Wednesday, January 16th 2019

NVIDIA Readies GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Based on TU116, Sans RTX

It looks like RTX technology won't make it to sub-$250 market segments as the GPUs aren't fast enough to handle real-time raytracing, and it makes little economic sense for NVIDIA to add billions of additional transistors for RT cores. The company is hence carving out a sub-class of "Turing" GPUs under the TU11x ASIC series, which will power new GeForce GTX family SKUs, such as the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, and other GTX 1000-series SKUs. These chips offer "Turing Shaders," which are basically CUDA cores that have the IPC and clock-speeds rivaling existing "Turing" GPUs, but no RTX capabilities. To sweeten the deal, NVIDIA will equip these cards with GDDR6 memory. These GPUs could still have tensor cores which are needed to accelerate DLSS, a feature highly relevant to this market segment.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti will no doubt be slower than the RTX 2060, and be based on a new ASIC codenamed TU116. According to a VideoCardz report, this 12 nm chip packs 1,536 CUDA cores based on the "Turing" architecture, and the same exact memory setup as the RTX 2060, with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory across a 192-bit wide memory interface. The lack of RT cores and a lower CUDA core count could make the TU116 a significantly smaller chip than the TU106, and something NVIDIA can afford to sell at sub-$300 price-points such as $250. The GTX 1060 6 GB is holding the fort for NVIDIA in this segment, besides other GTX 10-series SKUs such as the GTX 1070 occasionally dropping below the $300 mark at retailers' mercy. AMD recently improved its sub-$300 portfolio with the introduction of Radeon RX 590, which convincingly outperforms the GTX 1060 6 GB.
Source: VideoCardz
Add your own comment

64 Comments on NVIDIA Readies GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Based on TU116, Sans RTX

#1
sam_86314
Here's hoping we get a card with a full TU114 chip without RTX for $500. That'd be a good buy.

Edit: noticed typo in the title; says TU106 but the article says TU116.
Posted on Reply
#3
TesterAnon
As long its better than the GTX 1070/just as good as the RTX 2060 without RTX for $250 then this would be the first reasonable card this generation.
Posted on Reply
#4
Xzibit
I wonder if Jensen Huang finds this rumor underwhelming. No RTX, No DLSS. Will it be crushed ?
Posted on Reply
#5
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
bubbleawsome said:
Is it 1660 or 1160?
This new series could feature SKU number such as 1660, 1550, 1330. Anything goes as long as it's <2000. So NVIDIA runs two parallel client-segment families, GTX 10-series, and RTX 20-series.

For the next-gen, I predict the numbering will be RTX 4000 and GTX 3000 together, and so on.

Xzibit said:
I wonder if Jensen Huang finds this rumor underwhelming. No RTX, No DLSS. Will it be crushed ?
Turns out the TU116 only lacks RT cores, not tensor cores. There could still be DLSS because it's highly relevant to this segment for being faster than TAA.
Posted on Reply
#6
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Ok lets add more to the confusion.

They could of just had a GTX 2050, 2040, 2030...
Posted on Reply
#7
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
eidairaman1 said:
Ok lets add more to the confusion.

They could of just had a GTX 2050, 2040, 2030...
Then they would've been slapped with "I thought 2000-series did ray-tracing" lawsuits.
Posted on Reply
#8
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
btarunr said:
Then they would've been slapped with "I thought 2000-series did ray-tracing" lawsuits.
Erhem GTX, RTX...

Not any different from GTX, GTS, GT...
Posted on Reply
#9
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
eidairaman1 said:
Erhem GTX, RTX...

Not any different from GTX, GTS, GT...
They want to completely avoid these cards having "RTX" or "2xxx" in the name for complete CYA against people suing for lack of ray-tracing.

Even when they do mention "Turing" for the shaders, they specify they only mean shaders ("Turing Shaders" printed on the box).
Posted on Reply
#10
Naito
eidairaman1 said:
Erhem GTX, RTX...
Agreed. Nvidia could rather simply differentiate between ray-tracing support by keeping RTX exclusive to cards which have RT cores and GTX to cards which do not. This will help prevent yet another nomenclature nightmare. For example, market the 'GTX 1660 Ti' as the GTX 2050 or heck, even GTX 2045 depending on which tier Nvidia want it to sit. By sticking with the 1000 series, one may be forgiven for thinking it is still Pascal-based.
Posted on Reply
#11
cucker tarlson
btarunr said:
Then they would've been slapped with "I thought 2000-series did ray-tracing" lawsuits.
you can't sue if you can't read.same way if someone said they thought 1030 was faster than 980.
Posted on Reply
#12
TheOne
1080 equivalent 1770 Ti for <$400 and a 1080 Ti equivalent 1880 Ti for <$600.
Posted on Reply
#13
8tyone
TesterAnon said:
As long its better than the GTX 1070/just as good as the RTX 2060 without RTX for $250 then this would be the first reasonable card this generation.
Agree.
Posted on Reply
#14
sutyi
TesterAnon said:
As long its better than the GTX 1070/just as good as the RTX 2060 without RTX for $250 then this would be the first reasonable card this generation.
It only has 24SMs vs 30SMs in the RTX 2060, so it will be at bare minimum 20% slower compared to that. That puts it some where between a GTX 1060 and a GTX 1070, I'm guessing pricing will be on par with RX 590s.
Posted on Reply
#15
GlacierXD
1660? weird name for a new released product.
Posted on Reply
#16
cucker tarlson
sutyi said:
It only has 24SMs vs 30SMs in the RTX 2060, so it will be at bare minimum 20% slower compared to that. That puts it some where between a GTX 1060 and a GTX 1070, I'm guessing pricing will be on par with RX 590s.
2060 is 1080 performance so this will match 1070.If pricing matches rx590 we'll have a card worth looking at in the sub-300 range, cause atm rx590 is a farce. 4% faster than rx580 OC vs OC and $50 more expensive.
Posted on Reply
#17
Tsukiyomi91
need to see the performance of this non-RT Turing core being put thru its paces. If the theoretical performance is slower than the 2060, then I don't think anyone would save a few bucks on a new GPU that's essentially a nerfed TU106 with smaller die size & footprint. Price wise it'll be in the north of $270 or more since Nvidia being Nvidia, are gonna make sure people are going to pick the 2060 over the 1660Ti (coz why not)
Posted on Reply
#18
Gungar
btarunr said:
This new series could feature SKU number such as 1660, 1550, 1330. Anything goes as long as it's <2000. So NVIDIA runs two parallel client-segment families, GTX 10-series, and RTX 20-series.

For the next-gen, I predict the numbering will be RTX 4000 and GTX 3000 together, and so on.



Turns out the TU116 only lacks RT cores, not tensor cores. There could still be DLSS because it's highly relevant to this segment for being faster than TAA.
Because you really think there is going to have another RTX fiasco? xD Intel is coming for next gen Nvidia if they continue with RTX it's over for them.
Posted on Reply
#19
PerfectWave
it is funny they still make gpu without rtx and they wanna push RTX ON LOL
Posted on Reply
#21
Midland Dog
why not make it the gtx 2050ti it would sell like hotcakes in that price bracket (1060 3gb price)
Posted on Reply
#22
Vayra86
BWAAAAHHHahahaa surely this can't be true. Surely Huang isn't thát desperate. Surely RTX will live longer than one gen?

Wait, its actually happening :eek: Not even repurposed Pascal but actual Turing shaders with adaptations. I guess you can do that when money is no object?

So, RTX OFF it is, then. If you're still a believer that it will gain traction like this, what can I say. Damn, its a good day.
Posted on Reply
#23
Live OR Die
Ill buy it give me a GTX1880TI any day RTX is poo.
Posted on Reply
#24
Nxodus
source: VideoCardz

ah ok, fake news then
Posted on Reply
#25
PLSG08
Wouldn't it be easier to name if its the GTX 2060 and RTX 2060, rather than a whole new nomenclature?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment