View Full Version : I think the GTX-660 should be a big Seller

11-09-12, 08:39 PM
I wish that the GTX-660 TI had came out when the GTX-670 did.If you game at 1920 x 1080 then they are almost perfect from looking at the reviews.The GTX-660 TI is only around 4 to 10 FPS slower , most of the games it is just 2 to 4 FPS slower then the GTX-670.Plus the GTX-670 is only around 5 to 7 FPS slower then the GTX-680 in most games.I could have saver over $200 since I game at 1920 x 1080 .I could have almost went with a TRi SLI set-up for the price,altho it is not needed two is plenty,but I would have went with the 3 gig version of the GTX-660 Ti.The Kepler is one amazing chip ,It does'nt seem to manner what they do ,it is just a fast chip even when they cut some shader cores off or if they reduce the buss width.As for as that goes the Plain GTX-660 is pretty fast and running two of them in SLI is faster then a single GTX-680 at resolution of 1920 x 1080 or 1200mhz and cost just $440 for two verus $470 for a GTX-680.It a shame the GTX-660 can't be tri-SLI.I think the Plain GTX-660 should be a big seller for a mid-range card it is pretty fast.

11-26-12, 02:25 PM
Maybe not but looking at the reviews and running a GTX-660 in SLI looks to be pretty fast to me, and when overclocked it is as fast as a GTX-660TI. Plus why would they make a oem GTX-660 that has 1152 shader cores and 96 Texture Units and make some with two 6-pin power connectors and some that will do tri-SLI.It just has 1.5gigs or 3 gigs of memory.I know it is clocked slower but looks like it would overclock to make up the difference.

03-31-13, 03:52 PM
I considered the GTX 660 for my rig, but I decided on the GTX 660 Ti with 3GB RAM. I thought the extra RAM would be better in the long run. Even the GTX 670 only comes with 2GB RAM. So far, I'm happy with my GTX 660 Ti. I only game at 1080p anyway, so I thought the GTX 670 might be overkill for $70 more.