Wednesday, October 3rd 2012

Gigabyte Comes Up With a 3 GB GeForce GTX 660 Ti

Gigabyte Technology has today unveiled yet another memory-enriched graphics card, a factory-overclocked GeForce GTX 660 Ti with 3 GB of VRAM (1 GB more than 'normal'). Dubbed GV-N66TOC-3GD, the card features an Ultra Durable VGA design, a triple-fan/dual-slot WINDFORCE cooler, a 192-bit memory interface, GPU Base/Boost clocks of 1032/1111 MHz (915/980 MHz stock), a memory clock of 6008 MHz, SLI support, plus dual-DVI, (gold-plated) HDMI and DisplayPort outputs.

Gigabyte's 3 GB GeForce GTX 660 Ti OC can be found on pre-order priced at 329 Euro.
Add your own comment

27 Comments on Gigabyte Comes Up With a 3 GB GeForce GTX 660 Ti

#2
Casecutter
3Gb might make better use of the 192-Bit.
Posted on Reply
#3
Initialised
Does the GTX680 4GB give tangible gains over 2GB? - No

Will this give tangible gains over the 2GB? - No

It is there to confuse those who would otherwise buy a 7950.
Posted on Reply
#4
Dj-ElectriC
by: Initialised
Does the GTX680 4GB give tangible gains over 2GB? - No
That's not the same. The memory placement is connected A-symmetrically to 192BITs of the GTX660Ti
Posted on Reply
#5
claysm
It won't be faster.

An article on Tom's Hardware showed that at any given resolution, the 3GB model is slower than the 2GB.
Posted on Reply
#6
u2konline
by: Jetster
Good looking card
lol looks the same like any other card

a 192-bit memory interface, GPU Base/Boost clocks of 1032/1111 MHz (915/980 MHz stock), a memory clock of 6008 MHz

3GB with 192 bit memory lol
Um how about 256 bit.
Posted on Reply
#7
Ikaruga
by: claysm
An article on Tom's Hardware showed that at any given resolution, the 3GB model is slower than the 2GB.
It's surely a bad card design or a driver problem, and also the fault of the reviewer who did not care to investigate the issue.
I can't think of any valid points why would a proper 3GB model be any slower compared to the 2GB version with the mixed-density ICs .
Posted on Reply
#8
Nortrop
Pointless and expensive, it's 50 euro more than 2GB model. In single GPU config would run out of horsepower way before it runs out of ram.

Probably would make more sense in SLI and extreme resolutions, exceeding the price of a single 680, but with more power.
Posted on Reply
#9
Initialised
Like I said, it's there to confuse and price gouge punters who don't know any better.

Since the AMD 4800 series there has been no gain from double RAM cards or loss on half RAM cards but memory capacity is a number the uninformed punter thinks bigger = better
Posted on Reply
#10
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
by: Initialised

Since the AMD 4800 series there has been no gain from double RAM cards or loss on half RAM cards but memory capacity is a number the uninformed punter thinks bigger = better
More like since the the Geforce 4 and Radeon 9xxx cards.
Posted on Reply
#11
anubis44
by: Nortrop
Pointless and expensive, it's 50 euro more than 2GB model. In single GPU config would run out of horsepower way before it runs out of ram.

Probably would make more sense in SLI and extreme resolutions, exceeding the price of a single 680, but with more power.
Unless of course, like me, you have a 3 monitor setup. Then it's not pointless. Running out of texturing memory really DOES slow things down, and at 5240x1050 or higher, this CAN happen.

I went with the Windforce 7950 anyhow, and flashed it with the 7970 bios to 1GHz core/1375MHz memory.
Posted on Reply
#12
mediasorcerer
by: anubis44
Unless of course, like me, you have a 3 monitor setup. Then it's not pointless. Running out of texturing memory really DOES slow things down, and at 5240x1050 or higher, this CAN happen.

I went with the Windforce 7950 anyhow, and flashed it with the 7970 bios to 1GHz core/1375MHz memory.
Pls forgive off topic q- hows that working out for you with 7970 bios?
Posted on Reply
#14
anubis44
by: mediasorcerer
Pls forgive off topic q- hows that working out for you with 7970 bios?
Off topic question forgiven.

I like my Gigabyte 7950 very much. It's heatsink/fan combo is one of the best; it's quiet and cool, even at these speeds (never gets above 68 degrees), and my Cooler Master Storm Trooper easily manages to dissipate the heat it dumps in the case. It's running nicely with the 7970 bios flash. (I highly recommend a dual-bios card - something no nVidia card has). Only issue is that the HDMI port is disabled using this exact bios, but I don't care, since I use the DVI and two mini-display ports for my eyefinity setup. It was also $319.00, so I consider it a better value than the GTX670 Windforce I had and sold (which was $100 more).

Will probably crossfire it at some point.
Posted on Reply
#15
jazh23
Hi, please i need information about that video card...

by: Dj-ElectriC
Sorry for interrupting

http://i.imgur.com/Uuam7.jpg

Please, go on...
Hi from Venezuela, I want to know if you have the Gigabyte 660 ti OC 3GB? If the answer is yes, please can you share any impressions with me?

I'll buy a new video card soon and my options are:

-Gigabyte HD 7950
-Gigabyte GTX 660 ti OC 3GB
-Gigabyte GTX 670 OC 2GB

In advance, Thanks for any help...
Posted on Reply
#16
Ikaruga
by: jazh23
Hi from Venezuela, I want to know if you have the Gigabyte 660 ti OC 3GB? If the answer is yes, please can you share any impressions with me?

I'll buy a new video card soon and my options are:

-Gigabyte HD 7950
-Gigabyte GTX 660 ti OC 3GB
-Gigabyte GTX 670 OC 2GB

In advance, Thanks for any help...
How many monitors and, what is the resolution you are going to use while playing? Well, without knowing more, I would go for the 670 if money is not a problem.
Posted on Reply
#17
de.das.dude
Pro Indian Modder
by: jazh23
Hi from Venezuela, I want to know if you have the Gigabyte 660 ti OC 3GB? If the answer is yes, please can you share any impressions with me?

I'll buy a new video card soon and my options are:

-Gigabyte HD 7950
-Gigabyte GTX 660 ti OC 3GB
-Gigabyte GTX 670 OC 2GB

In advance, Thanks for any help...
7950. go for it. there was a similar thread for it with the same options. guy who asked was natr0n
Posted on Reply
#18
jazh23
Thanks for reply

by: Ikaruga
How many monitors and, what is the resolution you are going to use while playing? Well, without knowing more, I would go for the 670 if money is not a problem.
Just a single 23'' monitor (1920x1080p).

I Have $400, but if i can save some money to buy a pair of headphones would be nice...
Posted on Reply
#20
jazh23
by: de.das.dude
7950. go for it. there was a similar thread for it with the same options. guy who asked was natr0n
I always buy nvidia, but i'm not a fanboy, I have no problem with AMD, but I read that the 7950 had a stuttering problem, is true?

I need to buy a good video card, because is to expensive for me return the VGA to Amazon if it comes with any issues...
Posted on Reply
#21
jazh23
by: de.das.dude
please take a look here
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=179009
Thanks but I need feel the change from my GTX 560 ti 448, at least 660 ti.

The 7870 and 660 are good video cards, but I want to more power for play without lagging the new games like crysis 3, Bioshock 3, etc.
Posted on Reply
#22
Ikaruga
by: jazh23
Just a single 23'' monitor (1920x1080p).

I Have $400, but if i can save some money to buy a pair of headphones would be nice...
The two cards (7950 vs 660ti) are very similar. The 660Ti (at stock speed) performs better in "low" (1200p and below) resolutions, but the 7950 is a hell of an overclocker if power consumption is not an issue for you.

Here are some fun facts:

Nvidia Kelper cards need less power which saves money on the long run.
You usually get better driver with Nvidia cards
Physx might come handy if you wanna play one of the few supported games.
Nvidia's 3D support with a 144Hz is great if you play fps games and can afford one of the supported monitors

AMD cards are usually perform better in high resolutions 1440p and above, mostly due to the higher memory bus width (384bit on the 7950 compared to the 198 on the 660ti)
AMD cards usually offer more VRAM which makes them more future proof.
AMD cards are usually have better price/performance ratio, and because they also tend to overclock much better, they are definitely cheaper compared to Nvidia cards.

The 670 is a true monster at 1920x1080p, but you can get very close to that with the 660ti running current titles in 1080p, if you overclock the rams. You can use higher antialiasing values with the 670 because of the 256bit wide bus (the 660ti performs best with 2XAA in 1080p). I tend to prefer Nvidia nowadays, so I personally recommend you buy the 670, save some money and buy the headphone a little later:p

by: jazh23
I want to more power for play without lagging the new games like crysis 3, Bioshock 3, etc.
If you only go for higher fps and want it "cheap", get the 7950 and overclock it to oblivion
Posted on Reply
#23
jazh23
by: Ikaruga
The two cards (7950 vs 660ti) are very similar. The 660Ti (at stock speed) performs better in "low" (1200p and below) resolutions, but the 7950 is a hell of an overclocker if power consumption is not an issue for you.

Here are some fun facts:

Nvidia Kelper cards need less power which saves money on the long run.
You usually get better driver with Nvidia cards
Physx might come handy if you wanna play one of the few supported games.
Nvidia's 3D support with a 144Hz is great if you play fps games and can afford one of the supported monitors

AMD cards are usually perform better in high resolutions 1440p and above, mostly due to the higher memory bus width (384bit on the 7950 compared to the 198 on the 660ti)
AMD cards usually offer more VRAM which makes them more future proof.
AMD cards are usually have better price/performance ratio, and because they also tend to overclock much better, they are definitely cheaper compared to Nvidia cards.

The 670 is a true monster at 1920x1080p, but you can get very close to that with the 660ti running current titles in 1080p, if you overclock the rams. You can use higher antialiasing values with the 670 because of the 256bit wide bus (the 660ti performs best with 2XAA in 1080p). I tend to prefer Nvidia nowadays, so I personally recommend you buy the 670, save some money and buy the headphone a little later:p



If you only go for higher fps and want it "cheap", get the 7950 and overclock it to oblivion
Thanks, which 670 is better to choose, Gigabyte or another brand?
Posted on Reply
#24
Ikaruga
by: jazh23
Thanks, which 670 is better to choose, Gigabyte or another brand?
Yea both the Gigabyte and the MSI Power Edition are good ones, the former is quite slim and silent but the durability of the fans are not the best ... while the latter eats less power but it needs a little tweaking at the fan speeds under load to make it less noisy. There is also the one from Asus, which is the best overclocker iirc.

I would like to note that I never recommend upgrading to anything but twice as fast at least. You already have a very good card, and while the difference will be great and noticeable of course, but perhaps it won't be as much as what you would find satisfactory.
Posted on Reply
#25
jazh23
by: Ikaruga
Yea both the Gigabyte and the MSI Power Edition are good ones, the former is quite slim and silent but the durability of the fans are not the best ... while the latter eats less power but it needs a little tweaking at the fan speeds under load to make it less noisy. There is also the one from Asus, which is the best overclocker iirc.

I would like to note that I never recommend upgrading to anything but twice as fast at least. You already have a very good card, and while the difference will be great and noticeable of course, but perhaps it won't be as much as what you would find satisfactory.
I'll buy a new card because currently I can't run games smooth with maxim settings like Far cry 3, or Assassin's creed 3, etc.

I don't known that the gigabyte's fan has a durability problem, i will continue reading more reviews that help me to choose the best one. Thanks a lot...
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment