GTX 970 launch price $329 GTX 1060 6GB launch price $279 and being about 10% faster than GTX 970 GTX 1660 6GB launch price $219 and being about 15% faster than GTX 1060 6GB
Same pattern as usual - $60 off for 10-15% better performance, evil greedy Nvidia and sky is falling...again...
960 was 199 at launch, not sure why you are using the 970.
Big tech evolution that gen. The 1060 is faster than the 970 whereas the 960 was not faster than the 770. 970 is the equivalent previous gen card when it comes to the 1060.
What? The 960 was definitely faster than the 770, my 770 died and I upgraded to a 960 and it was a definite increase.
Big tech evolution that gen. The 1060 is faster than the 970 whereas the 960 was not faster than the 770. 970 is the equivalent previous gen card when it comes to the 1060.
What? The 960 was definitely faster than the 770, my 770 died and I upgraded to a 960 and it was a definite increase.
770.. about 18% faster. Not only that, it's faster in every category. Plus, most benches are with the 2GB version and it still performs a lot better.
Which of the two cards is faster depends tremendously on what you're doing. If you're leaning heavily on global memory bandwidth, then the GTX 770 will win, and by a lot. For something heavier on doing computations on the GPU chip itself, it could be close if it's something that fits the broken Kepler architecture pretty well.
Once you go outside of what Kepler can handle, the GTX 960 will crush the GTX 770. Most cryptocurrency mining would be an example of this. Anything that leans heavily on local memory atomics or L2 cache would also be an example. Anything that requires a lot of registers per thread will also make that happen: in a lot of compute code, the GTX 960 will be able to keep its data in registers, while the GTX 770 will have to go off the die entirely to global memory, and that could easily result in the GTX 960 being faster by a factor of 10 or more.
In most games, I'd expect the GTX 770 to win. Kepler was narrowly focused on graphics, and while it wasn't that good at it, it wasn't bad at graphics, either. It's once you move away from that and try to do compute that it falls apart.
Big tech evolution that gen. The 1060 is faster than the 970 whereas the 960 was not faster than the 770. 970 is the equivalent previous gen card when it comes to the 1060.
What? The 960 was definitely faster than the 770, my 770 died and I upgraded to a 960 and it was a definite increase.
770.. about 18% faster. Not only that, it's faster in every category. Plus, most benches are with the 2GB version and it still performs a lot better.
Which of the two cards is faster depends tremendously on what you're doing. If you're leaning heavily on global memory bandwidth, then the GTX 770 will win, and by a lot. For something heavier on doing computations on the GPU chip itself, it could be close if it's something that fits the broken Kepler architecture pretty well.
Once you go outside of what Kepler can handle, the GTX 960 will crush the GTX 770. Most cryptocurrency mining would be an example of this. Anything that leans heavily on local memory atomics or L2 cache would also be an example. Anything that requires a lot of registers per thread will also make that happen: in a lot of compute code, the GTX 960 will be able to keep its data in registers, while the GTX 770 will have to go off the die entirely to global memory, and that could easily result in the GTX 960 being faster by a factor of 10 or more.
In most games, I'd expect the GTX 770 to win. Kepler was narrowly focused on graphics, and while it wasn't that good at it, it wasn't bad at graphics, either. It's once you move away from that and try to do compute that it falls apart.
We're talking about gaming here so, for gaming and in the context of this topic, the 770 is a lot better than the 960.
I understand that you've replied like that because you didn't like my loose use of 'faster'.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Big tech evolution that gen. The 1060 is faster than the 970 whereas the 960 was not faster than the 770. 970 is the equivalent previous gen card when it comes to the 1060.
What? The 960 was definitely faster than the 770, my 770 died and I upgraded to a 960 and it was a definite increase.
770.. about 18% faster. Not only that, it's faster in every category. Plus, most benches are with the 2GB version and it still performs a lot better.
Which of the two cards is faster depends tremendously on what you're doing. If you're leaning heavily on global memory bandwidth, then the GTX 770 will win, and by a lot. For something heavier on doing computations on the GPU chip itself, it could be close if it's something that fits the broken Kepler architecture pretty well.
Once you go outside of what Kepler can handle, the GTX 960 will crush the GTX 770. Most cryptocurrency mining would be an example of this. Anything that leans heavily on local memory atomics or L2 cache would also be an example. Anything that requires a lot of registers per thread will also make that happen: in a lot of compute code, the GTX 960 will be able to keep its data in registers, while the GTX 770 will have to go off the die entirely to global memory, and that could easily result in the GTX 960 being faster by a factor of 10 or more.
In most games, I'd expect the GTX 770 to win. Kepler was narrowly focused on graphics, and while it wasn't that good at it, it wasn't bad at graphics, either. It's once you move away from that and try to do compute that it falls apart.
We're talking about gaming here so, for gaming and in the context of this topic, the 770 is a lot better than the 960.
A few years ago, maybe. Today, I'd be less sure, as Kepler was a weird, finicky architecture, and Nvidia has long since stopped optimizing anything for it. It is probably on the brink of having driver support dropped entirely. And if games start launching with shaders that assume that you can handle far more than the 63 registers per thread that was GK104's limit, a GTX 770 will completely choke on such games. As best as I can tell, the last GPU chip with Windows drivers not to support at least 255 launched way back in 2012. And yes, that includes Intel, not just AMD and Nvidia.
GTX 970 launch price $329 GTX 1060 6GB launch price $279 and being about 10% faster than GTX 970 GTX 1660 6GB launch price $219 and being about 15% faster than GTX 1060 6GB
Same pattern as usual - $60 off for 10-15% better performance, evil greedy Nvidia and sky is falling...again...
960 was 199 at launch, not sure why you are using the 970.
Big tech evolution that gen. The 1060 is faster than the 970 whereas the 960 was not faster than the 770. 970 is the equivalent previous gen card when it comes to the 1060.
What? The 960 was definitely faster than the 770, my 770 died and I upgraded to a 960 and it was a definite increase.
GTX 970 launch price $329 GTX 1060 6GB launch price $279 and being about 10% faster than GTX 970 GTX 1660 6GB launch price $219 and being about 15% faster than GTX 1060 6GB
Same pattern as usual - $60 off for 10-15% better performance, evil greedy Nvidia and sky is falling...again...
960 was 199 at launch, not sure why you are using the 970.
Big tech evolution that gen. The 1060 is faster than the 970 whereas the 960 was not faster than the 770. 970 is the equivalent previous gen card when it comes to the 1060.
What? The 960 was definitely faster than the 770, my 770 died and I upgraded to a 960 and it was a definite increase.
770.. about 18% faster. Not only that, it's faster in every category. Plus, most benches are with the 2GB version and it still performs a lot better.
Sorry, bad benchmarks, my 960 card was definitely faster than the 770 and I upped my graphics settings too, so in your face with your silly benchmarks
Every benchmark ever done by hundreds of thousands of people and you're the only person that's right even though you're just guessing. Nice. You've really shown me.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Every benchmark ever done by hundreds of thousands of people and you're the only person that's right even though you're just guessing. Nice. You've really shown me.
You have quite a curious notion of "every benchmark ever done by hundreds of thousands of people". Your own hand-chosen link lists the GTX 960 as faster than a GTX 770 in some of the benchmarks. And that's to say nothing of the many compute benchmarks where a GTX 960 will blow away a GTX 770.
Every benchmark ever done by hundreds of thousands of people and you're the only person that's right even though you're just guessing. Nice. You've really shown me.
You have quite a curious notion of "every benchmark ever done by hundreds of thousands of people". Your own hand-chosen link lists the GTX 960 as faster than a GTX 770 in some of the benchmarks. And that's to say nothing of the many compute benchmarks where a GTX 960 will blow away a GTX 770.
It is the better card overall for gaming, Quiz. I don't know why you're trying to nitpick at holes and point out situations that don't factor into the grand scheme of gaming. Overall, it's far better for games, 'especially' when both cards were relevant and still being made. You know that, you're just on some kind of PvP mission.
For new games, both are pretty bad so trying to argue that the 960 could outperform in 'some' games, today, is irrelevant. Neither would be a recommendation.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Comments
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-960-vs-Nvidia-GTX-770/3165vs2174
770.. about 18% faster. Not only that, it's faster in every category. Plus, most benches are with the 2GB version and it still performs a lot better.
Once you go outside of what Kepler can handle, the GTX 960 will crush the GTX 770. Most cryptocurrency mining would be an example of this. Anything that leans heavily on local memory atomics or L2 cache would also be an example. Anything that requires a lot of registers per thread will also make that happen: in a lot of compute code, the GTX 960 will be able to keep its data in registers, while the GTX 770 will have to go off the die entirely to global memory, and that could easily result in the GTX 960 being faster by a factor of 10 or more.
In most games, I'd expect the GTX 770 to win. Kepler was narrowly focused on graphics, and while it wasn't that good at it, it wasn't bad at graphics, either. It's once you move away from that and try to do compute that it falls apart.
I understand that you've replied like that because you didn't like my loose use of 'faster'.
For new games, both are pretty bad so trying to argue that the 960 could outperform in 'some' games, today, is irrelevant. Neither would be a recommendation.