Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 based on its .
See full details GeForce GTX 770 vs 660 Ti |
Released May, 2013
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
- 1 GHz
- 2 GB GDDR5
8.3 Out of 10
by techPowerUp!While the Lightning comes with very high clocks out of the box, the TF Gaming is only mildly overclocked by 13 MHz (~1).
VS
Released August, 2012
Generic GeForce GTX 660 Ti
- 915 MHz
- 2 GB GDDR5
7.6 Out of 10
by techPowerUp! (Aug, 2012)The game graphics are, even today, top notch, yet the game still runs well on most computers.
GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 770 vs 660 Ti
Gaming | |
Real world tests using the latest 3D games | |
| crysis: warhead (2013), battlefield 3 (2013) and Far Cry 3 | |
Benchmarks | |
Synthetic tests to measure overall performance | |
| Passmark, 3DMark Vantage Texture Fill, 3DMark 11 Graphics and 2 more | |
Compute Performance | |
General computing tests executed on the GPU | |
| Civilization 5 Texture Decomposition (2013), Passmark Direct Compute and 1 more | |
Noise and Power | |
How loud and hot does the card run idle and under load | |
| TDP, Idle Noise Level, Load Noise Level, Idle Power Consumption and 1 more | |
GPUBoss Score | |
Gaming, Benchmarks, Compute Performance and Noise and Power | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770GPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Higher clock speed | 1,046 MHz | vs | 915 MHz | Around 15% higher clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Better passmark score | 6,208 | vs | 4,686 | More than 30% better passmark score | |||
| Better 3DMark vantage graphics score | 36,150 | vs | 27,687 | More than 30% better 3DMark vantage graphics score | |||
| Better 3DMark vantage texture fill score | 109.5 | vs | 86.4 | More than 25% better 3DMark vantage texture fill score | |||
| Better 3DMark06 score | 29,690 | vs | 22,997 | Around 30% better 3DMark06 score | |||
| Higher memory bandwidth | 224 GB/s | vs | 144.2 GB/s | More than 55% higher memory bandwidth | |||
| Better 3DMark 11 graphics score | 11,310 | vs | 8,415 | Around 35% better 3DMark 11 graphics score | |||
| Higher effective memory clock speed | 7,012 MHz | vs | 6,008 MHz | More than 15% higher effective memory clock speed | |||
| More energy-efficient load power consumption | 246W | vs | 318W | Around 25% more energy-efficient load power consumption | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 3,213 GFLOPS | vs | 2,460 GFLOPS | More than 30% better floating-point performance | |||
| Significantly quieter idle noise level | 38.2 dB | vs | 41.8 dB | Around 10% quieter idle noise level | |||
| Higher turbo clock speed | 1,085 MHz | vs | 980 MHz | More than 10% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Higher texture rate | 134 GTexel/s | vs | 102.5 GTexel/s | More than 30% higher texture rate | |||
| Higher pixel rate | 33.5 GPixel/s | vs | 25.6 GPixel/s | More than 30% higher pixel rate | |||
| Significantly better civilization 5 texture decomposition (2013) score | 395 | vs | 297.4 | Around 35% better civilization 5 texture decomposition (2013) score | |||
| Higher far cry 3 framerate | 50.4 fps | vs | 37.3 fps | More than 35% higher far cry 3 framerate | |||
| More render output processors | 32 | vs | 24 | 8 more render output processors | |||
| Higher BioShock infinite framerate | 83.4 fps | vs | 62.9 fps | Around 35% higher BioShock infinite framerate | |||
| Higher battlefield 3 framerate | 126.2 fps | vs | 96.9 fps | More than 30% higher battlefield 3 framerate | |||
| Higher crysis: warhead framerate | 57 fps | vs | 41.6 fps | More than 35% higher crysis: warhead framerate | |||
| Higher memory clock speed | 1,753 MHz | vs | 1,502 MHz | More than 15% higher memory clock speed | |||
| Slightly quieter load noise level | 46.7 dB | vs | 47.9 dB | Around 5% quieter load noise level | |||
| Better passmark direct compute score | 3,121 | vs | 2,549 | More than 20% better passmark direct compute score | |||
| Wider memory bus | 256 bit | vs | 192 bit | Around 35% wider memory bus | |||
| Better CLBenchmark raytrace score | 164,636 | vs | 134,925 | More than 20% better CLBenchmark raytrace score | |||
| More SMX units | 8 | vs | 7 | 1 more SMX units | |||
| |||||||
| Lower TDP | 150W | vs | 230W | Around 35% lower TDP | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GTX 770 vs 660 Ti
Passmark Industry standard benchmark for overall graphics card performance
GeForce GTX 660 Ti | by techPowerUp! (Aug, 2012)3DMark 11, as the name might probably suggest, makes use of the Microsoft DirectX 11 API and puts every feature of it at its disposal to use, creating astonishingly realistic visuals.
3DMark Vantage (Texture Fill) Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX performance
3DMark 11 Graphics Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 11 GPU performance
Crysis: Warhead (2013) 1920x1080 - Enthusiast Quality + 4xAA
GeForce GTX 660 Ti | by techPowerUp! (Aug, 2012)Unfortunately, it leaves a less than satisfactory impression, making it a candidate to surpass Crysis for the highest hardware requirements.
Far Cry 3 1920 x 1080 - Ultra Quality + 4x MSAA + Enh. AtoC
GeForce GTX 770 | by techPowerUp!The game is a typical linear first-person shooter, but offers a talent tree, fast paced action and one-on-one duels with special game mechanics.
BioShock Infinite 1920 x 1080 - Ultra preset + DX11 (DDOF)
Reviews Word on the street
| GeForce GTX 770 | vs | 660 Ti | ||
 | GeForce GTX 770 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
