Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

660Ti Vs. 670

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 4, 2013 9:21:07 PM

I am looking on wether to get a MSI Nvidia GTX 660Ti 2GD5/OC or a MSI Nvidia GTX 670 2GD5/OC. What I want to know is if the Extra $90 is worth the benefit And I do plan on overclocking them

More about : 660ti 670

a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 9:25:02 PM

If you don't know whether it's worth it then you probably don't need if. If you're playing at 1080p, a 660ti will be more than enough.
a b U Graphics card
January 4, 2013 9:25:12 PM

the $90 is very well worth the benefit because after OverClocking GTx 670 you get the same performance of 680!...
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
January 4, 2013 9:26:37 PM

EzioAs said:
If you don't know whether it's worth it then you probably don't need if. If you're playing at 1080p, a 660ti will be more than enough.

660Ti is not enough for Far Cry 3 even at 1080p
a b U Graphics card
January 4, 2013 9:27:07 PM

until the 680 is overclocked =D
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 9:28:02 PM

legendkiller said:
660Ti is not enough for Far Cry 3 even at 1080p


It's enough. You'll just need to lower some of the image quality a little bit. Not that it'll look terrible since it's a proper PC optimized game
a b U Graphics card
January 4, 2013 9:29:49 PM

EzioAs said:
It's enough. You'll just need to lower some of the image quality a little bit. Not that it'll look terrible since it's a proper PC optimized game

"lower" isn't my type lol, I want the max if possible
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 9:33:01 PM

legendkiller said:
"lower" isn't my type lol, I want the max if possible


Not everybody plays at max settings lol. Some people are quite satisfied with medium-high as long as they don't have to pay a huge premium ;) 

We actually need OP's resolution and preferred image quality settings though to suggest better.
January 4, 2013 9:38:27 PM

I do plan on doing a 2 way sli in the future but right now i dont have the money for ether but i am close so i just want to know if it is worth the wait

Best solution

a c 132 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 9:39:21 PM
Share

If you want a good balance of max settings/value the 670 will provide it for you more so then the 660Ti. It has 680/7970 performance at a smaller price tag. The 660Ti is a card that will get you by with near maxed out settings now the 670 is good for now and is built to last you longer in the future. 6(7)0, and 6(8),0 the ( ) meaning the important number normally mean you will see a trend of them lasting longer. You will still find people using GTX480's and being happy as a cucumber.

my vote +1 to 670 I had a 660Ti returned it and got a 670 couldn't be happier first enthusiast grade card I have ever bought I normally buy middle of the road cards happy I spent the extra :) 
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 9:42:39 PM

By the time you're ready to go SLI, next gen cards will probably comes out already which makes upgrading to the 700 series a much more sensible solution than going SLI.
January 4, 2013 9:43:51 PM

see though im to young to have a job so money is a very large and heavy object but heresmy arguement if i get the 660ti i can oc it to a 670 but if i get a 670 i can oc it to a 680 but is the $90 worth that premeum sence there so similar in performace anyways
a c 132 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 9:46:16 PM

If money is the object and spending the extra 90 is going to put a strain on you the 660Ti will get the job done. I can't speak for how long it will relevant but it should be good for up to 2 years I would say on decent settings and probably pretty decent after that.
Also EZ I don't like the waiting game waiting and waiting normally pushes away the enjoyment one can have now versus later.
January 4, 2013 9:48:33 PM

i see what your saying because ive been saving up forever for the computer itself and i only have a $135 now but i would neot be happy useing the cards at that price range and would virtu mvp help sence i have an hd graphics 4000
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 9:49:00 PM

You're too young and if you're pondering over such things, it clearly shows that you're not ready yet to get something like a 670. I suggest you get a 660ti. And as you said, you could probably get performance closer to a 670 by overclocking.
a c 185 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 9:50:23 PM

There noway to answer your question what is worth it to me might not be worth it to you, let's consider the cricual questions you should answer before buying a graphics card. Here are five important ones:

What types of games do you play?
What other applications do you run?
What is your budget for a graphics card?
What is your monitor's display resolution?
What is your PC's performance level?
January 4, 2013 9:51:54 PM

You make it sound like i have no idea what im talking about i have done my research... and i am not to young, i mistated that i am to young to get a job i ust havent had one yet
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 9:52:05 PM

Rolar said:
i see what your saying because ive been saving up forever for the computer itself and i only have a $135 now but i would neot be happy useing the cards at that price range and would virtu mvp help sence i have an hd graphics 4000


Sorry to tell you this but Virtu mvp sucks. You could give it a try and if you're lucky it could work properly without any horrible artifacts or stuttering or even crashing. Though I really doubt it
January 4, 2013 9:55:39 PM

ok here we go:
Battlefield, AC, Crysis, Skyrim, Dragon age , Borderlands, Planetside, minecraft, Batman. Solidworks. 1920X1080 Also i have a 3570k at stock for now, 8gb ram, z77x-up4 th
a c 185 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 9:56:11 PM

Rolar said:
You make it sound like i have no idea what im talking about i have done my research... and i am not to young, i mistated that i am to young to get a job i ust havent had one yet
No...No... you just are taking it the wrong way ;)  that's the best way i can answer your question
January 4, 2013 9:58:05 PM

What im saying is that the budget is left to be decided i just want to know if in YOUR eyes the 670 is worth the $90 over the 660ti
a c 185 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:00:11 PM

Rolar said:
ok here we go:
Battlefield, AC, Crysis, Skyrim, Dragon age , Borderlands, Planetside, minecraft, Batman. Solidworks. 1920X1080 Also i have a 3570k at stock for now, 8gb ram, z77x-up4 th
Well if you get 660 ti that means running at "high" rather than at "very high" detail level, and it almost certainly means disabling antialiasing.I would go for the 670. ;) 
January 4, 2013 10:01:27 PM

and that response that you replied to was based at you it was based at EzioAs
a c 185 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:02:37 PM

Rolar said:
What im saying is that the budget is left to be decided i just want to know if in YOUR eyes the 670 is worth the $90 over the 660ti
Yes it's worth it. :) 
January 4, 2013 10:03:58 PM

I am aslo aware of the lacking memory bandwidth of the 660ti and the 670(if compared to the radeons) which is being part of the question i asked I just want to know if the 670 is worh the money and i am leaning towards the 670
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:05:34 PM

If you get a 660ti, you could max most of the games (including AA, although it takes quite a big hit due to the narrow memory bus) you said except crysis. I don't know about planetside though, heard it's quite demanding on the cpu and not too much on the gpu

If you get a 670 however, you can max most games including AA with ease
a c 132 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:06:04 PM

It's worth it but don't stretch yourself beyond what you can afford. Also, don't let people belittle you its petty and disrespectful. Either card will handle what you do just fine just ones more poised to go the distance of time then the other sir. And as suggested you would probably have to turn off AA+AF but that doesn't really change the game much in most games at least noticeably for most (unless you look hard at objects and there smoothness)
January 4, 2013 10:06:08 PM

I would also be going with the radeons but i want physx because most of the games i want for the pc support it
a c 132 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:06:45 PM

With the games you play god is it ever worth it visually for physx just saying
January 4, 2013 10:08:15 PM

i was not mad at what he said i just posted a misstatement and wanted to correct it
a b U Graphics card
January 4, 2013 10:09:05 PM

+1 to 670
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:10:01 PM

bigcyco1 said:
Yes it's worth it. :) 


+1. If you have the money, get it! Trust me, you're much more likely to regret not spending a little more and wondering how much better your gaming would be.
January 4, 2013 10:10:12 PM

The budget is not reall that important bacause i can scrounge up $270
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:12:41 PM

For all intents and purposes, if I was somehow being disrespectful (or sounded like a jerk) to you then I apologize. I was just trying to give the best answer to the best of my abilities.

I just think you should do more research so that you could justify things like this yourself in the future
a b U Graphics card
January 4, 2013 10:12:52 PM

EzioAs said:
If you get a 660ti, you could max most of the games (including AA, although it takes quite a big hit due to the narrow memory bus) you said except crysis. I don't know about planetside though, heard it's quite demanding on the cpu and not too much on the gpu

If you get a 670 however, you can max most games including AA with ease

i tested PS2 with my cousin's pc(3570k+7870)at max settings with everything turned up he was getting about 25-30 fps
January 4, 2013 10:13:09 PM

What about a Radeon 7950
a b U Graphics card
January 4, 2013 10:16:11 PM

Rolar said:
What about a Radeon 7950

7950=660Ti but with better AA,multi monitor,and overclocking(get to 670 stock easy)
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:16:12 PM

7950 has the bandwidth, but no PhysX like you mentioned. Plus no adaptive v-sync, so much worse framerates below 60 if you're using v-sync. And GTX660 Ti has unbelievably consistent, stable performance:

http://techreport.com/review/23981/radeon-hd-7950-vs-ge...

Probably applies to the GTX670 also, since they're architecturally very similar, and the consistency is probably driver-based. So I'd still recommend the GTX670 most.
a c 185 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:17:10 PM

Rolar said:
What about a Radeon 7950
Your talking taboo now. :na:  kidding it's a good choice as well. ;) 
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:17:16 PM

devilofdeaths said:
i tested PS2 with my cousin's pc(3570k+7870)at max settings with everything turned up he was getting about 25-30 fps


Wow, that's actually quite demanding. Could it be a driver issue? Does nvidia has the lead in this title or is it the same for both? Sorry to bother this thread, I just wanted to confirm this one.
January 4, 2013 10:18:22 PM

It is sorta appealing because its only $10 more than the 7950 and it in the middle of the 2 previously stated but no Physx :( 
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:20:55 PM

Only a few of the games out there uses Physx. It really doesn't concern most people actually
January 4, 2013 10:23:03 PM

Most of the games that I want to play use physx so it I sortof important
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:23:19 PM

Do you mean $10 over the GTX660 Ti? What card do you have currently by the way? If it's a GeForce, you could test PhysX for yourself. The games you're playing make use of it. If you have a Radeon, take a look at this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAfzjTAhpBk&feature=play...

Comparisons start about 40 seconds in. Looks pretty awesome to me :-) There's a similar one for Batman Arkham City - similar improvements interms of animations/attention to detail.
a c 185 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:24:23 PM

sam_p_lay said:
7950 has the bandwidth, but no PhysX like you mentioned. Plus no adaptive v-sync, so much worse framerates below 60 if you're using v-sync. And GTX660 Ti has unbelievably consistent, stable performance:

http://techreport.com/review/23981/radeon-hd-7950-vs-ge...

Probably applies to the GTX670 also, since they're architecturally very similar, and the consistency is probably driver-based. So I'd still recommend the GTX670 most.
:lol:  ;) 
January 4, 2013 10:25:13 PM

yes i do and atm im am useing the igpu in the 3570k
a b U Graphics card
January 4, 2013 10:26:45 PM

EzioAs said:
Wow, that's actually quite demanding. Could it be a driver issue? Does nvidia has the lead in this title or is it the same for both? Sorry to bother this thread, I just wanted to confirm this one.

ok 1.if you are in a giant battle the fps is way lower(cousin was)and 2000 people can be on the same server(1600 in test)i hear than nvidia is a bit better 1-2 fps and i'm watching a video on youtube the usual fps just running around is ~50 but the 660 Ti is highly overclocked and my cousin's 7870 and 3570k was at stock he overclocked them now i will see if i can get him to test with the overclocked parts (3570k 4.4Ghz 7870 1175/1400)
a c 132 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
January 4, 2013 10:27:44 PM

Yea I mean if he wasn't playing games that didn't use it I would suggest the AMD cards but idk hes mentioned hes interested in it and I've played all those games (that utilize it) on PHYSX and on high. Borderlands 2 is a completely different experience with versus without and same with batman games. If getting the 670 isn't to hard for you to get money wise do it its worth it like big has said and sam have pointed out +1 to them both.
!