Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

ASUS GTX 660 Ti DirectCU II 3GB vs Gainward GeForce GTX 760 2GB (stock cooler)

Last response: in Components
Share
January 18, 2014 12:11:22 PM

Hello Everyone :) 

I've decided to upgrade my GPU. Although I'm pretty sure the ASUS GTX 660 Ti DirectCU II 3GB is the best choice I want someone else's opinion on this, because I'm the kind of guy who tell myself what I want to hear.

Here are the prices (in Norway):
ASUS GTX 660 Ti DirectCU II 3GB: 256 USD and 188 EUR
Gainward GeForce GTX 760 2GB: 306 USD and 225 EUR

Thank you in advance.
a b Ĉ ASUS
a b U Graphics card
January 18, 2014 12:17:51 PM

The Asus
- runs cooler
- quieter
- uses a bit less power
- 3GB of vRam
- a lot more OC headroom
- Asus legendary durability and build quality
- the Gainward increased cost will not provide equally greater performance. The 660ti price : performance is better
m
0
l
January 18, 2014 1:30:54 PM

The 760 is equal to the 670, and you should buy the 760. Not sure on the gain word brand though, do you have other options?
m
0
l
Related resources
a b Ĉ ASUS
a b U Graphics card
January 18, 2014 1:41:27 PM

760 is between 660ti and 670. 760 is weaker than 670 as much as it is stronger than 660ti. It is really in the middle.
m
0
l
January 18, 2014 1:43:56 PM

Have you even looked at the performance charts? 670 = 760.
m
0
l
a c 86 Î Nvidia
a b Ĉ ASUS
a c 540 U Graphics card
January 18, 2014 1:59:15 PM

TechPowerUp.com tested with way more apps (i.e. 18 games) than AnandTech's 6 games:

m
0
l
a b Ĉ ASUS
a b U Graphics card
January 18, 2014 2:06:37 PM

As other have said; ASUS is the better brand ........

But, GTX 760 is a Faster card..... NOW, if you want it ALL, just get an ASUS GTX 760 Direct CU II..... worth every bit
m
0
l
January 18, 2014 2:51:13 PM

ko888 said:
TechPowerUp.com tested with way more apps (i.e. 18 games) than AnandTech's 6 games:



It says that the GTX 660 Ti is 6% slower than the GTX 760, but the ASUS GTX 660 Ti DirectCU II 3GB has a much better cooler. Don't you think I can overclock the ASUS GTX 660 Ti DirectCU II 3GB to beat an overclocked stock GTX 760? And 3GB of VRAM can't possibly hurt the performance, can it?
m
0
l
January 18, 2014 3:28:42 PM

You won't be buying a reference 760 anyway. Asus is decent but no better than gigabyte or evga. The 760 can be overclocked also which can equate equal if not better performance than 670.

The 760 is faster than the 660 so I don't know why we are still discussing this thread lol
m
0
l

Best solution

a b Ĉ ASUS
a b U Graphics card
January 18, 2014 3:31:14 PM

If you OC the 660ti to match the 760s speed, it will be faster. The 660ti has more CUDA cores, but at lower speed. An OC of around 10% on the 660ti will put it ahead of the 760. And no, extra GB of vRam don't hurt performance. It will actually be helpful in certain situations. Also Asus is a bit more expensive but is the best - best cooling system, most OC headroom and longest life. If I have to make a rank
1 - Asus
2 - Gigabyte; Sapphire
3 - EVGA, XFX
4 - MSI,
5 - Zotac, Gainward, Club3D, PowerColor, PNY, Palit and the others from PC Partner

P.S Android, this is not about one being faster then the other. 760 > 660 = its a no brainer. But 660ti at 250 is a better value than 760 at 300. The 760 costs 17% more, while delivering only 6%, but the 660ti comes with 50% more vRam. It is about price : performance ratio and specific models by specific brands.
Share
January 18, 2014 3:40:17 PM

Shneiky said:
If you OC the 660ti to match the 760s speed, it will be faster. The 660ti has more CUDA cores, but at lower speed. An OC of around 10% on the 660ti will put it ahead of the 760. And no, extra GB of vRam don't hurt performance. It will actually be helpfull in certain situations.


Thank you :) 

Your answer (and this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmGWyAyO9mc ) made me settle on the ASUS GTX 660 Ti DirectCU II 3GB.
m
0
l
a c 86 Î Nvidia
a b Ĉ ASUS
a c 540 U Graphics card
January 18, 2014 4:58:25 PM

GeForce GTX 660 Ti has a 192-bit memory interface width (144.2 GB/sec Memory Bandwidth to the GPU).

GeForce GTX 760 has a 256-bit memory interface width (192.2 GB/sec Memory Bandwidth to the GPU).

The GeForce GTX 660 Ti may have more CUDA Cores and Texture Units but the narrower memory bus width seems to hold it back.
m
0
l
January 19, 2014 4:52:18 AM

ko888 said:
GeForce GTX 660 Ti has a 192-bit memory interface width (144.2 GB/sec Memory Bandwidth to the GPU).

GeForce GTX 760 has a 256-bit memory interface width (192.2 GB/sec Memory Bandwidth to the GPU).

The GeForce GTX 660 Ti may have more CUDA Cores and Texture Units but the narrower memory bus width seems to hold it back.


Won't the extra 1GB VRAM and 6200MHz memory clock help weight that out?
Here are the specs by the way: https://www.asus.com/Graphics_Cards/GTX660_TIDC2OC3GD5/...
m
0
l
a c 86 Î Nvidia
a b Ĉ ASUS
a c 540 U Graphics card
January 19, 2014 12:17:13 PM

Vetle W said:
Won't the extra 1GB VRAM and 6200MHz memory clock help weight that out?
Here are the specs by the way: https://www.asus.com/Graphics_Cards/GTX660_TIDC2OC3GD5/...


No.

Extra VRAM only helps if the game is causing the amount of VRAM needed to exceed what that the graphics card has.

Extra VRAM cannot overcome a physical memory bus width limitation. Overclocking the memory on a GeForce GTX 660 Ti results in a greater performance increase than just overclocking the GPU. That's just proof that the lower memory bandwidth is limiting the GPU's performance.

You can overclock a GeForce GTX 760 to a performance level that is still beyond what an overclocked GeForce GTX 660 Ti can reach.

Manual overclocking isn't a guarantee so you should only be comparing out of the box performance in your purchasing decision.
m
0
l
January 19, 2014 4:51:36 PM

Shneiky said:
If you OC the 660ti to match the 760s speed, it will be faster. The 660ti has more CUDA cores, but at lower speed. An OC of around 10% on the 660ti will put it ahead of the 760. And no, extra GB of vRam don't hurt performance. It will actually be helpful in certain situations. Also Asus is a bit more expensive but is the best - best cooling system, most OC headroom and longest life. If I have to make a rank
1 - Asus
2 - Gigabyte; Sapphire
3 - EVGA, XFX
4 - MSI,
5 - Zotac, Gainward, Club3D, PowerColor, PNY, Palit and the others from PC Partner

P.S Android, this is not about one being faster then the other. 760 > 660 = its a no brainer. But 660ti at 250 is a better value than 760 at 300. The 760 costs 17% more, while delivering only 6%, but the 660ti comes with 50% more vRam. It is about price : performance ratio and specific models by specific brands.


Well that didn't appear to be the title of the post asking which was a better price performance ratio. It looked to me he wanted to know which was better, so I answered him.

You are pulling all these percentages from the chart - but I'm not convinced that chart is the end all be all - if I'm not mistaken, that chart is comparing the REFERENCE Nvidia 760. The overclocked versions of 760s/770s with the better dual/tri fan heatsinks installed are CONSIDERABLY faster than the reference.

Additionally, you are ranking EVGA as 3rd tier GPU maker? I'm sorry but I have to disagree. They have THE BEST overclocking software of any GPU manufacturer, period. They have outstanding warranty and customer service not to mention the "step-up" program if you are attracted to those types of things. EVGA and Gigabyte are tier 1, period. The Gigabyte currently is probably runs cooler and quieter than any other manufacturer if you are attracted to that type of thing, and they have a very strong 3 year warranty as well.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7398/the-geforce-gtx-760-...
m
0
l
a b Ĉ ASUS
a b U Graphics card
January 20, 2014 3:39:44 AM

I agree that my Tier 1 and Tier 2 are quite similar in quality, but my personal preference to Asus comes from equal quality across the board of all Asus made boards and their amazing long life which only Sapphire matches. I pass my hardware down to family, so long life that over expands the warranty is something important to me.

EVGA runs hotter and noisier than Gigabyte/Sapphire/Asus. The software has nothing to do with the question, which is purely hardware. EVGA and XFX both have sometimes power design issues, they are less than MSI, but are still there. On a lot of occasions, I have witnessed a coil whine, or a capacitor whining mainly on XFX, but also on EVGA cards, after 1-2 years of use, the percentage is small, but not to be discounted. XFX have generally more noisy coolers.

And no, Gigabyte is not the coolest and quietest. They have an astounding quality though. I personal don't like their slightly thinner PCBs but that's more of a my thing.

I am a person who works 10-12 hours daily in front of a computer. Not gaming - working. When you spend that much time, you start to appreciate every few Db less of noise, and Asus is the leader there (except their edition of 290X which did not work out). I prefer to run stock Mhz and stay at under 30 Db at full load, than to superclock and hear a tiny helicopter in the case. It is a matter of priorities.

m
0
l
January 20, 2014 7:38:48 AM

Shneiky said:
I agree that my Tier 1 and Tier 2 are quite similar in quality, but my personal preference to Asus comes from equal quality across the board of all Asus made boards and their amazing long life which only Sapphire matches. I pass my hardware down to family, so long life that over expands the warranty is something important to me.

EVGA runs hotter and noisier than Gigabyte/Sapphire/Asus. The software has nothing to do with the question, which is purely hardware. EVGA and XFX both have sometimes power design issues, they are less than MSI, but are still there. On a lot of occasions, I have witnessed a coil whine, or a capacitor whining mainly on XFX, but also on EVGA cards, after 1-2 years of use, the percentage is small, but not to be discounted. XFX have generally more noisy coolers.

And no, Gigabyte is not the coolest and quietest. They have an astounding quality though. I personal don't like their slightly thinner PCBs but that's more of a my thing.

I am a person who works 10-12 hours daily in front of a computer. Not gaming - working. When you spend that much time, you start to appreciate every few Db less of noise, and Asus is the leader there (except their edition of 290X which did not work out). I prefer to run stock Mhz and stay at under 30 Db at full load, than to superclock and hear a tiny helicopter in the case. It is a matter of priorities.



Its funny you keep posting generalizations like this. The Gigabyte actually runs considerably cooler than the ASUS (and EVGA).

I understand you like ASUS, but what you are saying simply isn't factual. Read some articles. Please prove me wrong if you can.

I have read a TON about these cards. The gigabyte runs cooler than the ASUS, EVGA, or MSI.

Coil whine can happen in any manufacturer's card. The good companies cover this under warranty, and will replace the card if you have excessive coil whine. Just because you got a card of company "X" 5 years ago that made coil whine doesn't mean that every card they produce does the same thing. You make it sound like you had coil whine from multiple cards which I find hard to swallow. Did you try to get them replaced under warranty?

I am going to stop following this thread because its frustrating when people join forums and think they are experts, while meanwhile sites like Toms and Anandtech etc are posting very precise information that proves otherwise.

I sit in front of the computer at work for 10+ hours a day regularly also. I'm not a big fan of coil whine myself. I'm also not sold on Asus either because 1) they posted a really crappy video trying to show how good AIDA 64 is for Ivy Bridge stress testing (which is a joke), and 2) I bought one of their monitors and it was the worst picture I have ever seen. Maybe it was a lemon.

I know alot of people have really good experiences with Asus, and I will try Asus again for a graphics card, but I am not going to pay a premium over EVGA or gigabyte in order to do so.

All of the Gigabyte and EVGA products I bought lasted much longer than their warranties. Less than 6 months ago I gave a Q6600 and Gigabyte mobo to a friend that had been running overclocked for about 5-6 years, and it still ran excellent. I just retired a EVGA GTX 260 as well, still runs like a champ with no coil whine.

Anyway, you are entitled to your opinion, I just wish you would site some facts rather than make a handful of claims that don't line up with the reviews from experts (people who actually review components and write reviews for a living).
m
0
l
a b Ĉ ASUS
a b U Graphics card
January 20, 2014 6:19:22 PM

Well my dear friend, if I may call you that, your precise measurements point in my direction:


http://hothardware.com/Reviews/GeForce-GTX-680-RoundUp-...

GTX 680 roundup. Asus runs 2C hotter than GB, but the GB is the loudest card, followed by EVGA.

-----

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-ti-...

660TI roundup. Asus is the quietest - 4.5 DB quieter than GB and the GPU runs approximately 5C lower as well. Although other components on the Asus could use a bit more cooling.

-----

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/3117/9/six-geforce-gtx-...

Another 660TI. Even more favorable to Asus.

-----

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/asus-...

And yet another 660ti. 3 of them just to reassure you.

----

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7950-revi...

HD7950 - even if there is no EVGA and GB. Asus comes on top.

-----

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/radeo...

7790 roundup. Another one for Asus.

-----

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-280x-thir...

R9 280X. Asus is quieter by 2Db while GB is cooler by 2C. I prefer less Db.

------

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GeForce_GTX...

www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_780_Direct...

ASUS: Noise at full: 30 Db Temp at full: 67C
GB: Noise at full: 38 Db Temp at full: 72C

--------
Should I continue? Of course there are moments where Asus trades blows with GB, or GB does a slightly better job. In all the 650TI reviews I saw, the Asus was performing way worse than how it does in my case and GB was looking considerably better. I am not trying to mindlessly defend Asus. I was just thinking that Asus may perform better in positive pressure case than GB and GB to be better in a negative pressure one. Since I use positive pressure, that is maybe the case, because the card never ever spins more than 1350 RPMs and 61C in a 20C room inside a HAF912 (Prime95+Kombustor full CPU+GPU load) and is never more loud than the front intake fan (200mm, 19db rated, but I doubt it, I put my money on 26) or the HDD. Guess you can't always trust reviews...

Of course, GB and EVGA have a slight performance lead due to higher clocks when comparing cards at the same price point. But 5% (even 10 in worst case scenarios) performance is not something I would trade 3 Db for. Maybe you will.

In the end, in Western Europe, Asus has the same prices as GB and both are cheaper than EVGA in most cases. If there is a difference, it doesn't go more than 5 bucks for any card below 150 euro, 10-15 for 250 cards, and I don't really know or care how the 350+ cards are.

P.S I know, I know, Asus failed the 290x. GB did as well. Sapphire has the best model.
m
0
l
!