Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by taspeotis on Friday February 22, 2019 @08:26PM (#19230943)

From NVIDIA [1]

> As far as naming goes, and why 16 series instead of just using 11? Quite simply, we felt that from an overall architecture and performance perspective, TU116 is closer to the other TU10x parts than it is to prior generation GP10x. TU116 has most of the Turing architecture features, including the new dedicated cores for INT32 and FP16 operations, and it also has all of the new Turing shading features, including variable rate shading and mesh shading. And as you see, performance is closer to the GeForce RTX 2060 than it is to the GeForce GTX 1060. In fact just like you said, it performs closest to the GTX 1070, beating it in some games and losing some others. So we ultimately settled on 1660 Ti instead of 1160 Ti. ‘16’ is closer to 20, after all.

[1] https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3445-evga-gtx-1660-ti-...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by taneq on Friday February 22, 2019 @10:40PM (#19231445)

So like USB2 becoming USB3, or Java 1.4 going to 5, or Thunderbird going from 3 straight to 5.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by alasdair_ on Saturday February 23, 2019 @03:50AM (#19232419)

> So like USB2 becoming USB3, or Java 1.4 going to 5, or Thunderbird going from 3 straight to 5.

Or AngularJS 1.8 going to a complete fucking mess.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by freecodyx on Saturday February 23, 2019 @08:02AM (#19233166)

Haha. Or php 5.6 to 7

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by DKnoll on Sunday February 24, 2019 @07:01AM (#19238260)

I was curious about this so I looked it up. Apparently there was a PHP 6, but it was scuttled and had some of it's features backported to PHP 5.3.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by craftyguy on Saturday February 23, 2019 @02:10AM (#19232154)

USB 2->3 doesn't really help your point, since 2 comes directly before 3 in integer math, so it (3) is literally a logical successor to 2.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by taneq on Saturday February 23, 2019 @02:42AM (#19232249)

IIRC after USB2 came out, there was "USB Full Speed" (12mbps) and "USB High Speed" (480mbps), then they renamed "USB 2.2 High Speed" it to USB3. USB3 is literally USB2.2 with a name change, so I feel like it fits.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by Lorkki on Saturday February 23, 2019 @03:00AM (#19232285)

Are you sure you don't mean that USB 1.2 was changed to USB 2.0? I don't recall any naming confusion between USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/s) and 3.x (5 Gbit/s and up).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by taneq on Saturday February 23, 2019 @03:04AM (#19232294)

Ah, that's probably what I was thinking of. Thanks for the correction!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by arscan on Saturday February 23, 2019 @09:45AM (#19233489)

...Netscape 4 to Netscape 6. Windows 8 to Windows 10. The i7-8086k processor.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by nextweek2 on Saturday February 23, 2019 @01:51PM (#19234850)

Not having Windows 9 was for a very good technical reason, not because of marketing.

An unknown number of RegEx strings are looking for Windows 95 and Windows 98 just by looking for 'Windows 9'.

[ Parent | on HN ]

[dead]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by WrtCdEvrydy on Friday February 22, 2019 @10:42PM (#19231453)

Can't do that if you want to sell an overpriced 2050 Ti.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB Review by hnuser123456 on Saturday February 23, 2019 @02:40AM (#19232246)

They probably want to reserve 20xx for RTX cards only.

[ Parent | on HN ]