NVIDIA Launches New $219 Turing-Powered GeForce GTX 1660 (hothardware.com)

MojoKid writes: NVIDIA took the wraps off yet another lower cost Turing-based graphics card today, dubbed the GeForce GTX 1660. For a $219 MSRP, the card offers a cut-down NVIDIA TU116 GPU comprised of 1408 CUDA cores with a 1785MHz boost clock and 6GB of GDDR6 RAM with 192.1GB/s of bandwidth. Generally speaking, the new GeForce GTX 1660 is 15% to 30% faster than NVIDIA's previous generation GeForce GTX 1060 but doesn't support new ray tracing and DLSS features that the majority of NVIDIA's new Turing cards support. Performance-wise, GeForce GTX 1660 is generally faster than an AMD Radeon RX 590 overall. Boards from various OEM partners should be in the channel for purchase this week.

Comments

Nah.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't buy cards from shady companies that cripple games and fudge benchmarks and buy reviews, I don't mind being 10-15% slower. That's just the overclock envelope anyway. Fuck Nvidia, shameless whores, never again.

Re: Nah.

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of us have been saying that since they stole technology from 3DFx and put them out of business. Those Voodoo cards were awesome in the day. Would be nice to have more than two choices.

Re:Nah.

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah because amd/ati never pulled the same crap.

Re: Nah.

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of us have been saying that since they stole technology from 3DFx and put them out of business.

What technology did they steal? The original Voodoo and Voodoo 2 cards were awesome but after that 3Dfx became a dinosaur and didn't keep up with nvidia and ATi who were releasing programmable GPUs, nobody wanted 3Dfx cards then because their technology sucked.

Re: Nah.

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. Plus they were 3D only cards that required a gay passthrough cable and it only worked with their proprietary GLIDE API. Fuck 3DFX.

Re:Nah.

[Anonymous Coward]

WOW!!!!

I'd never thought I'd see the day when I would observe an ethical human being.

Good for you!

BTW, I've been avoiding like the plague scumtel and nshitia products for almost 20 years!

Re: Nah.

[Type44Q]

Nobody was ever accused of stealing. 3Dfx' strength lay in their phenomenally efficient low-level API which was limited to 16bit color; as DirectX became more popular, 3Dfx lost their edge. When Nvidia rolled out the first 3D chip with vertex acceleration ("transform &: lighting"), it was fucking over.

Re: Nah.

[TheRealMindChild]

Holy christ. How can you and the person you are replying to be so wrong and so confident at the same time?

The original Voodoo/Voodoo2 cards were an add-on with a VGA passthrough cable, but that was at the birth of 3d acceleration. Voodoo Rush cards existed just fine along side these as an all-in-one video card. Once we got to the Voodoo Banshee, the add-on card platform was retired. And Nvidia and ATI were just getting started, albeit with garbage hardware initially. The Voodoo 3 was an amazing card and one that people *wanted*.

3DFX's failure had nothing to do with their hardware offerings. They were top of the line and no one had a bad thing to say while they were still being sold. As we reached the Voodoo 4 era, 3DFX decided though instead of letting other people make cards with their chips, they would make and market their own cards exclusively. That is what killed them. The Voodoo 5 was highly sought after years after they stopped being produced

Turing Powered

[SuperKendall]

Adding a new step to the GPU process, not only do you have to feed the card textures and shaders, now you ALSO have to feed it arbitrary state machines to compute in order to provide the power it needs to perform.

Re:Turing Powered

[Tough Love]

Huh? WTF are you blathering about?

Re:Turing Powered

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he is talking about a Turing machine, which is what powers this graphics card.

Many tiny turning machines.

Try to keep up.

Re:Turing Powered

[Tough Love]

Maybe jokes should be funny.

Re: Turing Powered

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux has rotted your brain.

Re:Turing Powered

[Anonymous Coward]

The really hard part is only using 1D textures and the texture coordinates -1 and 1.

Re:Turing Powered

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

Maybe jokes should be funny.

Yeah, but anyone could do it that way.

Re:Turing Powered

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not as bad as it sounds, just keep it away from Apple.

Give RX 570s are going for $130

[rsilvergun]

with two free games and RX 580s are readily available for $120 on ebay (just got one for $100) they're probably feeling a bit of pressure on the low end.

Also to my shock and awe AMD works now. Longtime PC gamers will remember a period of almost 5 years when their GPU drivers were a disaster. I've been gaming on it for 2 weeks now with zero crashes (knock on wood). The only downside is power consumption, it pulls about 80 watts more than a GTX 1060. But at $100 it's hard to complain.

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Bradac_55]

Thanks for the rabid competing product sales pitch. We didn't even need to start a count down.

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd hardly call it rabid. My only real complaint is that the claim of $130 for an RX 570 with two free games is hard to verify. Same with his claim of an RX 580. Mostly the issue is ebay for graphic cards are such a mess of scams. It'd be great if ebay did a better job of fixing that. :/

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Tough Love]

RX580 is the top selling card on Amazon for a long time, it's hard to argue with the value. But otherwise AMD is barely hanging onto its roughly 17% add-in GPU share. Radeon VII is kickass but who knows when the supply is coming back and not everybody wants or needs a high end card. There is a lot of Nvidia hate going around and from where I sit it's richly deserved. I'm in that camp myself, I'd rather eat a turd than give money to NVidia. Seems like I've got lots of company there.

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Anonymous Coward]

that 83% that doesnt agree with you...

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for the awesome advertisement for a substandard product. Now, fuck off and die.

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Tough Love]

...contains a lot of people who have been abused by and consequently hate Nvidia.

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Anonymous Coward]

radeon vii is only being sold in enough numbers to show investors that AMD is still competitive. amd loses money on every card. they are not making more than the 5000 they promised.

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Tough Love]

That "loses money" refrain is apocryphal and is based on wholesale price of HBM2 not declining at all in 20 months, thus defying the law of semiconductor gravity. More likely, underestimated demand.

Re: Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Billly Gates]

Steam says otherwise. Gamers gave the finger to AMD and bought the 1050ti over the much supperior Rx 570 15 to 1!

Steam hardware survey has Nvidia owning ,85% of the market with Intel and AMD fighting for the 15%. Gamers want game works optimized titles and Jay2cents and Linus Tech Tips whore for Nvidia with a vengeance making commenters think you're an idiot to consider anything but Nvidia.

AMD is screwed as people are so brainwashed

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not like AMD/ATi is much better, they have abused customers with poor drivers for years and years while pushing GPUs beyond their stable limits to achieve competitive performance at the expense of their customers. That's why, despite competitive pricing, the overwhelming majority of gamers do not use them.

15-16 years ago nvidia was cheating in 3dmark benchmarks and a couple of years before that ATi was cheating in Quake3 benchmarks, then again in Crysis benchmarks, in particular degrading image quality to get an edge and then of course there's nvidia's hostility toward linux development model with respect to drivers. You're idiot if you pick either one of those companies and think you've got the moral high ground.

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Tough Love]

Sounds like you're a bit out of touch. AMD drivers have been great for years, particularly on Linux. Open sourcing the mainstream driver was brilliant, and they got a lot of loyal customers for that.

Re: Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Tough Love]

Steam hardware survey says 75% Nvidia, not 85%.

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Anonymous Coward]

What does Putin's cock taste like, tell us?

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[thegarbz]

with two free games and RX 580s are readily available for $120 on ebay (just got one for $100) they're probably feeling a bit of pressure on the low end.

If you're not interested in gaming there's always a cheaper slower option on the market.

Re: Give RX 570s are going for $130

[thegarbz]

AMD is screwed as people are so brainwashed

Producing buggy cards with barely working drivers is not consumers being brainwashed. Sometimes there's more to life than raw performance per dollar. That said AMD has gotten *MUCH* better since they first released the 5xx series.

Re: Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called the battered wife syndrome.

Oh nvidia rapes me because they love me...

Re: Give RX 570s are going for $130

[DamnOregonian]

Sure, but it also says more people are using their integrated Intel chipset than are using the first AMD chip to show up on the list, 17 entries down.
I have no problem with AMD, and own an integrated AMD GPU on my i7-8705g.
But I don't get why you so ravenously try to alter reality to make AMD look like rainbows come out of its ass.

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[DamnOregonian]

I can personally speak to this.
NV drivers on Linux are vastly superior in performance and stability, and lack of quirkiness.
You want real fun? Try to get good performance on a dedicated AMD GPU on a laptop that shares an integrated Intel GPU.
DRI_PRIME=1. Come on. Bring back my Catalyst control panel, please.
Though the fact that AMDs drivers are open source is something I appreciate very much.

Re:Give RX 570s are going for $130

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like you're a bit out of touch. AMD drivers have been great for years, particularly on Linux.

No they haven't, but they have been vastly less shit than they used to be.

Open sourcing the mainstream driver was brilliant, and they got a lot of loyal customers for that.

Yes it was finally admitting that they couldn't do a good Linux driver so they just threw it over the wall to the community to do it instead, it's still worse than nvidias proprietary drivers but it is a whole lot better than it used to be.

Pedantry

[lgw]

Since the Slashdot janitors don't edit, all I can do is rant:

offers a cut-down NVIDIA TU116 GPU comprised of 1408 CUDA cores

"Comprise" means "include" not "compose". "Comprise" implies these are all the things included, where "include" leaves open the possibly that you didn't list everything.

It's never correct to say "comprised of" any more than "included of"; That's just someone trying to look smart but instead babbling nonsense. If you want to say "composed of", say "composed of". If you want to use "comprise", use it just like you would "include".

So "offers a cut-down NVIDIA TU116 GPU comprising 1408 CUDA cores" would at least be a well-formed English sentence, but I think "composed of" would read better here.

Re:Pedantry

[Highdude702]

Or cut all that bullshit and say 'With'.
So "offers a cut-down NVIDIA TU116 GPU with 1408 CUDA cores"

Cmon man get with the times if it don't fit in a tweet people don't have the time or brain to pay attention to it.

Re:Pedantry

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know if anyone has ever explained this to you, but once the usage of a phrase becomes common and well known and understood by everyone reading or hearing it, then that phrase becomes acceptable, no matter how many outdated usage guides disagree.
Languages are dynamic things. Deal with it.

Re:Pedantry

[Xenx]

While there is contention among language professionals, "comprised of" is considered standard English usage by multiple well regarded sources. Further, it is commonplace in both writing and speech. As the general public is the intended audience, and not just language professionals, it would be more accurate for them to use it as they have.

Re:Pedantry

[sexconker]

WRONG!

There's some jackass going around trying to convince everyone of that, and he's dedicated his life to eradicating all instances of "comprised of" from Wikipedia, and the shitty "news" articles that covered his efforts are almost assuredly why you "know" this "fact".

But that jackass is WRONG! The usage of "comprised of" is perfectly valid, and has been in standard usage for ages. It comes from the Latin comprehendere, and basically means to bring shit together (com) before (pre) taking it (hendere). Comprise means to collectively make up, form, or constitute.

3 books that comprise a volume are the 3 books comprising that volume, and that volume is comprised of (or by) those 3 books.

The only thing you are even close to correct on is the idea that "com" may imply completeness, as in "complete". But you're still wrong because "complete" itself refers to the fucking groups of soldiers that absolutely did have things not included. When 10 guys die or are incapacitated you would complete your unit by adding more from your slaves / subjects that weren't initially included. Hell, a unit of soldiers is also known as a "complement". Complete doesn't mean everything is included, but that nothing necessary is missing. Thus a GPU "comprised of" 1408 CUDA cores is perfectly valid as long as they didn't sell it as a GPU that should have more CUDA cores. They have different SKUs for that.

Re:Pedantry

[PopeRatzo]

"Comprise" means "include" not "compose". "Comprise" implies these are all the things included, where "include" leaves open the possibly that you didn't list everything.

It's never correct to say "comprised of" any more than "included of"; That's just someone trying to look smart but instead babbling nonsense. If you want to say "composed of", say "composed of". If you want to use "comprise", use it just like you would "include".

It hurts me to say it, but you are absolutely correct, and I endorse your rant.

Re:Pedantry

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes thank you for being an unthinking parrot for Bryan Henderson, who is wrong anyway.

Re:Pedantry

[lgw]

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=comp...

Every result I see says I'm right. I see no one arguing the other way.

Re:Pedantry

[Anonymous Coward]

"I did a duckduckgo search for it" is not a rebuttal.

Re:Pedantry

[Tough Love]

The Oxford Dictionaries online dictionary regards the passive form "comprised of" as standard English usage

Re:Pedantry

[Anonymous Coward]

Webster says you're wrong.

Re:Pedantry

[Anonymous Coward]

"Comprised of" is every bit as correct as the construction "inclusive of," which has been in common use for a very long time.

"Comprised of" is perfectly cromulent, notwithstanding pseudo-pedants who want to feel superior without cause.

Re:Pedantry

[Anonymous Coward]

Read the results, you goddam stupid motherfucker. And wipe the drool off your keyboard.

Re:Pedantry

[thegarbz]

Not wrong, but no one cares either.

The oxford dictionary specifically calls out that "comprised of" in this sense is common in the english language but also classically and grammatically incorrect.
This usage is part of standard English, but the construction comprise of, as in the property comprises of bedroom, bathroom, and kitchen, is regarded as incorrect.

Re:Pedantry

[Anonymous Coward]

Google "inclusive of" -- it's been in common use for a very long time.

The linguists and lexicographers say that "comprised of" is correct usage, and they're the experts.

Re:Pedantry

[mjwx]

WRONG!

There's some jackass going around trying to convince everyone of that, and he's dedicated his life to eradicating all instances of "comprised of" from Wikipedia, and the shitty "news" articles that covered his efforts are almost assuredly why you "know" this "fact".

But that jackass is WRONG! The usage of "comprised of" is perfectly valid, and has been in standard usage for ages. It comes from the Latin comprehendere, and basically means to bring shit together (com) before (pre) taking it (hendere). Comprise means to collectively make up, form, or constitute.

3 books that comprise a volume are the 3 books comprising that volume, and that volume is comprised of (or by) those 3 books.

The thing I've discovered about pedants is that those who are most pedantic about something tend to be the ones who know the least about that subject. English language pedants doubly so. Over here a lot of people get hot under the collar if you say "can I get" despite it being perfectly cromulent. Same with using literally as hyperbole. Even the Oxford English Dictionary now literally lists the hyperbolic definition of literally.

People who actually know a lot about language (or other subjects) tend to be less pedantic about it because they're smart enough to know what you're on about.

So being a pedant just makes you look like an arse, to anyone who knows anything about the subject, it makes you look like dumb arse. Language pedants doubly so because languages are inherently irregular.

But take Hart Grammer Nazis, they're, there, their.

I wish AMD would release new cards

[Anonymous Coward]

Nvidia have had the monopoly on GPUs for practically ever; AMD really need to shake things up like they did with ryzen and at least give us another option which isn't just a rebadged binned GPU with a higher power limit (the 5xx are literally just rebadges of the 4xx with process node improvements and the 590 is just a binned 580 with a higher power draw)
Sure they're released the radeon 7 but that's not much use to those of us who'd rather spend that kind of money on a mortgage payment instead of a graphics card.
I want to spend 200-250 on a card and it NOT be nvidia and it NOT to run at 95c and use 300 watts please AMD!

Re:I wish AMD would release new cards

[Anonymous Coward]

If Intel is fast enough to market with decent products, this is really their window of opportunity. My card is already too old to work with the software I'm using (Blender) while Turing cards are too new to work with the current stable version the way I'd want them to. Maybe the manufacturer who first puts out some AV1 acceleration gets my money. By that time the other software is there as well. Navi, navi oh where art thou!

Re:I wish AMD would release new cards

[sl3xd]

I want ... it NOT to run at 95c and use 300 watts please AMD!

I'm afraid those days are done. We're pretty much at the end of the road for die shrinks. There are some who are hopeful that we'll make it to 5nm, and some Cthulhu dreamers thinking we'll get to 3.5 in a few more years.

Welcome to the end of the road.

Next up is multi-layer dies, which have same surface area, but 2-4 layers of transistors -- meaning 2-4x the heat to transfer out of the same contact patch.

You thought heat was a problem before? Hold my beer.

Re:I wish AMD would release new cards

[sexconker]

Wait. For. Navi.

Anyone buying a new GPU now is a fool! Navi will be out, and it'll likely disappoint, but it'll at least be a 7nm GPU.
Nvidia will likely trot out their 7nm offerings in the fall. These will blow anything AMD has out of the water, but Nvidia will probably charge way too much for them, so some of the Navi parts may bet better for a given price point.

Note that AMD already release 7nm GPUs in the compute-focused Vega cards and their Radeon VII rebrand. This is Vega. Vega is shit. It is hot, expensive, and not very fast. As an AMD fan I must warn the world. Do not buy Vega.

The only possible reason anyone should consider Vega is if they can secure the deal with the 3 free games (not in all markets, some retailers are already out of codes, some retailers simply never give them to you, etc.) and you want or can easily sell them. I'm not touching The Division 2 because it's just The Division 2.0. The Resident Evil 2 remake I already have (it's fantastic). I've never cared about Devil May Cry.

Re:I wish AMD would release new cards

[drinkypoo]

They're going to have to figure out a way to reduce voltage, then...

Re: I wish AMD would release new cards

[Billly Gates]

Nope it doesn't match the 2080ti so gamers will assume it sucks for all editions like always. Nvidia has an incredible mindshare and cult following if you go on YouTube reviewer sites like Jayz2cents

Re: I wish AMD would release new cards

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought a new vega 56 for $350 sold and shipped by Amazon. My 480 is still good enough, but the vega is better for vr and 4k.

Re:I wish AMD would release new cards

[thegarbz]

but it'll at least be a 7nm GPU.

I'll take irrelevant shit for $100 Jim!

I agree with waiting for Navi to see what the competition brings to a table and at what price. But there's few things I could give less shits about than the transistor gate size on the die itself. Tell me the performance, the price, and if it is possible to not sound like a vacuum cleaner and those are the only things that come into any buying decision.

Oh and if it had RGB lighting, because you know can't build a computer in 2018 that doesn't look like a 70s disco on the inside.

i missed something

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought the point of the new 'turing-based' cards WAS in fact the ray tracing.

15% boost? sounds pretty underwhelming otherwise.

Re:i missed something

[sl3xd]

15% boost? sounds pretty underwhelming otherwise.

Welcome to the silicon wall. It took Nvidia 36 months and roughly 50% more transistors to get that 15% of performance.

The days of doubling your performance every couple of years is done.

Re:i missed something

[Crash Dummy Redux]

Raytraving is in the Nvidia RTX 2000-series (higher price point) and removed from the GTX 1600-series (lower price point). Not everyone is going to need raytracing, especially since so few video games support it. The GTX 1660 effectively eliminates AMD 570/80/90 video cards at the $200 to $250 price point.

Re:i missed something

[Anonymous Coward]

do you ever stop your digital flatus

Re:i missed something

[sexconker]

Nah, AMD let Nvidia sit on their ass that long, and all Nvidia had to do was rebrand their machine learning cards. They didn't even design and fab something new based on that architecture. They just gave people cut down chips and said the tensor cores would run raytracing (via Nvidia's proprietary, game-crippling middleware RTX) and shitty AI upscaling that's worse than regular upscaling (DLSS).

Re:i missed something

[Kjella]

Welcome to the silicon wall. It took Nvidia 36 months and roughly 50% more transistors to get that 15% of performance. The days of doubling your performance every couple of years is done.

Then crippled it with 2/3rds the memory bandwidth of the 1660 Ti, so it's actually capable of considerably more. As for long term, the human brain does everything it does in 15-20W. Maybe we can't do it with die shrinks but something tells me there's still a ton of potential in low-power computing.

Re:i missed something

[Tough Love]

RX 580 retails for under $200 for months now, which is why it's Amazon's top selling card. 1660 isn't going to displace 580, rather it's going to eviscerate the RTX line. Nvidia knows it and that's why they needed the Mellanox distraction.

Re:i missed something

[Anonymous Coward]

My brain can't push a 1080p image to an external monitor at 60fps based on a mathematical reconstruction of a virtual space. There are different types of performance, and the performance curve of graphics has reached the domain of diminishing returns.

Re:i missed something

[Anonymous Coward]

why don't you make a video about that
and why can't you ever get a sentence out without stopping every two words

Re:i missed something

[Crash Dummy Redux]

If you paid attention to the YouTube tech scene, dozens of videos were made about that point yesterday.

If you haven't noticed, creimer is a retard.

Fuck off.

Re:i missed something

[Anonymous Coward]

"If you paid attention to the YouTube tech scene"

i don't i have a life i stopped caring about video cards and motherboards after i stopped being a teenager

"If you haven't noticed, creimer is a retard."

we noticed we noticed

"Fuck off"

chris that is very rude

Unless you want open source drivers...

[Anonymous Coward]

Then the RX5x0s make sense, whether for gaming or GPGPU (assuming you aren't cuda-bound.)

Having said that, the RTX2060 is really the sweet spot card. 360 sounds like a lot until you realize it has half the Tensor performance of the Volta high end card or RTX2080 card, and while the memory will limit your datasets, can handle a lot more processing than multiple previous generation cards from either AMD or Nvidia, unless they are better suited to FP32/64 calculations.

Except for a lucky strike of course

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

What is this in terms of Seti@Home or some other thing? Every couple of years I can do everything I've done before over a decade and a half in a few weeks, making all that effort pointless. I suppose nobody should run any number crunching until the year 2525 and get everything from now until then done by February 2525.

15% Better Than 1060

[mentil]

What the 1660 boils down to is ~15% more performance than a 1060 for the same price. Same amount of VRAM, also.
Get your act together, AMD, we're heading toward Intel-style 7% gains per GPU generation.

Re:15% Better Than 1060

[Anonymous Coward]

You want a smaller company to tackle two giants at the same time in different markets? AMD's doing good job if you consider their size.

Re:15% Better Than 1060

[samwichse]

AMD is eating nVidias lunch on the low end with the integrated Vega CPUs. A 2400g is about equivalent to a gt 1030 in performance.

You get a quad core, 8-thread CPU and it comes with the equivalent of a free 1030 built in for $135? Makes a hard case for buying anything from nVidia's low end.

I've read bad things about AMD's top end

[rsilvergun]

mostly that they're pushing them too hard to hit competitive numbers. You end up with a card that's unstable out of the box. You can tweak voltages and such until the card is stable, and you'll get the performance that was promised on the tin, but it just feels like if I'm blowing $700 on a GPU I shouldn't have to.

As for the RX580 being top selling, I'm pretty sure that's due to miners. Miners made AMD cards rare as hens teeth right when they fixed their stability issues, killing their market share in PC gaming.

Re:I've read bad things about AMD's top end

[Tough Love]

mostly that they're pushing them too hard to hit competitive numbers. You end up with a card that's unstable out of the box.

Complete rubbish, nobody is complaining about unstable out of the box. Rather, there are complaints about buggy tweaking tools. Enthusiasts quickly found that the Radeon VII can be aggressively undervolted at default clock, and in fact can be overclocked while undervolted.

Re:I've read bad things about AMD's top end

[Tough Love]

As for the RX580 being top selling, I'm pretty sure that's due to miners.

You can be pretty sure you're wrong, confirmed by Steam's hardware survey that shows RX580 and other 500 series steadily increasing total installed share.

Re:I've read bad things about AMD's top end

[Tough Love]

Re your mining theory, it probably explains why prices are remain fairly high for Vega 56 and 64, and it might explain why Radeon VII sold out in about two hours, when miners found out about the double precision floating point performance (3.4 TFLOPS.) I seriously doubt that miners are buying 500 series now, especially as there are many used ones on the market if they really do feel the need.

You know what miners really aren't buying? Nvidia cards. It really never made much sense, and now that profitability is marginal to negative it makes no sense at all.

Re:I've read bad things about AMD's top end

[drnb]

As for the RX580 being top selling, I'm pretty sure that's due to miners.

You can be pretty sure you're wrong, confirmed by Steam's hardware survey that shows RX580 and other 500 series steadily increasing total installed share.

Yes, as the miners now sell their used 580s to gamers who were essentially locked out due to inflated prices for over a year.

I'm not really shilling

[rsilvergun]

I'm genuinely pleasantly surprised that AMD got their shit together. It also took a lot for me to "take the plunge" and try AMD after several bad experiences going back to 2004 (plus all the bad press on their drivers from 2004-2009 or so).

Something I have noticed, my RX580 is underclocked (1200, XFX apparently ships their GPUs underclocked and then has instructions on overclocking them). I haven't bothered pushing it to it's full allowed clock of 1300 (it's one of the early, low end models) because it's not worth the trouble. My bench marks are right in line with what I see online. e.g. a Passmark score of 8400 or so, etc.

It makes me wonder if nVidia games benchmarks more than I realized.

Re:I'm not really shilling

[rtb61]

It is just the way of things. US corporation when they get dominant market share, just turn into arse holes and take crappy short cuts, look no further than the latest iteration if Nvidia shield, just full of cheap crap shortcuts to maximise profits based on pretending it is like the previous model. So AMD damages it rep and moves heaven and earth to rebuild it with hardwork whilst Nvidia is selling out the trust it built to screw customers and maximise profits. Given time AMD will dominate and Nvidia will work hard at rebuilding it's reputations. It called the psychopathic corporate executive cycle of life. Those dickbrains clamber on corporations, pushing the high profit spreadsheets, earn the short term bonuses for pumping up profits, selling out the companies trust and reputation and it all inevitably blows up forcing the rehiring of stable executives who rebuild the company with much lower profit margins and once rebuilt, they are replaced with psychopaths again to sell out that reputation earned by others. Often the companies die before they can be rebuilt.

Re:I'm not really shilling

[parkinglot777]

Well, is it possible that the same money-grabber psychopathic corporate executives move between AMD and NVidia? Just a thought...

Um... there on NewEgg for that price right now

[rsilvergun]

See here.

I spend a few months sniping ebay to get that 580 for $100 though. You'll usually pay $120-$140. But a GTX 1060 6GB will set you back $160-$180 (was trying to snipe one of those too, still am albeit at $100 :) ).

The RX 570 is _nuts_ though. It out does the 1060 3gb for $50 bucks less. Heck, I've seen the 8gb version go for $140 on sale. Even with the power consumption (figure 40-60 watts more) it's a no brainer unless you've got a cheap OEM computer (in which case yeah, you're stuck with nvidia because your PCI-E slot & power supply won't deliver enough juice).

Re:Um... there on NewEgg for that price right now

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry if that came across as bitchy. It's just that on ebay, used prices for RX 570 are on the order of $130 and Amazon lists them at $150 or more. Sometimes newegg is a good deal, but frequently--at least in my experience--it's not so I don't normally check it for prices. Besides, I keep arguing with myself if I want to upgrade one of my computers from a 750 Ti to something else or not. I'm still undecided--I might upgrade the whole system first. It's just nice to know of a possible good place if I decide to go for it.

I would be more interested

[nehumanuscrede]

In seeing Nvidia come back to reality when it comes to their GPU pricing as of late.

Walked through a Fry's recently and saw an entire SHELF full of 2080 TI cards ( maybe 30+ units ) at $1500 each.
I'm pretty sure the price is WHY the shelf was still full of them.

Similar to the lesson Apple had to learn with their overpriced iPhone X, there is a limit people are willing to pay for any given product.

Fast? I know Fast!

[Anonymous Coward]

I just run everything on my SGI Crimson.
It's great!

Think crypto mining

[rsilvergun]

580s have sold like hot cakes, but it's only the last 3-4 months they've been available to gamers.

570s were still being bought for mining

[rsilvergun]

The miners didn't get scared off until the 550, which is pretty useless (it's a bit faster than integrated AMD graphics). Yeah, even 560s had shot up in price.

Meanwhile you could still get 1050s for $200 bucks (crazy, since it was suppose to be a $120 card, but so be it). 1050 TIs were pushing $250, but again, you take what you can get when a bloody RX 570 is going for $350 bucks.

AWESOME

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

This is awesome- another stupidly-expensive video card that will be obsolete in 6 months. Woo hoo!

Okay, maybe it'll actually be obsolete in 3 months, but hey- for that 90-day window I'll have a video card that my friends won't geek-shame me over. I won't have to hang my head in shame because my video card doesn't have the latest GPU made from genuine imported yak kidneys or whatever.

Re:AWESOME

[Anonymous Coward]

$220 is "stupidly expensive?" This is the 1660 we're talking about, not the 2080Ti...

User name definitely checks out in this case.

LIAR!

[Anonymous Coward]

https://www.theverge.com/2013/1/16/3881826/amd-accuses-bob-feldstein-of-stealing-documents-nvidia
https://hothardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-partner-program
https://www.techradar.com/news/nvidia-faces-allegations-of-anti-consumer-practices-in-the-graphics-card-world
https://www.cnet.com/news/former-nvidia-engineer-charged-with-insider-trading/
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/145830-industrial-espionage-amd-files-suit-against-former-employees-for-alleged-document-theft

Re:IT'S NOT THE BEER IT'S THE LYING, FAGGOT KEN DO

[Anonymous Coward]

You are laughable incorrect.

As well as amusingly unhinged.