660 Ti alternatives?

[foxh0und]

I'm currently working on a new build to mostly play Battlefield 3 on high/ultra, people have suggested to me to get the 660 Ti, but it seems expensive to me for what it is, it is £259 for the MSI PE and other companies don't run much cheaper, maybe in the US the 660 Ti is big bang for buck, but I'm not too sure about the U.K, I am totally new to gaming pc's so I don't understand GPU's, but from prices I've seen, I can get a 3GB GPU for the same price as a 2GB 660 Ti, does that make any difference?


Here is the build:
GPU: 2GB MSI GTX 660 Ti Power Edition
CPU: Intel Core i5 3570k + Coolmaster hyper 212 Evo CPU cooler
MOBO: MSI Z77A-G45
PSU: 650W Corsair Enthusiast TX V2
RAM: 8GB (2 x 4GB) Corsair DDR3 Vengeance
SSD: 128GB OCZ Vertex 4
HDD: 1TB Seagate 7200 RPM

 

[djscribbles]

The memory on the GPU is only one minor factor in comparing them. It's not uncommon for slower GPUs to be bundled with unnecessarily large memories to make them seem more powerful.

Think of the video card like a CPU with onboard memory. Once you have 'enough' memory (which 2GB is enough for 1080p max settings almost always), all that matters is the memory bandwidth (how quick can the GPU read the stuff in memory) and the raw processing power of the GPU.

If you're just put off by the price of the 660 Ti, you can look to the AMD 7850 for a cheaper alternative that performs in the same ballpark. However the 660Ti is priced pretty appropriately for what you get, there may be some slightly better deals in last gen cards, or on the AMD side; but any card much cheaper than 200$ isn't likely to perform nearly as good as the 660Ti.

 

[arzbhatia]

The best alternative is the Radeon HD 7950. 3GB + 384Bit. The 660ti is just 192 bit :\

 

[vitornob]

192 bits? Doesn't matter if the performance is on par.

 

[Dangi]

192 bits? Doesn't matter if the performance is on par.

It does matter once you start enabling high resolutions and AA filters

But for 1080 gaming it shouldn't matter

 

[arzbhatia]

192 bits? Doesn't matter if the performance is on par.

Haha! Trust me. It does.

 

[Dangi]

Go for the 7870 or 7950, depending on your budget

 

[djscribbles]

Haha! Trust me. It does.

These guys don't seem to think it matters, actually.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/08/27/nvidia_geforce_gtx_660_ti_at_high_aa_settings_review/8

Our testing today at super high AA settings has shown that the "bus limited" GeForce GTX 660 Ti does not crumble so easily. There were no instances where we ran into "VRAM wall"s that took gaming performance into single digits, this never happened even at high AA settings with Transparency AA.

Not saying your wrong, just saying that there is certainly evidence to the contrary. (as a note, they were testing a 660Ti clocked to the same rate as a GT 670 to isolate the difference in memory bandwidth; so don't take the framerates they posted out of context for comparing against AMD cards)

 

[zooted]

A good alternative is a 7870. They trade blows when the settings and AA is turned up. The 7950 wins when the AA and settings are maxed. Not to mention the CGN cards have a lot of overclocking headroom. They also scale very nicely in overclocking.

 

[sarinaide]

HD 7870 or GTX 570

I wish people will stop saying its on a par, in Physx tessellation the Nvidia's are faster in other titles on pure DX 11 rendering the 7870 will easily beat a 660ti. Ultimately it comes down to the game you play. Battlefield 3 favours nvidia engines.

 

[MikkelP]

I'm not qualified to give you a decent answer but the gpu memory is not all that important.. Check out www.game-debate.com and compare GPU's there.