Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GTX 560 SLI upgrade to GTX 660 SLI?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 15, 2012 3:29:53 PM

Current specs.

i5-2500k
2 x Gigabyte GTX-560 1 GB
Gigabyte GA-Z68MA-D2H-B3
4 x 4GB (16 GB) Memory DDR3 - CL9

I currently only play BF3 at 1980 x 1080. I find that even with the SLI setup I cant run it on ULTRA and every once and while the frames slow down a bit. I know that's a limitation of VRAM.

I was considering selling my GTX 560's and upgrading to 2 x GeForce GTX 660 OC 2GB PCI-E. I do not overclock ever.

Do you think the upgrade would be worth it to last another 1-2 years? I'd like it to be able to run the next release of Battlefield, but who knows what those requirements will be with it being so far out.

I was also considering selling my i5 and sticking an i7-3770k in here as well.
November 15, 2012 3:44:54 PM

Why not just get a 670? For example, this 670 would be almost on-par with the 660 SLI in performance, but is much cheaper:

http://pcpartpicker.com/part/zotac-video-card-zt6030210...

I don't recommend an i7. There're no games where they really have an advantage over the i5 in most situations. There are a few where thy do have a performance advantage ,but the i5 already performs so well that it's hardly any different and the i7's advantage is only Hyper-Threading, not a huge deal when you already have four cores. Maybe some future games will change this, but that's the way it is right now and for the foreseeable future AFAIK.
m
0
l
Related resources
November 15, 2012 3:52:34 PM

Bah they all beat me to it, but yea you are better off getting a single high end card - it will perform the same and cost less, and you will have less issues with it. Only reason to really SLI is if you need higher performance than a single card can give you, so SLI'ing lower end cards to match high end cards is not recommended, and most of the time more expensive.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 3:54:53 PM

Amuse_UK said:
Looking at the latest drivers from Nvidia, the 670 is now back up with the 7970 in certain titles.

If you are in the USA, i suggest this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


Why would you go with a slightly overclock MSI....

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Same price, same mail in rebate, but on a GTX680 PCB w/ better cooling and factory overclocked to 1006 mhz core....



But ya. OP. You'd be better off going with a single card set-up. SLI/CFX set-ups still suffer from stuttering (although Nvidia's new Adaptive Vsync does solve some issues, but stuttering still happens)
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
November 15, 2012 3:55:52 PM

I'd say you can expect a good 50% framerate gain over what you have (they are non-Ti right?). The GTX670 is a strong option for future-proofing - although there's no way it could compete with dual GTX660s, it is cheaper than two cards and allows you to add another a year or two down the line for a much lower price. GTX660 offers best performance for money, but GTX670 will give more longevity if you're leaving a slot free for another.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 3:56:35 PM

killerhurtalot said:
Why would you go with a slightly overclock MSI....

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Same price, same mail in rebate, but on a GTX680 PCB w/ better cooling and factory overclocked to 1006 mhz core....

No need to quote me, just give the OP the link.

Glad you could find a better price/perf 670.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:01:48 PM

Here is the interesting thing. I can get a 670 around here for $380-420. I can get two 660's non ti for around $420-440.00. You still think it would be better to get a 670?
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:02:29 PM

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of SLI, many games just don't utilize it very well. I'm not sure why because it should be double the power, but most of the time it isn't. A better solution, if you were to get an additional card, is to have one card run dedicated physx and the other be something like the GTX 670. It feels like a paltry amount of games actually support Physx, but it truly does bring some awesome effects and is very hardware intensive, hence the value of a dedicated card. You don't need to spend big on the dedicated card either, something like a 480 should do fine. One 670 will simply crush anything on the market currently besides super CPU intensive games. Maybe like Metro 2033 on full max, or Witcher 2 with ubersampling on would cause it to drop to sub 60 frames. I honestly can barely tell the difference sometimes between ultra and the extra super intensive setting, maybe it's just me. Also, kind've unrelated, but I can't even tell the difference between getting 60 frames and 40, if the framerate is constant, hell even 35 frames is playable to me if it never dips below 30.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:04:33 PM

670 is a lot better than 2 non Ti 660's, you simply have no issues with SLi...

Should be a no brainer.

SLi with the 6 series or 7xxx series from AMD, is best spent when using surround, or 2560x1600 res.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:04:58 PM

The 670 that I suggested beats all other 670s except maybe Asus' 1.3GHz GPU clock model (but probably that one too) and is available for under $383. It has a significant GPU factory overclock to ~1.1GHz base frequency and a far more important 10% memory factory overclock to ~1.65GHz that alleviates the memory bandwidth bottle-neck. It does in fact compete well with two 660s in SLI, much better than a reference 670 or a 670 with only a moderate GPU factory overclock.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:05:41 PM

All that can be attained on any other 670.

Got my 670's at 1290mhz core, and 7100mhz on the memory right now, and these are reference models.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:07:19 PM

That's manual overclocking. No one said anything about manual overclocking, so no, it can't be attained on reference 670s. My numbers are stock for the card. It can also be pushed farther on average than any reference 670 anyway should you opt for manual overclocking.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:09:30 PM

Amuse_UK said:
So, as a closure, the OP needs to tell us if he knows how to OC GPU's, otherwise, the faster stock card will give a bit more performance, whereas a cheaper 670, can be tweaked to deliver the same as a more expensive product.


You can't tweak a cheaper card to perform as well as a superior card when you do the same tweaks to it.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:10:12 PM

So, as a closure, the OP needs to tell us if he knows how to OC GPU's, otherwise, the faster stock card will give a bit more performance, whereas a cheaper 670, can be tweaked to deliver the same as a more expensive product.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:10:17 PM

+1 to gtx670

no SLI issue, better case ventilation, can further upgrade to dual gtx670 if u have extra $ later
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:11:45 PM

You certainly can :) 
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:14:16 PM

No, you can't. Better binning and cooling as well as often better build quality on the better models means that you can't because they hit higher frequencies on average and do so with lower temps and lower noise.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:17:38 PM

None of Zotac's cards are highly binned, they just have coolers slapped on them.

EVGA's FTW/SSC/POV's TGT/ASUS's Matrix... these are highly binned chips.

m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:18:29 PM

Overclocking is not that simple and takes a lot of trial and error. It used to be that you could permanantly damage your card by messing around, but I think most newer cards have a fail safe in them that won't let the card heat up to dangerous levels without reverting or shutting off or something. So you have to reach the threshold in right before the card goes into fail safe, which takes a lot of time to get just right. I still believe it lowers the shelf life of your card to having it run at maximum power all the time, but that's just me.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:23:32 PM

blazorthon said:
No, you can't. Better binning and cooling as well as often better build quality on the better models means that you can't because they hit higher frequencies on average and do so with lower temps and lower noise.


Well i have a reference model gtx 680 that clocks up to 1280, My friend bought an evga SC gtx 670, he can't even overclock his 20 Mhz over the factory overclocked speeds without it crashing... Don't just assume because you are paying more for a factory clocked card that the card can actually overclock higher than a reference card.

And as for temps my GPU stays around 70c at 1280Mhz and isn't to loud. Having the extra fans on a card that you can't up the volts on dose not really allow you to clock it higher anyway all it will do is make your card temp go from say 70-75c to 60-70c, and 75c still isn't to hot for GPUs.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:28:59 PM

Derza10 said:
Well i have a reference model gtx 680 that clocks up to 1280, My friend bought an evga SC gtx 670, he can't even overclock his 20 Mhz over the factory overclocked speeds without it crashing... Don't just assume because you are paying more for a factory clocked card that the card can actually overclock higher than a reference card.


A more expensive 670 is actually probably the superior card regardless of overlocking rates, it may have more MHRz or pipllines, filters or whatever. I mean I love graphics as much as the next guy, but is it really even worth it to push your card? I mean any version of the GTX 670 can crush any game in the market at 1080p. I'm also one to think that the differences between medium settings and high settings tend to be huge, but the jump between high and ultra is far less noticeable. I still can't for the life of me understand why some enthusiasts think it is absolutely paramount to get 60fps a all times. Very few console games on the planet run at 60fps and I've never noticed them chugging let alone being unplayable.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:32:59 PM

bryjoered said:
A more expensive 670 is actually probably the superior card regardless of overlocking rates, it may have more MHRz or pipllines, filters or whatever. I mean I love graphics as much as the next guy, but is it really even worth it to push your card? I mean any version of the GTX 670 can crush any game in the market at 1080p. I'm also one to think that the differences between medium settings and high settings tend to be huge, but the jump between high and ultra is far less noticeable. I still can't for the life of me understand why some enthusiasts think it is absolutely paramount to get 60fps a all times. Very few console games on the planet run at 60fps and I've never noticed them chugging let alone being unplayable.


And no. the price usually has little to do with what the card's quality is. Look at MSI. Their cards (GTX 660 ti and GTX 670) were utter trash because they overvolted them...And they still sold at a premium because the over volting gave them a good performance boost over the competition (at the detriment to the GPU's life span)



Wait 2-3 years down the road. It's definitely worth overclocking when it gets outdated.

I'm hoping that my GTX 670 would last maybe 3-4 years being able to game at least at 30 fps on 1080p...
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:33:44 PM

Derza10 said:
Well i have a reference model gtx 680 that clocks up to 1280, My friend bought an evga SC gtx 670, he can't even overclock his 20 Mhz over the factory overclocked speeds without it crashing... Don't just assume because you are paying more for a factory clocked card that the card can actually overclock higher than a reference card.

And as for temps my GPU stays around 70c at 1280Mhz and isn't to loud. Having the extra fans on a card that you can't up the volts on dose not really allow you to clock it higher anyway all it will do is make your card temp go from say 70-75c to 60-70c, and 75c still isn't to hot for GPUs.


EVGA doesn't count. They don't make good cards nor good coolers. Furthermore, a great non-reference cooler can be far more effective than your claims. Furthermore, I don't just assume that a factory overclocked card is superior, I went with what is a superior card and said that it is superior. The same could be said for cards such as the Asus GTX 670 DCII TOP (although it's discontinued) and a few other 670s compared to most others This Zotac is simply the best stock 670 and one of the best overclockers.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:35:44 PM

Hahaha^^

I will have to remember that, "EVGA make bad cards"
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:35:51 PM

Amuse_UK said:
Hahaha^^

I will have to remember that, "EVGA make bad cards"


I never said that. I said that they don't make good cards because that's the truth. That doesn't mean that they make bad cards. EVGA's selling point is customer service, not card quality.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:38:53 PM

blazorthon said:
I never said that. I said that they don't make good cards because that's the truth. That doesn't mean that they make bad cards. EVGA's selling point is customer service, not card quality.

I think you may know my brother "Recon-UK"

You should have a conversation with him, see how long you last :) 
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:39:21 PM

I never have overclocked nor do I have the desire too really.

So this card here would be better than two 660 no TI's in SLI hey?

http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX39319



Based on these to reviews the 670 would be slower than 2 x 660, although only by 4 or so FPS I guess. I am comparing BF3:

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

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-670-rev...




How about this article, related to this card, would one be concerned with buying a 670?
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/MSI-GTX-660-670-overvo...

m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:42:27 PM

blazorthon said:
I never said that. I said that they don't make good cards because that's the truth. That doesn't mean that they make bad cards. EVGA's selling point is customer service, not card quality.


Tell that to the people that buy and OC EVGA's cards. I still haven't seen a GTX 670 FTW that can't make it to 1150 mhz core and 6.5 ghz memory. They make good quality cards that's basically guaranteed a certain level of performance (where as I've seen Zotacs being literally can't be oced at all cause the manufacturer doesn't leave headroom)

And also by customer service you mean great warranty that they actually honor in decent periods of time instead of directing you through a *** ton of customer service representatives.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:45:48 PM

Just for instance, my bro, a well respected tom's hardware expert Ranked 25th world wide.

He managed to clock EVGA GTX 480 SSC cards before everyones eyes in this forum, all on air, and achieved some absolutely stunning results.

He also posted video's to back up his results.


I think his max was 920mhz on the core, that is 220mhz over stock.........
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:48:43 PM

rayf01 said:
I never have overclocked nor do I have the desire too really.

So this card here would be better than two 660 no TI's in SLI hey?

http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX39319



Based on these to reviews the 670 would be slower than 2 x 660, although only by 4 or so FPS I guess. I am comparing BF3:

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

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-670-rev...




How about this article, related to this card, would one be concerned with buying a 670?
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/MSI-GTX-660-670-overvo...



You're making too big of a deal over a small performance improvement with potential for a on of problems.

With SLI set-ups, you literally have to wait for graphics drivers to come out to actually support SLI/CFX for new games otherwise it performs like *** o only slightly above a single card performance. Not to mention the stuttering problem.


And When you read the article that MSI was overvolting... why did you link a MSI card.... just go with any other brand other than MSI....
And no, that card is barely factory overclocked... it's core's only at 965 mhz with no memory overclock...

I doubt any GTX 670 would be able to outperform GTX 660 SLI. (when the proper SLI support comes to those games)





And OP has spoken. He doesn't want to OC the card. Go buy that Zotac card that blazorthon suggestd

http://www.compusa.com/applications/searchtools/item-de...

$375 at compusa.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:51:16 PM

Amuse_UK said:
I think you may know my brother "Recon-UK"

You should have a conversation with him, see how long you last :) 


He used aftermarket coolers according to him (I've talked to him, I outlasted him and we had to get mods involved because he and a few others got pissed at me for not backing down :p  ), so that doesn't count either and besides, it's with a card from two generations ago that doesn't even use the same GPU micro-architecture. You're making unfair comparisons.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:52:47 PM

blazorthon said:
He used aftermarket coolers according to him (I've talked to him, I outlasted him :p  ), so that doesn't count either.

You outlasted because he got treated like scum, due to forum trolls, i do not think you realize what he taught people in this forum, he had mods come to him about what he did, and taught them a thing or two, do not try rubbing things in peoples faces when you have no real clue.

He also outsmarted you with knowledge 10/1.

m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:54:07 PM

Ok, back to an original question then. Compared to my SLI of two non TI GTX 560's, would I see much of a performance gain going to a single GTX 670?


And I linked both the article and the MSI card because the gentleman up top recommended the MSI card. I was inquiring as to if this was fixe or something and still recommending it.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:56:05 PM

rayf01 said:
Ok, back to an original question then. Compared to my SLI of two non TI GTX 560's, would I see much of a performance gain going to a single GTX 670?


Yes. It's be roughly the performance gain from the 580 to the 670, but with the added benefit of less stutter thanks to the lack of mid-ranged Fermi SLI (although if you're not sensitive to this, you might not see it anyway), much lower power consumption, and more memory capacity.
m
0
l
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 15, 2012 4:56:43 PM

Amuse_UK said:
You outlasted because he got treated like scum, due to forum trolls, i do not think you realize what he taught people in this forum, he had mods come to him about what he did, and taught them a thing or two, do not try rubbing things in peoples faces when you have no real clue.

He also outsmarted you with knowledge 10/1.

Really? Which Mods?
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:58:00 PM

OP ignore the odd bickering between the kids. The advice your getting from most to snag a 670 or possibly a 680 instead of SLI'ing two 660 (non ti) cards is the best advice. The two 660's will only be marginally better than a single 670 in some games, a lot worse in those that are not optimized for SLI, plus you wont have the odd headaches that can accompany SLI.

You can see the 660 SLI tests here:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-gef...

Can compare say the BF3 tests of the 670 back to the 660 SLI tests:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-670-rev...
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 4:58:01 PM

Amuse_UK said:
You outlasted because he got treated like scum, due to forum trolls, i do not think you realize what he taught people in this forum, he had mods come to him about what he did, and taught them a thing or two, do not try rubbing things in peoples faces when you have no real clue.

He also outsmarted you with knowledge 10/1.


No, he didn't. He made a complete asshole out of himself. No one was an ass to him until after he started it. Anything that he got was his own fault for being incapable of arguing without resorting to mockery when he has no proof for his claims and refusing to accept when he's wrong such as how the 480's power consumption is big enough to dent the power bill of even USA's low electricity prices compared to the Radeon 7850.

What he accurately taught people was that the 480, for a time, had huge value and great cheap computers could be built with it. However, he refused to accept that newer and better cards came out later on and that's his own fault too.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:00:11 PM

He mentioned 1 or two who had actually taken up his information, and benchmarked vs him, i believe one was 4ryan6, and arthurh.

Blazorthon, you sound butthurt.
m
0
l
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 15, 2012 5:01:34 PM

Amuse_UK said:
He mentioned 1 or two who had actually taken up his information, and benchmarked vs him, i believe one was 4ryan6, and arthurh,

OK Recon I'll check on that.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:10:55 PM

Amuse_UK said:
He mentioned 1 or two who had actually taken up his information, and benchmarked vs him, i believe one was 4ryan6, and arthurh.

Blazorthon, you sound butthurt.


I could say the same about you. Whats the point of this?
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:13:54 PM

blazorthon said:
I could say the same about you. Whats the point?

My point is exactly what i said, you are butthurt, it is clearly obvious...

I do not understand why you need to fight me so much if it was wrong.

m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:14:35 PM

I'm having some trouble trying to find a comparable BF3 benchmark for a 560 non TI SLI vs a single 670, even across two reviewers. I'd like to see what kind of FPS difference I would have compairing these two:

1.) 2 x GTX 560 non TI in SLI

and the

2.) Single GTX 670

Could anyone help me out here? This would give me some hard numbers to see what kind of performance increase I will get going from my current cards.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:16:53 PM

The 670 is the better choice for you, please ignore our silly argument.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:18:27 PM

rayf01 said:
I'm having some trouble trying to find a comparable BF3 benchmark for a 560 non TI SLI vs a single 670, even across two reviewers. I'd like to see what kind of FPS difference I would have compairing these two:

1.) 2 x GTX 560 non TI in SLI

and the

2.) Single GTX 670

Could anyone help me out here? This would give me some hard numbers to see what kind of performance increase I will get going from my current cards.


Agreed on that, 670 is better. If you want a good comparison, then you would probably be fine with looking at GTX 580 to GTX 670 comparisons instead of 560 SLI to 670. Two 560s are only slightly faster than the 580 on average. It won't show how much things will improve going from an older, mid-ranged SLI setup to a new, single GPU setup, but it'll at least show a decent FPS comparison.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:18:49 PM

Amuse_UK said:
My point is exactly what i said, you are butthurt, it is clearly obvious...

I do not understand why you need to fight me so much if it was wrong.


If it was wrong, all the more reason to fight it. That's not being butthurt or whatever, that's refusing to accept a false reality.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:20:39 PM

Ahhh, no one really cares in all honesty.

He made you look stupid because you barked up the wrong tree too much, remember your 7850 fiasco?

Turned out that your expertise would have led many to a burnt out card.

m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:21:51 PM

blazorthon said:
Actually, he only used a single example in that and I admitted it anyway, so no, not really. He made his own fiasco mistakes too.

I would love to hear what fiasco's they were.

All i know is that he used to try and advertise Nvidia, as he works for them..............
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:22:10 PM

Amuse_UK said:
Ahhh, no one really cares in all honesty.

He made you look stupid because you barked up the wrong tree too much, remember your 7850 fiasco?

Turned out that your expertise would have led many to a burnt out card.


Actually, he only used a single example in that and I admitted it anyway just to be on the safe side, so no, not really. He made his own fiasco mistakes too.
m
0
l
November 15, 2012 5:23:33 PM

Amuse_UK said:
My point is exactly what i said, you are butthurt, it is clearly obvious...

I do not understand why you need to fight me so much if it was wrong.


My god, you are almost as worse as Recon. No offence to him at all, but seeing him write on every post "You should get a 480" was kinda annoying (Exaggerated obviously..)
m
0
l
!