Originally Posted by tpi2007
Agreed. It will be $279 MSRP because they can, because it will be more efficient than the RX 590, and will probably beat it by a few (not many probably) percentage points.
AMD won't be much hurt with this move because the RX 590 is basically a post-crypto RX 580 and RX 570 flusher, by making people look at them again and realise that they are at a good value compared to the RX 590. They are probably hoping that by the time the GTX 1660 non Ti and 1650 arrive they already sold most of the back stock and are closer to launching Navi.
just take note that 590 is overpriced compared to either 580 or 570, not to mention the performance gap between GTX1060 and RX590 is small.
if you're implying that GTX1660Ti would only be 15%~20% faster than GTX1060 then i doubt a price of $280 would make it look good.
lets do some mathematical comparison between Turing and Pascal:
RTX2060 = 1920:120:48 @ 1680Mhz | 192bit GDDR6 @ 336GB/s | relative performance 116.9% (based on TPU)
GTX1070 = 1920:120:64 @ 1683Mhz | 256bit GDDR5 @ 256GB/s | relative performance 100% (based on TPU)
this implies that Turing is approximately 17% faster than Pascal.
now lets apply it to 1660Ti:
GTX1660Ti = 1536:96:48 @ 1770Mhz? | 192bit GDDR6 @ 288GB/s?
GTX1060 = 1280:80:48 @ 1708Mhz | 192bit GDD5 @ 192GB/s
lets ignore the clock speed increase
1536/1280 = +20%
Turing IPC = +17%
1.2 * 1.17 = 1.40 or +40%
then if we apply 40% on top of GTX1060 in that image, we'd see it sit right beside RX Vega 56.
but then, if it really does perform close to Vega 56... the price may as well be $300, no wonder they priced the RTX2060 FE at $350.
in any case, when i posted this, i very much already did the mathematical estimation.
Originally Posted by epic1337
190% 2060 ≈ 1070Ti ~ 1080
160% 1660Ti ≈ 1070
130% 1660 ≈ RX590
100% 1650 ≈ 1060 3GB
perfectly scaled ❤, now if only they're priced really well... meh.