GTX 660ti or 560ti?

Generic forum to discuss Octane Render, post ideas and suggest improvements.
Forum rules
Please add your OS and Hardware Configuration in your signature, it makes it easier for us to help you analyze problems. Example: Win 7 64 | Geforce GTX680 | i7 3770 | 16GB
1drworx
Licensed Customer
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:04 pm

Would there be any advantage in a GTX 660ti over my 560ti with the new 3.03 build?

Any help much appreciated.

Dale
I7 2600k | EVGA gtx 660ti 2gb | Win 8 x64 | 16gb RAM
User avatar
FooZe
OctaneRender Team
Posts: 1335
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 9:00 pm

Hi,

This is a very good question and it would be great (and simple!) if someone has tried this and has some real world numbers...

I can do some theorizing tho' (warning - excessive details and guessing to follow):

What we know: We know that a 680 is about on par with a SINGLE GPU on a 590.

The 590's stats are:
Shader clock: 1215
Memory clock: 3414
CUDA cores: 512

The 680's stats are:
Clock: 1006
Mem clock (base): 6000
CUDA cores: 1536

So in comparison (680 vs single 590 GPU)
Clock = 83%
Mem clock = 176%
CUDA cores = 300%

We know these differences (along with the change of architecture) leads to roughly the same performance in octane render.


So to compare the 660ti with the 560ti:
560ti
shader clock: 822 (or 732 for the 448 core version)
mem clock: 4008
cuda cores: 384 (or 448 for the 448 core version)

660ti:
clock: 915
mem clock: 6000
cuda cores: 1344

So comparison:
clock = 111% (or 125% vs the 448 core 560ti)
mem clock = 150%
cuda cores = 350% (or 300% vs the 448 core 560ti)

So we know that the 680 vs single 590 core differences equate to roughly the same speed so how do the 560ti vs 660ti differences compare to these?
Well, it's hard to call. Your getting a better bonus for clock speed, but lower for memory, and same or better on cuda cores depending on your 560ti.
I have noticed at least on a 670 that memory clock is important and changing this seems to effect performance more than the base clock speed.

I doubt you will see much improvement in speed if any. But the 660 may have other advantages to you however - perhaps more VRAM (depending on the card you have alread), also in the future (once we get the octane side support going) it may allow you to use a higher number of textures in your scene. Also it will be easier on your system in terms of power if you want to stack your system with them.
If you play games then i'm pretty sure it will be a good upgrade too.

If your motherboard can take both cards then you can always add a 660 and use it along with the 560 in octane.

Cheers
Chris.
1drworx
Licensed Customer
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:04 pm

Thanks Chris this was very helpful.
Dale
I7 2600k | EVGA gtx 660ti 2gb | Win 8 x64 | 16gb RAM
tuts3d
Licensed Customer
Posts: 129
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:44 pm

Hi fooze, so it means the 690's are double the speed of 590's, right? Hmmm, then I should have bought those 690's after all ;)
win 7 64 bit/ core i7 4770k/ 32 GB ram / gtx Titan sc/ asus Maximus vii hero MOBO
User avatar
Refracty
Licensed Customer
Posts: 1599
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:42 pm
Location: 3D-Visualisierung Köln
Contact:

no the 590 and 690 will give you about the same render speed in Octane
User avatar
bepeg4d
Octane Guru
Posts: 10375
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:02 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

hi,
if a 680 is about equal to a single gpu 590 and a 580 is roughly 10/20% faster than a single gpu 590, the 690 should be roughly 10/20% slower than a 590 ;)
ciao beppe
User avatar
abstrax
OctaneRender Team
Posts: 5510
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:01 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

bepeg4d wrote:hi,
if a 680 is about equal to a single gpu 590 and a 580 is roughly 10/20% faster than a single gpu 590, the 690 should be roughly 10/20% slower than a 590 ;)
ciao beppe
Interestingly that's not the case here. The 580 is 10-20% faster than a 680, but the 590 is roughly as fast as a 690. In some scenes the 690 wins in others the 590. The 680 is bit faster than a 690 GPU, but nor much (less than 10%).

Cheers,
Marcus
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
User avatar
pixelrush
Licensed Customer
Posts: 1618
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 7:11 pm
Location: Nelson, New Zealand

Nice to afford a 690 or two at ~2000 NZ dollars each ;)
You don't happen to have a 670 for a performance comparison do you?
I'm sort of interested in one but I can't quite work out how fast it would be in comparison to my 460 :roll:
Maybe I'll sit out a generation in the hopes Nvidia get serious about single precision again...
i7-3820 @4.3Ghz | 24gb | Win7pro-64
GTS 250 display + 2 x GTX 780 cuda| driver 331.65
Octane v1.55
User avatar
abstrax
OctaneRender Team
Posts: 5510
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:01 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

pixelrush wrote:Nice to afford a 690 or two at ~2000 NZ dollars each ;)
You don't happen to have a 670 for a performance comparison do you?
I'm sort of interested in one but I can't quite work out how fast it would be in comparison to my 460 :roll:
Maybe I'll sit out a generation in the hopes Nvidia get serious about single precision again...
Unfortunately we don't have any 670 at work. It should be considerably faster than a 460, but don't ask me how much. Btw, you can get a Palit 690 for 1550NZD. I know it's not cheap, but less than 2000...

Cheers,
Marcus
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
User avatar
bepeg4d
Octane Guru
Posts: 10375
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:02 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

interesting, thanks marcus for the clarification ;)
same velocity, more ram, but less power and noise, good product, except for the price, here in italy is double of a 590 :(
ciao beppe
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”