GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER OC Review

I see it's nice and toasty at 70c in your benchmark room :b. All these refreshes worry me that we are far away from Ampere or whatever is next.
 
I think it's more likely refreshes are a cheap way to stay competitive with AMD and still make a profit on currently manufactured parts more than anything.

While the performance is a decent step up from the regular 1660, the price point is just not right imo. There have been regular deals on the RX 5700 that put the card in the $239 range; I just picked up an XFX reference 5700 a few weeks ago for $279 with a game code for BL3 or Ghost Recon, and after selling the game code, the card ended up being $245. Undervolting it makes the power consumption drop to levels of the 1660 and 1660ti. It has been pulling 105-120w average in games at 930mv core and still able to go lower, though still testing out the max undervolt that is stable; I was playing Modern Warfare '19 at 915mv last night with no issues after an hour, and with the fan speed never getting to an audible level, pulling 120+ (mostly capped at 144 fps) at 1080p max settings.
 
Thanks for the review. Contemplating this card because I don't need anything more powerful, but I'll wait to see if AMD is competitive before I make a decision.
 
It'll definitely be interesting to see what the 5500 series has in store; given the low wattage capabilities of the undervolted 5700, I'm hopeful for some very competitive numbers with the 1660(ti).
 
Great review! Thank you Brent!. My only critique of the review would be, to include comparative #'s from the 1660, as well as AMD solutions that are near the price point. Currently only the RX590 and RX580 are near it (at $199 and $179 respectively). From looking at other sites, the 1660 Super comes in at close to 20% faster than the RX590. I'd go with the 1660 Super and spend the extra $$ over the AMD alternative if money was an issue.
 
Space_Ranger said:
Great review! Thank you Brent!. My only critique of the review would be, to include comparative #'s from the 1660, as well as AMD solutions that are near the price point. Currently only the RX590 and RX580 are near it (at $199 and $179 respectively). From looking at other sites, the 1660 Super comes in at close to 20% faster than the RX590. I'd go with the 1660 Super and spend the extra $$ over the AMD alternative if money was an issue.
Click to expand...

We do explain this on the test setup page, page 4.

We do not have a 1660 original to compare with.

This will not be the end all be all of 1660 SUPER reviews, now that we have this card we can use it in future comparisons.
 
Space_Ranger said:
Great review! Thank you Brent!. My only critique of the review would be, to include comparative #'s from the 1660, as well as AMD solutions that are near the price point. Currently only the RX590 and RX580 are near it (at $199 and $179 respectively). From looking at other sites, the 1660 Super comes in at close to 20% faster than the RX590. I'd go with the 1660 Super and spend the extra $$ over the AMD alternative if money was an issue.
Click to expand...

To add to Brent's response, we also didn't have the time to scare up comparison cards and benchmark those with the launch window that we had available. At this point, I'm thinking the RX590/580s are dead cards walking with the 5500's coming in at their price points at some point in the next month and we'll certainly compare this one to those when we get the hardware in.
 
As big of a fan of AMD as I am, the 580/590's were dead when the plain 1660 dropped. The performance was considerably higher with MUCH less power usage, it was a no-brainer decision and the 1660 Super just makes it that much more-so. The 570 4GB has always been a good bang for the buck card, but it still suffers from high power draw; if AMD gets the power numbers in check with the 5500 series (and with my experience so far with a 5700 I think they absolutely will) then it'll be a good competitive pricing point again. I've been looking to replace the 570 and 590 in my kids computers and have been waiting on the 5500 series to see if they can wrangle the performance to be at least close to the 1660/Super/Ti for similar or lower power numbers to see which cards to pick up.
 
David_Schroth said:
To add to Brent's response, we also didn't have the time to scare up comparison cards and benchmark those with the launch window that we had available. At this point, I'm thinking the RX590/580s are dead cards walking with the 5500's coming in at their price points at some point in the next month and we'll certainly compare this one to those when we get the hardware in.
Click to expand...
While I understand that the RX series is a dead series, knowing where the 1660 Super's were in comparison was of value to me, as my daughter's machine has the RX580 in it still, and my son has the RX590 in his. The comparison had value to me, and I was just explaining my critique. Thank you for the review, and I do look forward to the lower series of the 5000's. They might find their way into my kids machines sooner rather than later :)
 
Review was well done, I am not too impressed with the price of the card. At 1080p and still limited in some games at the outset requiring lower or much lower settings is just not good enough. Combined with 6gb of VRam I just see this card having a limited useful life span. Should be less than $200 in my opinion.
 
The 1660 super does 10bit color with the special studio driver right?
I am not too interested in gaming performance but I do want 10bit color to go with a 10bit color monitor.
Does AMD do 10bit color with anything other than their professional stuff? What Ive read is confusing, and if they do, its under limited scenarios.
The 1660 super seems like the better value, as much as I like AMD....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Become a Patron!
Back
Top