the Nvidea 7x and hte Ati HD 8x series hit, though.
20-11-2012, 06:44 PM #15
We can definitely agree that the 5850 is still a pretty solid graphics card. But it's all a question of the settings and framerates you want.
20-11-2012, 07:03 PM #16
As for the other options, like the 670, it's priced almost at twice the price of the 660Ti, the price I'm getting it for, that is.
About the next gen of GPU's, Nvidias Maxell, as I said, has been pushed back to 2014 and I don't really know whether the Kepler "refresh" will bring something worth while. Maybe I'll end up regretting the buy, maybe not. As for AMD, they'll probably have the HD8x out before Nvidia, if it's good, I can always sell the 660Ti and get something new :)
21-11-2012, 03:21 AM #17
- Join Date
- Jun 2012
What the kepler refresh will bring is vastly improved price/performance, but since you already get a discount it's irrelevant for you.
Right now the amd cards were a dud so nvidia just launched their midrange card (256bit bus instead of 384, and a small 294mm^2 die) and branded it geforce gtx 680, then gimped the rops and bus width for the lower end versions.
Gtx680 only has 3.5B transistors vs 3B in the gtx 580 , considering the massive process node shrink it could have been more than double, which is what you'll see in gk110.
Right now we are being sold 200 euro midrange parts that are cheap to manufacture for 400-500 euros because of a lack of competition, just like amd was pushing their 7970 for a ridiculous 550 euros when it launched 6 months before kepler was ready.
We get it mashakos , you like your gtx 580.... just stop.
I can only scoff at the unengine benchmark results, it's the most irrelevant benchmark out there;
You use that as basis for your double performance bullshit (we are supposed to give advice here, what you are doing is the opposite) and at the same time scoff at the other results that are much closer (and where the 670 wins) with lots of AA (you can extrapolate those results to using SSAA too btw , so they do matter, unlike unengine plebmark)
Then you flip flop and suddenly it's 'the extra performance doesn't matter only a framerate whore will notice'. Again, just stop , for a supposed hardcore pc man you are embarrasing yourself. Even the OP is telling you off now.
Noone gives a shit about getting 80 or 90 fps indeed, but that extra performance does matter in the form of minimum framerates, extra performance always matters. Someone will have to look up a comparison for those between the two cards if they can be arsed, I'm not even going to dignify the idea of buying a 270W gpu in 2012 when there is a 170 W alternative that is faster.
Last edited by Finicky; 21-11-2012 at 03:37 AM.
20-11-2012, 09:54 PM #18
BF3 is a taxing game. Especially at 2560x1600, where the difference Anandtech measured was 17 FPS (44 to 61).
Shogun 2, eh? Anandtech measures a 33% difference at 1900x1200. Kepler cards were/are suffering from a performance bug in Shogun 2 ultra, so don't bring that up. Unless it's to admit that Nvidia are hit by bugs from time to time, just like AMD.
20-11-2012, 10:50 PM #19
I can back up my claim that the difference isn't that big by recording and posting youtube videos. I might do that, but in any case think about this: you're pointing out a 40% increase (at best) gap between a card you can get for $200 used and a $400 card. So for a best case scenario of a 25fps gap (much lower if you count in a bunch of other games) would you seriously recommend the $200 premium?
20-11-2012, 11:11 PM #20