GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Ventus XS OC from MSI – Which Games Can it Handle?

Nvidia has begun to renew the average range of graphics cards, and as always on the top with the new GeForce GTX 1660 Ti . This new model is much more standard and can be seen as the direct heir of the GTX 10 series, since unlike the models that have arrived in the RTX 20 series does not have access to everything related to artificial intelligence and tracing Ray.

Perhaps that is why it is a much more interesting model from the point of view of price-performance, as will be seen throughout this analysis, since the reference price of Nvidia is at 299 euros (with VAT) or 279 dollars (without taxation).

The model that I have chosen to analyze is a basic one of MSI since Nvidia has not created a founder edition for this particular model as it has done with the GeForce RTX 20. That means that the Ventus XS OC is slightly factory raised about 60 MHz , and must be taken into account throughout the article since all values ​​are given with that frequency of use.

Unpacking and features

geforce_gtx_1660_ti.jpeg

All the companies have launched to put on sale multiple customized models of the GTX 1660 Ti because it is situated at a price point quite interesting for the average consumer. The 300-320 euros in which move almost all models, with some standing at 340 euros, is not a low price but not expensive as it could be considered the 380-420 euros of the RTX 2060.

This model is effectively placed on the 300 euros, both the normal version Ventus XS and this Ventus XS OC that comes slightly up from factory. The design itself is interesting, with a size that is not exceedingly large at 204 mm × 128 mm × 42 mm, so it is below the typical width of a 225 mm micro-ATX motherboard, and the 245 mm an ATX It is somewhat higher than normal, but it will fit well in practically any box. It has a width of 42 mm, which are approximately what occupy two PCIe slots.

218441 bytes327263 bytes403963 bytes334690 bytes355961 bytes455670 bytes404228 bytes431445 bytes321667 bytes360501 bytes376384 bytes402379 bytes393490 bytes327214 bytes352230 bytes325815 bytes345659 bytes

It has a reinforcement back plate, although it is not an especially heavy model, since it weighs 669 grams. It has three DisplayPort 1.4 connectors and one HDMI 2.0b, and receives its power from an eight-pin PCI connector. It is the standard in all the models that have come on the market of the GTX 1660 Ti. The plastic cover in gray and black gives a good appearance to the graphics card, and you can see that these 90 mm fans have fourteen blades.

Turing architecture v2: without RTX

gtx1600_ti__archstylized_smaller.png

The biggest novelty of the TU116 chip that forms the heart of the GTX 1660 Ti is that it does not have the most striking parts of the Turing architecture, but maintains the improvements of this in the CUDA cores. This means that there is nothing of RTX, no ray tracing or supersampling by artificial intelligence, but there are other characteristics present.

This TU116 chip has three graphics processing clusters (GPC), in turn with 12 textures processing clusters (TPC) each, with a total of 24 multiprocessors of data flows (SM) in the whole chip, and 1536 CUDA cores Turing type.

Each GPC also has its own rasterized engine, and the chip has six 32-bit memory controllers, for a total of 192 bus bits that, working at 12 Gb / s, yield a total bandwidth of 288 MB / s. Each memory controller has eight rasterized units (ROP) and 512 KB of level 2 cache, for a total of 48 ROP and 3072 KB of cache. It also has a total of 96 texturing units at a rate of eight for each TPC.

GeForce graphics cards
GeForce RTX 2060 GeForce GTX 1660 Ti GeForce GTX 1070 GeForce GTX 1060
Company Nvidia Nvidia Nvidia Nvidia
GPU TU106 TU116 GP104 GP106
GPU variant TU106-300-A1 TU116-400-A1 GP104-200-A1 GP106-400
Multiproc. of data flows 1920 1536 1920 1280
Frec. base 1365 MHz 1500 MHz 1506 MHz 1506 MHz
Frec. Turbo 1680 MHz 1770 MHz 1683 MHz 1708 MHz
You rendering 48 48 64 48
You texture 120 96 120 80
Texture rate 201.60 GTexel / s 169.92 GTexel / s 201.96 GTexel / s 136.64 GTexel / s
Pixel rate 80.64 GPixel / s 84.96 GPixel / s 107.71 GPixel / s 81.98 GPixel / s
Memory 6 GB GDDR6 6 GB GDDR6 8 GB GDDR5 6 GB GDDR5
Frec. memory 14 GHz 12 GHz 8 GHz 8 GHz
Ifaz. memory 192 bits 192 bits 256 bits 192 bits
Memory bandwidth 336.00 GB / s 288.00 GB / s 256.00 GB / s 192.00 GB / s
Consumption 160 W 120 W 150 W 120 W
PCIe slots two two two two
With. PCIe 1x 8 pins 1x 8 pins 1x 8 pins 1x 6 pins
Computational power 6.45 TFLOPS 5.44 TFLOPS 6.46 TFLOPS 4.37 TFLOPS
PVPR $ 349 $ 279 $ 379 $ 249

The most curious thing about the elimination of the tensor cores is that they have been left on the chip but as floating point processing cores (FP16). In the GeForce RTX Turing chips, the tensor cores are the ones that process some FP16 operations  even if it’s like killing flies with cannons – so they are elements that Nvidia could not remove from the TU116. However, they can not process tensors efficiently, the algebraic unit widely used in artificial intelligence.

The FP16 and FP32 cores are used according to the programmer’s wishes to execute the shaders or pieces of code that are dedicated to determine the levels of illumination of a pixel according to the effects of the scene and other parameters that those shaders have. The FP16 are faster but less precise, and the FP32 are more precise but slower.

The Turing architecture also includes a new lossless memory compression algorithm that allows effective bandwidth to be up to 50% higher, with Nvidia indicating that it is generally between 18 and 33% higher on the RTX 2080 Ti. Moreover, everything indicated in the analysis of the RTX 2080 Ti on the variable shading rate (VRS), improvements in video encoding / decoding, mesh shading, etc., also applies to the TU116 chip.

Methodology of graphical performance analysis

Performance tests are performed by selecting the ultra presets whenever possible and if they give the option. Regarding smoothing, I do not put it beyond FXAA as long as the name of the smoothing used in the settings is clearly indicated so that it can be compared well with the QHD and 4K resolution, in which the latter on a standard 27-inch monitor serves of little or nothing to activate edge smoothing. Also when putting a smoothing of major or minor the improvement in visual quality will depend on the size of the monitor and the distance of use, and there may be differences when applying one or the other depending on the architecture of the graphics card.

I also deactivate the specific characteristics of each brand’s cards, such as Nvidia’s HBAO + environmental occlusion or AMD’s PureHair, for the possible negative impact they have on the cards of the opposite brand. The tests have been performed with GeForce 419.18 drivers installed.

The values ​​are collected from the frame-time files generated by the games themselves, such as The Division , or through OCAT , an AMD application that integrates the PresentMon library developed by a prominent Intel employee. This library is hooked directly to the graphic library that is being used -DX11 , DX12 or Vulkan, among others- , giving very precise measurements of the frame times. Analyzing the data of the file generated by means of a script, you can obtain the frame rate, and also study its results in different graphs by passing them to a spreadsheet if you wish.

The values ​​are taken at least twice per game, and all non-essential applications and processes are closed as they run to ensure there is nothing consuming CPU time in the background. The interfaces of Steam, UPlay and Origin are also deactivated to avoid conflicts. In addition to showing the average frame rate , I include the 99th percentile , which is the minimum FPS above which 99% of the time the game is spent. Generally, if you lose 30 FPS, the 99th percentile can be considered as the game experience will not be completely fluid.

Test equipment

For the tests I have chosen several models of processors of four and six physical cores to check if the processor comes to limit the graphics cards, and how much is this limitation. The equipment used includes:

  • Ryzen 5 2600X, B350 motherboard, 16 GB of memory at 3200 MHz.
  • Core i7-8700K, Z370 motherboard, 16 GB of 3200 MHz memory.
  • Core i5-8400, in the XP3 Cube SH310R4 of H310 chipset Shuttle, 16 GB of 2666 MHz memory.

When testing the most powerful graphics cards, testing the Core i5-8400 with only 2667 MHz memory can generate a small loss of performance, but it is a cheaper general-purpose motherboard platform such as AMD’s B350 / B450, although the AMD motherboards give all access to 3200 MHz memory, even the most economical ones. Therefore, it is comparing two mid- range PCs with Intel and AMD processor with a high- end processor with Intel.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

shadow_of_the_tomb_raider.jpg

Comparison per processor

Shadow of the Tomb Raider, DX12, FHD
Core i7-8700K
92.2
Ryzen 5 2600X
89.5
Core i5-8400
84.2
Average Percentile 99

Comparison for GPU DX11

Shadow of the Tomb Raider, FHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti FE
103,7
RTX 2080 FE
102.2
GTX 1080 Ti
100.2
RTX 2070
93.7
RTX 2060
90.9
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
85.9
RX Vega 64
77.1
GTX 1060
58.2
Average Percentile 99
Shadow of the Tomb Raider, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
96.2
RTX 2080
86.4
GTX 1080 Ti
78.2
RTX 2070
75.8
RTX 2060
68.3
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
62.5
RX Vega 64
59.6
GTX 1060
one
Average Percentile 99

Comparison for GPU DX12

Shadow of the Tomb Raider, FHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
140.7
RTX 2080
130.2
GTX 1080 Ti
116.5
RTX 2070 FE
113
RTX 2060
99.9
RX Vega 64
98.3
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
92.2
GTX 1060
one
Average Percentile 99
Shadow of the Tomb Raider, QHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
113.1
RTX 2080
94.1
GTX 1080 Ti
81.2
RTX 2070 FE
77.9
RTX 2060
69.1
RX Vega 64
66.8
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
61.5
GTX 1060
one
Average Percentile 99

Hitman

Comparison per processor

Hitman, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
103.9
Core i5-8400
97.3
Ryzen 5 2600X
92
Average Percentile 99

Comparison for GPU DX11

Hitman, FHD, DX11
GTX 1080 Ti
123.4
RTX 2080 Ti
122.1
RTX 2080
121.3
RTX 2070 FE
118.4
RX Vega 64
117.5
RTX 2060
111.9
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
103.9
GTX 1080
90.5
GTX 1070 Ti
90.3
GTX 1060
75.3
Average Percentile 99
Hitman, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
121.1
RTX 2080
115.5
GTX 1080 Ti
108.5
RTX 2070 FE
101.9
RX Vega 64
97.5
RTX 2060
91.1
GTX 1080
88.7
GTX 1070 Ti
87.6
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
83,7
GTX 1060
59.8
Average Percentile 99

Comparison for GPU DX12

Hitman, FHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
146.4
RTX 2080
144.4
GTX 1080 Ti
141.9
RX Vega 64
131,7
RTX 2070 FE
129
RTX 2060
114,1
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
107,7
GTX 1070 Ti
91.2
GTX 1080
90.9
GTX 1060
77
Average Percentile 99
Hitman, QHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
142.4
RTX 2080
126
GTX 1080 Ti
115.9
RTX 2070 FE
104.8
RX Vega 64
103,1
RTX 2060
89,8
GTX 1080
89.4
GTX 1070 Ti
86.9
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
79.2
GTX 1060
58.9
Average Percentile 99

Total War: Warhammer

Comparison per processor

Total War: Warhammer, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
90.5
Ryzen 5 2600X
86
Core i5-8400
82.2
Average Percentile 99

Comparison for GPU DX11

Total War: Warhammer, FHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
145.3
RTX 2080
143.6
GTX 1080 Ti
137.4
RTX 2070 FE
122.7
GTX 1080
118.5
GTX 1070 Ti
110.2
RTX 2060
106.4
RX Vega 64
103.9
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
90.5
GTX 1060
69.7
Average Percentile 99
Total War: Warhammer, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
123.9
GTX 1080 Ti
108.7
RTX 2080
107,4
RTX 2070 FE
90.3
GTX 1080
84.2
GTX 1070 Ti
77.8
RX Vega 64
76.5
RTX 2060
75.6
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
63.8
GTX 1060
49.1
Average Percentile 99

Comparison for GPU DX12

Total War: Warhammer, FHD, DX12
RTX 2080
114
RTX 2080 Ti
112.3
GTX 1080 Ti
110.8
GTX 1080
107.5
GTX 1070 Ti
105
RX Vega 64
104.6
RTX 2070 FE
100.3
RTX 2060
94.5
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
85.5
GTX 1060
66.5
Average Percentile 99
Total War: Warhammer, QHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
105.7
RTX 2080
97.6
GTX 1080 Ti
96.9
RTX 2070 FE
83.2
GTX 1080
80.7
RX Vega 64
79.2
GTX 1070 Ti
76.2
RTX 2060
71
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
61,7
GTX 1060
27
Average Percentile 99

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

Comparison per processor

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
67.6
Core i5-8400
67,4
Ryzen 5 2600X
65.5
Average Percentile 99

Comparison for GPU DX11

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, FHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
131,6
RTX 2080
107.6
GTX 1080 Ti
96.8
RTX 2070 FE
90.4
RX Vega 64
78.7
RTX 2060
77.9
GTX 1080
76.8
GTX 1070 Ti
70.7
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
67.6
GTX 1060
44.7
Average Percentile 99
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
93.6
RTX 2080
74,7
GTX 1080 Ti
65.8
RTX 2070 FE
63.4
RX Vega 64
55,1
RTX 2060
52.9
GTX 1080
52.2
GTX 1070 Ti
48.1
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
45.8
GTX 1060
30.2
Average Percentile 99

Comparison for GPU DX12

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, FHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
113.3
RTX 2080
99
GTX 1080 Ti
90.6
RX Vega 64
82.9
RTX 2070 FE
79
GTX 1080
75.8
RTX 2060
69.5
GTX 1070 Ti
68.9
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
61,8
GTX 1060
43.8
Average Percentile 99
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, QHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
83.6
RTX 2080
68.8
GTX 1080 Ti
62.6
RX Vega 64
56.7
RTX 2070 FE
56.4
GTX 1080
51.4
RTX 2060
48.1
GTX 1070 Ti
46.1
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
41.5
GTX 1060
30
Average Percentile 99

The Division

Comparison per processor

The Division, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
85.6
Core i5-8400
85.5
Ryzen 5 2600X
83.3
Average Percentile 99

Comparison for GPU DX11

The Division, FHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
165.2
RTX 2080
135.1
GTX 1080 Ti
125.5
RTX 2070 FE
110.4
RX Vega 64
101.2
GTX 1080
100.8
GTX 1070 Ti
96.1
RTX 2060
93.5
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
85.6
GTX 1060
60.1
Average Percentile 99
The Division, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
126
RTX 2080
100.5
GTX 1080 Ti
92.4
RTX 2070 FE
81.2
RX Vega 64
74.1
GTX 1080
72,1
GTX 1070 Ti
68.6
RTX 2060
67.9
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
62.2
GTX 1060
42.9
Average Percentile 99

Comparison for GPU DX12

The Division, FHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
149.2
GTX 1080 Ti
131,7
RTX 2080
127.5
RX Vega 64
110.6
GTX 1080
102.5
RTX 2070 FE
102.2
GTX 1070 Ti
95.6
RTX 2060
84.8
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
73.3
GTX 1060
61.6
Average Percentile 99
The Division, QHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
110.9
RTX 2080
93.4
GTX 1080 Ti
90.1
RX Vega 64
77.2
RTX 2070 FE
74.9
GTX 1080
72.4
GTX 1070 Ti
66.8
RTX 2060
61,8
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
54,7
GTX 1060
42.8
Average Percentile 99

Gears of War 4

Comparison per processor

Gears of War 4, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
106.2
Core i5-8400
102.7
Ryzen 5 2600X
95.1
Average Percentile 99

Comparison by GPU

Gears of War 4, FHD, DX12
RTX 2080
166.2
RTX 2080 Ti
160
GTX 1080 Ti
154.5
RTX 2070 FE
150.5
GTX 1080
140.3
GTX 1070 Ti
129.4
RTX 2060
115.2
RX Vega 64
113.4
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
106.2
GTX 1060
82,4
Average Percentile 99
Gears of War 4, QHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
135.2
RTX 2080
112
GTX 1080 Ti
111.3
RTX 2070 FE
100.9
GTX 1080
90.2
GTX 1070 Ti
83.5
RX Vega 64
78.6
RTX 2060
74.9
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
67,7
GTX 1060
52.4
Average Percentile 99

Forza Horizon 4

forza_horizon_4.jpg

Comparison per processor

Forza Horizon 4, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
103.5
Core i5-8400
100.5
Ryzen 5 2600X
99.9
FHD 4K UHD

Comparison by GPU

Forza Horizon 4, FHD, DX12
RTX 2080
140.3
RTX 2080 Ti
136.2
RX Vega 64
123.2
GTX 1080 Ti
112.6
RTX 2070 FE
108.6
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
103.5
GTX 1080
102.1
RTX 2060
100.5
GTX 1060
one
Average Percentile 99
Forza Horizon 4, QHD, DX12
RTX 2080 Ti
117.6
RTX 2080
117
RX Vega 64
99
GTX 1080 Ti
93.7
RTX 2070 FE
89.3
GTX 1080
83.5
RTX 2060
81.8
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
81.7
GTX 1060
one
Average Percentile 99

The Witcher 3

Comparison per processor

The Witcher 3, DX11, FHD
Core i5-8400
81.5
Core i7-8700K
81.2
Ryzen 5 2600X
78.4
Average Percentile 99

Comparison by GPU

The Witcher 3, FHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
184.9
RTX 2080
152.3
GTX 1080 Ti
142.4
RTX 2070 FE
119
GTX 1080
102
RTX 2060
97.8
RX Vega 64
94.7
GTX 1070 Ti
93
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
81.2
GTX 1060
57.7
Average Percentile 99
The Witcher 3, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
142.5
RTX 2080
115.4
GTX 1080 Ti
104.7
RTX 2070 FE
91.4
GTX 1080
74.3
RTX 2060
72.5
RX Vega 64
71.2
GTX 1070 Ti
68.8
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
60.4
GTX 1060
42.4
Average Percentile 99

For Honor

Comparison per processor

For Honor, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
127,6
Ryzen 5 2600X
124.9
Core i5-8400
124.5
Average Percentile 99

Comparison by GPU

For Honor, FHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
253.8
GTX 1080 Ti
210.8
RTX 2080
208.4
RTX 2070 FE
170.5
GTX 1080
159.8
RX Vega 64
155,1
GTX 1070 Ti
151
RTX 2060
144.6
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
127,6
GTX 1060
94.9
Average Percentile 99
For Honor, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
187.4
RTX 2080
151.4
GTX 1080 Ti
141.4
RTX 2070 FE
118.5
RX Vega 64
107.8
GTX 1080
102.3
RTX 2060
100.1
GTX 1070 Ti
95.1
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
87
GTX 1060
66
Average Percentile 99

Ghost Recon Wildlands

Comparison per processor

Ghost Recon Wildlands, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
55.6
Core i5-8400
55,1
Ryzen 5 2600X
53
Average Percentile 99

Comparison by GPU

Ghost Recon Wildlands, FHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
92.7
RTX 2080
78.8
GTX 1080 Ti
75
RTX 2070 FE
69.1
GTX 1080
62.4
RTX 2060
59.8
GTX 1070 Ti
58.6
RX Vega 64
56
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
55.6
GTX 1060
40.8
Average Percentile 99
Ghost Recon Wildlands, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
76.5
RTX 2080
63.8
GTX 1080 Ti
59.3
RTX 2070 FE
54.5
GTX 1080
48.6
RTX 2060
46.1
RX Vega 64
46
GTX 1070 Ti
45.2
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
42.9
GTX 1060
30.3
Average Percentile 99

Warhammer 40 000: Dawn of War III

Comparison per processor

Warhammer 40 000: Dawn of War III, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
109.2
Core i5-8400
102.7
Ryzen 5 2600X
99.9
Average Percentile 99

Comparison by GPU

Warhammer 40 000: Dawn of War III, FHD, DX11
GTX 1080
134.8
GTX 1080 Ti
134.4
RTX 2080 Ti
134.4
RTX 2080
134.2
RTX 2070 FE
129.1
GTX 1070 Ti
128.1
RTX 2060
118.5
RX Vega 64
113.3
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
109.2
GTX 1060
82.6
Average Percentile 99
Warhammer 40 000: Dawn of War III, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
128.4
RTX 2080
113.6
GTX 1080 Ti
111.3
RTX 2070 FE
94.7
GTX 1080
91.6
RX Vega 64
89
GTX 1070 Ti
86.6
RTX 2060
81,6
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
63.7
GTX 1060
55,7
Average Percentile 99

Assassin’s Creed Origins

assassin__039_s_creed__2017_-3852668.jpg

Comparison per processor

Assassin’s Creed Origins, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
75.5
Core i5-8400
73.2
Ryzen 5 2600X
68.8
Average Percentile 99

Comparison by GPU

Assassin’s Creed Origins, FHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
98.5
RTX 2080
97.6
GTX 1080 Ti
93.1
RTX 2070 FE
90
RTX 2060
82.7
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
75.5
RX Vega 64
66.8
GTX 1060
62.4
Average Percentile 99
Assassin’s Creed Origins, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
91.6
RTX 2080
82.7
GTX 1080 Ti
76.7
RTX 2070 FE
73.3
RTX 2060
64.2
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
57.7
RX Vega 64
56.8
GTX 1060
45.8
Average Percentile 99

Far Cry 5

image.jpeg

Comparison per processor

Far Cry 5, DX11, FHD
Core i7-8700K
100.6
Core i5-8400
99.5
Ryzen 5 2600X
94.5
Average Percentile 99

Comparison by GPU

Far Cry 5, FHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
131.4
RTX 2080
131.1
GTX 1080 Ti
125.5
GeForce RTX 2070 FE
125,1
GTX 1080
114,1
RX Vega 64
112
RTX 2060
111.7
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
100.6
GTX 1060
70
Average Percentile 99
Far Cry 5, QHD, DX11
RTX 2080 Ti
125.2
RTX 2080
110.2
GTX 1080 Ti
99.9
GeForce RTX 2070 FE
95.1
RX Vega 64
84.3
GTX 1080
82.1
RTX 2060
80.2
GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
71.4
GTX 1060
48.2
Average Percentile 99

Temperatures, noise and overclocking

1_msi_geforce_gtx_1660_ti_ventus_xs.jpeg

This version GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Ventus XS OC is aimed at those who want an economic model but with a double fan to ensure good temperatures, although this particular model also has a factory rise of 60 MHz. The difference between the models Factory uploaded and those that use reference frequencies is a few euros, sometimes an almost insignificant difference, but with a slight improvement in power for those who want to click the graphics card on the motherboard and forget any overclocking tool .

Temperatures and noise

The following measurements are taken with the box with the side panel removed and one meter away, and we must bear in mind that only the fans of the graphics card will be audible – the source does not have, the processor fan does not make noise noticeable with this in charge, and the fans of the Silent Base 601 box are silent .

In the field of temperature, at full load and with the test site at about 25 ºC, the graphic card reaches 70-71 ºC, depending on the moment, while it is being played. They are good and adequate values, and they are also backed by a good double fan design of this graphics card.

Regarding noise , it can not be said to be silent because there is a certain noise of air moving, but it is not annoying. In full load the fans move at about 2000 RPM depending on the moment, with a noise that is over 33.5 dB, so in a box like the one used for the test equipment will be heard little.

At rest, the situation does not change much, with the fans running at 1400 RPM, the noise does not vary much, perhaps falling slightly to 29 dB, with the GPU at around 36 ºC, being certainly imperceptible. I have not noticed electrical noise problems in any test case.

Overclocking

This model of GeForce GTX has the same peculiarity as the GeForce RTX 2060. The usual difference between the base frequency and the turbo of Nvidia graphics cards is usually about 200 MHz, but now the company has chosen to establish higher turbo frequencies. This means that this series of graphic cards have a base frequency of 1500 MHz and its turbo is 1770 MHz, 270 MHz more, and in the specific case of this model it is 1830 MHz or 330 MHz more.

That leaves little room for the Nvidia architecture for an additional upload, which using the EVGA Precision X1 program that implements the Nvidia Scanner utility creates an additional +54 MHz curve. Scanner automatically tests the upload capacity of the graphics card, creating specific curves for the GPU included in it of voltage and frequencies. This saves the entire trial and error process, and ensures a stable rise.

In addition to the turbo frequency rise, I have also tested the rise of the memory clock that allows, setting it to +1000 MHz. These data are collected below.

Base Additional OC of the model Increase
Frec. base 1500 MHz
Frec. reference turbo 1770 MHz 1830 MHz (+60 MHz) +3.34%
Frec. additional turbo 1830 MHz 1884 MHz (+54 MHz) +2.9%
Vel. VRAM 12,000 MHz 12 800 MHz (+800 MHz) +6.7%

The Division is a game little dependent on the power of the processor, and therefore there will be no limitations of any kind when trying to overclocking the GTX 1660 Ti with this game. The integrated performance test is quite stable in terms of the results from one pass to another, so I like to use it to take measurements of the frequency rise made. In these tests I usually have the graphics card always warm after leaving it running for several hours to better check the limits of the rise, since the heat or very long use of the graphics card when doing overclockingit is the only way to see if the rise is stable or not. Therefore, the normal value of performance is different from that indicated in the analysis under the heading The Division .

The Division (DX11, 1440p) FPS Improvement (%)
Turbo reference (1770 MHz) 61.0
Turbo model (1830 MHz) 61.5 +0.8%
Additional upload (+54 MHz) 62.4 +2.3%
Memory rise (+800 MHz, GPU at 1830 MHz) 63.9 +4.7%
Both at maximum (GPU and memory) 64.8 +6.2%

The additional increase that can be achieved in this game is around 1.4% with respect to the turbo frequency of the model by simply increasing those 54 MHz indicated by the Scanner , or 5.3% if the memory is also increased 800 MHz. It is an increase somewhat low, but you have to take into account what I have indicated before the difference between the base frequency and turbo wouldalready include an additional rise MHz compared to other models of RTX 20 and GTX 10. It is interesting that Nvidia, in this window of price between 300 to 340 euros, has opted to put on the market a graphic chip “something uploaded” as standard.

When making the GPU rise and memory, the noise does not change much, rising to 34-34.5 dB, which is the perceptible noise of air movement, but without being uncomfortable. Taking into account that I take the measurements with the cover removed, with the box closed the noise can go more towards the 38 dB with three silent fans installed in the box operating above 800 RPM, which is a more noticeable noise but also not annoying . The temperature with this rise is at 73-74 ºC.

Consumption

The average consumption of the test equipment playing is about 200 W , and even at maximum load with Furmark shows good results with a consumption of about 185 W. With the small additional rise, there is no significant increase in consumption, perhaps about 5 W.

Finally, and looking at other areas such as cryptocurrency, the card has a mining power of Ethereum of about 28 MH / s (mega-summaries per second), with a default consumption of 161 W. You can limit the consumption of the graphic card to 58% and reduce the clock -502 MHz maintaining about 25 MH / s, going to consume 115 W.

Consumption in «Furmark» (in watts)
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (+60 MHz)
185
GeForce RTX 2060
235
GeForce RTX 2070 FE
260
RTX 2080 FE
295
RTX 2080 Ti FE
330
RX Vega 64 ROG Strix
350
Rest Load

conclusion

comparativa.jpeg

Endless users have skeptically watched the ray tracing and artificial intelligence that the graphics chips used by Nvidia in the GeForce RTX 20 bring under the hood. That there is almost no content that takes advantage of them and that they are technologies that require more development and polishing it to be functional could play against Nvidia if it were not because the competition is lethargic. In addition, this inclusion of special technologies has increased the graphic cards, providing practically the same performance at the same price point between the GTX 10 and RTX 20 series, except the honorable exception of the RTX 2060.

However, the TU116 chip arrives to provide a substantial performance improvement at the same price point, although some may qualify as insufficient . The GTX 1060 arrived for $ 279, which is the same price as the GTX 1660 Ti. As you can see in the analysis, the 1660 Ti has between 30% and 50% more power than the GTX 1060 depending on the game, but you can see that it remains in general more around 35-40% improvement , for the same price as that graphics card two and a half years ago.

An evolution of power of 35-40% in two and a half years seems insufficient, but it is the moment that lives the world of graphic cards. The improvement of the GTX 1060 compared to the GTX 960 two years earlier was more around 60-70%, so clearly the market needs more competition so that the power per euro improves in graphics cards. In fact, this GTX 1660 Ti has around the power of the GTX 1070, or a little more in some cases.

Taking into account the moment we live, the GTX 1660 Ti provides a good power-price ratio, and is not far in gross power compared to the RTX 2060, although the latter maintains better power-price ratio. The RTX 2060 can be, in the worst case, around 10% more powerful and at best around 25%, but on average it stays more between 15 and 20%. Those who prefer to wait for the supersampling by artificial intelligence (DLSS) and the tracing of rays out of the beta phase they are in, is the graphic card that will cost most buy right now.

Also Read:  Gigabyte RTX 2070 Gaming OC White 8G reviewed - Overclocked TU106

Kennedy

Hi, My name is Kennedy - a gamer, and blogger. I write everything about gaming from the high-end Intel processors and graphics cards to reviews of the latest AAA games. I am also interested in cryptocurrency (Ripple & Bitcoin Cash). When I'm not on my rig gaming or blogging, you will find me outdoors on my dirt bike!

Leave a Reply

error: Content is protected !!