The performance numbers in this rumor are retarded. If 1660ti is 16% over 1060, then 1660 must be equal to 1060,making the successor to 1060 equal to the pascal card.Nvidia is smarter than do what AMD did with 480-580-590.
1536 turing cores with ddr6 can't be a 16% improvement over 1280 pascal cores with ddr5. 1070 is 1.35x of 1060 and that's what 1660Ti will be aiming for. There will indeed be a card 15-20% faster than 1060 - the 1660.

cucker tarlsonThis rumor is retarded. If 1660ti is 16% over 1060, then 1660 must be equal to 1060. 1536 turing cores with ddr6 can't be a 16% improvement over 1280 pascal cores with ddr5. 1070 is 1.35x of 1060 and that's what 1660Ti will be aiming for and. There will indeed be a card 15-20% faster than 1060 - the 1660.

1660 will probably match or beat the RX 590 with much less power draw, if it is indeed 229$ then the 590 needs a price cut.
At least for casual 1080p gamers this year isn't as bad as for high-end gamers.

cucker tarlsonThe performance numbers in this rumor are retarded. If 1660ti is 16% over 1060, then 1660 must be equal to 1060,making the successor to 1060 equal to the pascal card.Nvidia is smarter than do what AMD did with 480-580-590.
1536 turing cores with ddr6 can't be a 16% improvement over 1280 pascal cores with ddr5. 1070 is 1.35x of 1060 and that's what 1660Ti will be aiming for. There will indeed be a card 15-20% faster than 1060 - the 1660.

Why do you insist on taking the performance shown in one (questionable, as we have no means to reproduce it) DX11 benchmark and inferring the performance of a card in general? Wait 3 more weeks and answers will present themselves ;)

cucker tarlsonNvidia is smarter than do what AMD did with 480-580-590.

That's what we definitely saw in the case of RTX. Not to speak of the naming scheme in the case of 1660.

M2B1660 will probably match or beat the RX 590 with much less power draw, if it is indeed 229$ then the 590 needs a price cut.
At least for casual 1080p gamers this year isn't as bad as for high-end gamers.

You mean the 1660Ti will match or beat the RX590. In any case, we'll see soon enough.

MistralYou mean the 1660Ti will match or beat the RX590. In any case, we'll see soon enough.

Who cares at this point, power draw this and that puts me to sleep.

I think that GTX 1660=1344 , GTX 1660 Ti=1536, GTX 1650=1024 cores.

eidairaman1Who cares at this point, power draw this and that puts me to sleep.

Spoiler

thanks @F7GOS

Efficiency IS performance, lower power draw means lower noise, longer lifespan, higher clock rates, and fewer errors.

How about we all wait it out until w1zz gets the review samples from Nvidia, bench it against the current but now dated Pascal lineup, RTX cards & AMD's RX lineup. Only then we will see if this card is deemed "worthy" to replace the RTX2060 as the "non RT card that everyone wanted."

Tsukiyomi91How about we all wait it out until w1zz gets the review samples from Nvidia, bench it against the current but now dated Pascal lineup, RTX cards & AMD's RX lineup. Only then we will see if this card is deemed "worthy" to replace the RTX2060 as the "non RT card that everyone wanted."

I believe people wanted the exact RTX 2060 sans the RT at under $300. Since these are less powerful than that, some will still whine about it.

eidairaman1Who cares at this point, power draw this and that puts me to sleep.

Spoiler

thanks @F7GOS

:laugh::roll:
lol,how about an actual review once,eh ? will you ever learn to use those instead of those puny YT commentaries..... :rolleyes:

21 games in 3 resolutions + 1 OpenCL, updated a month ago
www.pcgameshardware.de/Grafikkarten-Grafikkarte-97980/Specials/Rangliste-GPU-Grafikchip-Benchmark-1174201/2/

580 is 2% faster overall

strix 1060 vs nitro 580 dead equal at 1080p and 1440p

www.computerbase.de/thema/grafikkarte/rangliste/

aib 580s are pretty much spent as far as overclocking goes, +4% gain

www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/RX_580_Nitro_Plus/33.html

1060 can easily clock to 2100mhz and gan substantial amounts of performance

www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/27.html

at the same time 580 OC will draw at least 80W more than 1060 OC, and that matters a lot given how you've now got +230W of power draw to cool down quietly and none of those 580 cards come with the same coolers that you find on Vega/1080Ti to do it silently.

I used to consider 580 a better buy than 1060,but that was only thanks to freesync support while the card itself was just not as good. Now that nvidia cards can use adaptive sync on budget monitors, a 1060 is a better choice over 580 in general.

That is.... interesting :oops:

cucker tarlsonThe performance numbers in this rumor are retarded. If 1660ti is 16% over 1060, then 1660 must be equal to 1060,making the successor to 1060 equal to the pascal card.Nvidia is smarter than do what AMD did with 480-580-590.
1536 turing cores with ddr6 can't be a 16% improvement over 1280 pascal cores with ddr5. 1070 is 1.35x of 1060 and that's what 1660Ti will be aiming for. There will indeed be a card 15-20% faster than 1060 - the 1660.

The leak that shows the 1660 Ti being only 16% faster than a 1060, that test was done in a laptop, who knows how much lower the clocks are on that when compared to the desktop version of the 1660 Ti.
Plus Ashes of the Singularity is rather CPU dependent, right? I could see a laptop CPU being a very limiting factor in that leak too.

Anyway, I'm expecting the 1660 Ti to be slightly weaker or even trade blows with the 1070, and the 1660 to do the same against the RX 590.

ezodagromThe leak that shows the 1660 Ti being only 16% faster than a 1060, that test was done in a laptop, who knows how much lower the clocks are on that when compared to the desktop version of the 1660 Ti.
Plus Ashes of the Singularity is rather CPU dependent, right? I could see a laptop CPU being a very limiting factor in that leak too.

Anyway, I'm expecting the 1660 Ti to be slightly weaker or even trade blows with the 1070, and the 1660 to do the same against the RX 590.

AotS isn't even a good game benchmark. It's mostly a showcase for async compute.

However, I will point out that 2060 is a great 1440p card and can handle 4k with some tweaking. A lesser card could still be pretty good at 1440p. Mid-range Pascal or Turing couldn't do that, so, price hike or not, that's progress in my book.

@bug agree. With that said, I don't think saving $50 or more for a "nerfed RTX2060" is going to make it worth one's wallet, considering how good the 2060 is in terms of value/performance ratio. On top of having both RT cores & Tensor Cores baked into the core, I say it's the "cheapest" card to enter the ray tracing bandwagon.

Will be snapping up a GTX 1650 for sure...

bastards one for 180 another 230

F7GOSWill be snapping up a GTX 1650 for sure...

Hmh that name reminds me on Ati Radeon x1650pro. One of the few Radeons what I have had, great card at the time, mine failed quite soon though but the same did 7600gt which I replaced it with. Had a pretty bad luck back then...