GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

A forum for discussing FAH-related hardware choices and info on actual products (not speculation).

Moderator: Site Moderators

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules before posting.

GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby gordonbb » Fri Feb 22, 2019 3:25 pm

Anand Tech has posted their review of the $279US EVGA GTX 1660 Ti. It only show Single-Precision results but shows the card at stock clocks producing in FAHBench about the same results as a GTX 1070 FE so likely 700-800kPPD.

The reviewed model is a triple (2.75) slot single fan “short board” model not a dual-slot dual-fan model and is also the “Black” model with a 1770MHz Boost clock rather than the XC Gaming model with a 1860MHz Boost clock which is likely of more interest to those folding with multiple air-cooled cards in one rig which should produce slightly better results.
Image
User avatar
gordonbb
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 4:12 pm
Location: Great White North

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby gordonbb » Fri Feb 22, 2019 5:48 pm

Code: Select all
            Cost Yield  TDP   Value Efficiency
Model       MSRP  kPPD   W   kPPD/$   kPPD/W
RTX 2080 Ti 999   2400  260   2.40     9.23
RTX 2080    699   1400  225   2.00     6.22
RTX 2070    499   1275  185   2.56     6.89
RTX 2060    349   1050  160   3.01     6.56
GTX 1660 Ti 279    850  130   3.05     6.54


TLDR - 2060 is likely a better buy if cost is not a factor
User avatar
gordonbb
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 4:12 pm
Location: Great White North

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby MeeLee » Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:57 am

From what I read, it's closer to a regular 1070 in PPD (600-700k).
The main ingredient is faster and more efficient, lower power, GDDR6 ram, and a slightly higher GPU boost clock speed.
MeeLee
 
Posts: 470
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:16 pm

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby toTOW » Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:53 pm

gordonbb> You're way too optimistic ... I'm seeing only 620k on a 1070 and 700-800k on a 1080 ...
Folding@Home beta tester since 2002. Folding Forum moderator since July 2008.

FAH-Addict : latest news, tests and reviews about Folding@Home project.

Image
User avatar
toTOW
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 8864
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby gordonbb » Sat Feb 23, 2019 8:53 pm

toTOW wrote:gordonbb> You're way too optimistic ... I'm seeing only 620k on a 1070 and 700-800k on a 1080 ...

The original value for the GTX 1660 Ti I agree was a little optimistic and would likely be closer to 750kPPD. The values are assuming a stable overclock and not a lower power limit for stability and longevity but the results should scale for comparison.

Stable Overclock
Code: Select all
Card        Cost Yield  TDP   Value Efficiency
             US$  kPPD   W   kPPD/$   kPPD/W
RTX 2080 Ti $999  2400  260   2.40     9.23
RTX 2080    $699  1400  225   2.00     6.22
RTX 2070    $499  1275  185   2.56     6.89
RTX 2060    $349  1050  160   3.01     6.56
GTX 1660 Ti $279   750  130   2.69     5.77
I can't speak to the stock values as the actual data is no longer available at Overclock.net just the summary so it is hard to judge how skewed the reported values are. I am running a 2060 and 2070 currently and can vouch for those numbers.

But the conclusion, even if we further reduce the PPD estimate for the 1660 Ti, is still that the 2060 is a better value and more efficient if cost isn't too much of an issue. Given the process and architecture improvements in Turing the 1660 Ti would likely only make sense if cost is an issue and one is trying to decide between a GTX 1060 6GB or 1070 and a GTX 1660 Ti.

My EVGA 1070 Ti SC Black, averaged over 7 days, is running at 883.52kPPD, 1.96GHz Shader Clock (+150MHz Offset), 145.58W Actual Power Draw, (150W Power Limit), 63.71C GPU Temperature and 44.81% (1633.15rpm) Fan Speed and has completed 41 WUs.

I'm still relatively new at Folding and have a lot I can learn. I'm trying to maximize my Folding efficiency and to be rigorous in my methodology and appreciate any and all feedback that can help me along the way.
User avatar
gordonbb
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 4:12 pm
Location: Great White North

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby Nathan_P » Sat Feb 23, 2019 10:14 pm

toTow's numbers for a reference spec 1070 and 1080 are spot on, my heavily factory overclocked 1070 and 1080 score around 700k and 850k PPD respectively.

As with all F@H numbers though, PPD is heavily dependant on the project being worked on. My 1080 can vary from 680k PPD to 890k PPD depending on the project
Image
Nathan_P
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:22 pm
Location: Jersey, Channel islands

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby MeeLee » Sun Feb 24, 2019 3:37 am

Still, the 1660 isn't like the 1060 or 1070 or 1080.
It can be considered a lower end model of a new generation of cards.

It has slightly lower cuda cores, but higher GPU boost frequency from factory, and GDDR6 ram, which is a big improvement on GDDR5 ram.
As a result, lower overclock percentages can be gotten from these cards than a GTX1070 or 1080, but the 1660 should be considered a lower end RTX2060 card, without ray tracing, rather than a competitor to the 1060 or 1070.
It's a lot faster than a 1060.
MeeLee
 
Posts: 470
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:16 pm

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby gordonbb » Sun Feb 24, 2019 4:55 am

MeeLee wrote:Still, the 1660 isn't like the 1060 or 1070 or 1080.
It can be considered a lower end model of a new generation of cards.

It has slightly lower cuda cores, but higher GPU boost frequency from factory, and GDDR6 ram, which is a big improvement on GDDR5 ram.
As a result, lower overclock percentages can be gotten from these cards than a GTX1070 or 1080, but the 1660 should be considered a lower end RTX2060 card, without ray tracing, rather than a competitor to the 1060 or 1070.
It's a lot faster than a 1060.
Folding won’t generally see a significant advantage with GDDR6 versus 5 or 5X. Nor do the improvements in the Turing architechture with respect to dedicated integer cores be able to be leveraged in the current version of OpenMM in use but that may change.

It is, however, useful to compare the performance of the new Turing cards compared to Pascal as that is what most of us are familiar with and at this point both are available in the market so the information is useful for someone deciding whether to buy a1070 or a 1660 for folding.

I actually find my 2070 to be a strong overclocker. I can run +180MHz stable Folding at 2025MHz for weeks. I haven’t pushed the 2060 yet to see how far it goes yet but I’m mostly focused on efficiency which is where Turing really seems to shine with the process and architecture improvements.
User avatar
gordonbb
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 4:12 pm
Location: Great White North

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby HaloJones » Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:44 pm

I've read that Turing's compute pipeline is more efficient so whereas Pascal switches between integer and floating-point, Turing can run them simultaneously.
1x Titan X, 1x 1070ti, 4x 1070
HaloJones
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:16 am

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby toTOW » Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:10 pm

Which is pretty useless since FAH is floating point operations only ... :roll:
User avatar
toTOW
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 8864
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby gordonbb » Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:28 pm

Nathan_P wrote:toTow's numbers for a reference spec 1070 and 1080 are spot on, my heavily factory overclocked 1070 and 1080 score around 700k and 850k PPD respectively.

As with all F@H numbers though, PPD is heavily dependant on the project being worked on. My 1080 can vary from 680k PPD to 890k PPD depending on the project
I just started running a "Stock" Baseline for my cards. i.e. No overclocks, Default Power-Limit, Auto Fan. Granted I'm just a few WUs in but my EVGA GTX 1070 SC Gaming Black ACX 3.0 (08G-P4-5671-KR) is still yielding 895.14kPPD as the lower card in a dual-card Rig. It's not a higher-end FTW model so it's base clock is 1607 and Boost is 1683MHz but it still manages to Boost up to 1974-87MHz at 67C and 57% Fan so I'm not certain why your yield is so low with your 1080 if your running it Stock with no Power Limit Adjustments and your not Thermally limited by your chassis or Ambient Temperature. I'll have better numbers for yields at Stock for my hardware at the end of the week.
User avatar
gordonbb
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 4:12 pm
Location: Great White North

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby Theodore » Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:59 am

gordonbb wrote:Folding won’t generally see a significant advantage with GDDR6 versus 5 or 5X. Nor do the improvements in the Turing architechture with respect to dedicated integer cores be able to be leveraged in the current version of OpenMM in use but that may change.


I beg to differ on that.
Due to the way the pascal cards are made, not much overclocking can be done on the GPU, but quite an amount can be done on the Vram.
I think this is what most people have been doing with these cards to get higher PPD (when limited by the purchase of faster hardware).
The GDDR5 used in the 1060, 1070, and 1080 is limited to 8Gbps; or about 7,6GB/s.
It is probably very easy to overclock these cards to 8,6GB/s, and a noticeable performance improvement is detected while folding.
I think many overclocking articles in EVGA or overclock.net forums will concur.
The GDDR6 used in 1660 and RTX cards, is limited to 14Gbps or 13.6GB/s; which is nearly twice the speed.
Definitely a boost in performance for folding that far outpaces overclocking GDDR5 RAM on a now 'older gen card' (the 1060, 1070, and 1080 cards are now 1 generation old), and performance of faster RAM is definitely measurable in FAH.

The exact amount of benefit GDDR6 gives over GDDR5, is probably best tested by safely overclocking the GDDR5 RAM as high as possible; and/or underclocking the GDDR6 RAM to speeds equal that of a GDDR5 card.
It will probably give a closest estimate on the performance impact in FAH.
Theodore
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2019 2:07 pm

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby Joe_H » Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:32 am

You can "beg to differ" all you want, but your belief runs counter to extensive testing by folders showing speed and amount of VRAM has a minimal effect on GPU folding speed. The GPU clock speed for the shaders is more important. In fact, such testing has shown that excessive VRAM speed leads to increased thermal load and can either bring on errors, or slow down the shaders.

Now if you want to do careful testing and post the results, others may be interested or be able to show problems with your test setup.
Image

iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
Joe_H
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4664
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:41 pm
Location: W. MA

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby gordonbb » Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:56 am

Theodore wrote:
gordonbb wrote:Folding won’t generally see a significant advantage with GDDR6 versus 5 or 5X. Nor do the improvements in the Turing architechture with respect to dedicated integer cores be able to be leveraged in the current version of OpenMM in use but that may change.


I beg to differ on that.
Due to the way the pascal cards are made, not much overclocking can be done on the GPU, but quite an amount can be done on the Vram.
I think this is what most people have been doing with these cards to get higher PPD (when limited by the purchase of faster hardware).
The GDDR5 used in the 1060, 1070, and 1080 is limited to 8Gbps; or about 7,6GB/s.
It is probably very easy to overclock these cards to 8,6GB/s, and a noticeable performance improvement is detected while folding.
I think many overclocking articles in EVGA or overclock.net forums will concur.
The GDDR6 used in 1660 and RTX cards, is limited to 14Gbps or 13.6GB/s; which is nearly twice the speed.
Definitely a boost in performance for folding that far outpaces overclocking GDDR5 RAM on a now 'older gen card' (the 1060, 1070, and 1080 cards are now 1 generation old), and performance of faster RAM is definitely measurable in FAH.

The exact amount of benefit GDDR6 gives over GDDR5, is probably best tested by safely overclocking the GDDR5 RAM as high as possible; and/or underclocking the GDDR6 RAM to speeds equal that of a GDDR5 card.
It will probably give a closest estimate on the performance impact in FAH.
Hmm - when I tested it I saw a 2% increase in PPD:
Code: Select all
Power   GPU   Mem   GPU   GPU   Cha   Fan   FAHBench   FAHBench    FAHBench   Inc.   Total
Limit   Clk   Clk   Clk    T     T      Score      Scaled      Atoms      Change   Change   
 (W)   O/S   O/S   (MHz)   (°C)   (°C)   (%)   (ns/day)   (ns/day)          (%)    (%)
217   185   0   2025   66   44   70   118.7782   184.5906   35206      
217   185   50   2025   66   43   70   119.0690   185.0425   35206      0.24%   0.24%
217   185   100   2025   66   43   70   119.2506   185.3247   35206      0.15%   0.40%
217   185   150   2025   66   43   70   119.4067   185.5673   35206      0.13%   0.53%
217   185   200   2025   66   43   70   119.6039   185.8737   35206      0.17%   0.70%
217   185   250   2025   66   43   70   119.7430   186.0898   35206      0.12%   0.81%
217   185   300   2037   67   43   70   120.1965   186.7948   35206      0.38%   1.19%
217   185   350   2025   66   44   70   120.1370   186.7023   35206      -0.05%   1.14%
217   185   400   2037   67   44   70   120.4953   187.2591   35206      0.30%   1.45%
217   185   450   2025   67   44   70   120.5535   187.3495   35206      0.05%   1.49%
217   185   500   2037   67   43   70   120.7269   187.6189   35206      0.14%   1.64%
217   185   550   2025   67   44   70   120.7805   187.7023   35206      0.04%   1.69%
217   185   600   2025   67   43   70   120.8827   187.8611   35206      0.08%   1.77%
217   185   650   2025   67   43   70   121.0401   188.1056   35206      0.13%   1.90%
217   185   700   2025   67   43   70   121.1519   188.2795   35206      0.09%   2.00%

GTX 1070 Ti
Ambient: 24C
Stable GPU Temp reached by 60% of 5min run
nvidia-smi -i 1 -pm 1
nvidia-smi -i 0 --power-limit=217
DISPLAY=:0 XAUTHORITY=/run/user/122/gdm/Xauthority nvidia-settings -a [fan:0]/GPUTargetFanSpeed=70
DISPLAY=:0 XAUTHORITY=/run/user/122/gdm/Xauthority nvidia-settings -a [gpu:0]/GPUGraphicsClockOffset[3]=185
DISPLAY=:0 XAUTHORITY=/run/user/122/gdm/Xauthority nvidia-settings -a [gpu:0]/GPUMemoryTransferRateOffset[3]=0
nvidia-smi -i 0 -l 1 --format=csv,noheader --query-gpu=temperature.gpu,power.draw,clocks.current.sm,fan.speed
~/projects/FAHBench-2.3.2-Linux/bin# ./FAHBench-cmd -w wu-11713 --run-length 300
When I tried it in Production I saw no noticeable increase in PPD. When I stopped after a month I saw no noticeable decrease.
What increase are you seeing and what is your test methodology?
User avatar
gordonbb
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 4:12 pm
Location: Great White North

Re: GTX 1660Ti Compute Performance

Postby MeeLee » Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:53 am

Joe_H wrote:You can "beg to differ" all you want, but your belief runs counter to extensive testing by folders showing speed and amount of VRAM has a minimal effect on GPU folding speed. The GPU clock speed for the shaders is more important. In fact, such testing has shown that excessive VRAM speed leads to increased thermal load and can either bring on errors, or slow down the shaders.

Now if you want to do careful testing and post the results, others may be interested or be able to show problems with your test setup.


I don't think that information is correct.

I can concur with Theodore, overclocking just the VRAM by 700Mhz on a mid-tier card, increases PPD by about 10-15%, not the 2% mentioned above.
My stock 1060 runs at 335k PPD, but with a VRAM overclock it runs at about 375k PPD.

Likewise, when I would underclock the VRAM to the maximum underclock, the PPD count is nearly halved of fully working.
If it were the case that folding wouldn't benefit vram overclocking, everyone would underclock their VRAM to idle, and save a lot of energy in the process.

Vram overclocking definitely makes a difference on my cards!
MeeLee
 
Posts: 470
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:16 pm

Next

Return to FAH Hardware

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron