To get our weekly geekiness quota out of the way early, the desktop video card industry is a lot like The Force. There are two sides constantly at odds with each other for dominance of the galaxy/market, and balance between the two sides is considered one of the central tenants of the system. Furthermore when the system isn’t in balance something bad happens, whether it’s galactic domination or uncompetitive video card prices and designs.

To that end – and to bring things back to a technical discussion – while AMD and NVIDIA’s ultimate goals are to rule the video card market, in practice they serve to keep each other in check and keep the market as a whole balanced. This is accomplished by their doing what they can to offer similarly competitive video cards at most price points, particularly the sub-$300 market where the bulk of all video card sales take place. On the other hand when that balance is disrupted by the introduction of a new GPU and/or new video card, AMD and NVIDIA will try to roll out new products to restore that balance.

This brings us to the subject of today’s launch. Friday saw the launch of AMD’s Radeon HD 7790, a $149 entry-level 1080p card based on their new Bonaire GPU. AMD had for roughly the last half-year been operating with a significant price and performance gap between their 7770 and 7850 products, leaving the mid-$100 market open to NVIDIA’s GTX 650 Ti. With the 7790 AMD finally has a GTX 650 Ti competitor and more, and left unchallenged this would mean AMD would control the market between $150 and $200.

NVIDIA for their part has no interest in letting AMD take that piece of the market without a fight, and as such will be immediately countering with a new video card: the GTX 650 Ti Boost. Launching today, the GTX 650 Ti Boost is based on the same GK106 GPU as the GTX 650 Ti and GTX 660, and is essentially a filler card to bridge the gap between them. By adding GPU boost back into the mix and using a slightly more powerful core configuration, NVIDIA intends to plug their own performance gap and at the same time counter AMD’s 7850 and 7790 before the latter even reaches retail. It’s never quite that simple of course, but as we’ll see the GTX 650 Ti Boost does indeed bring some balance back to the Force.

NVIDIA GPU Specification Comparison
  GTX 660 GTX 650 Ti Boost GTX 650 Ti GTX 550 Ti
Stream Processors
Texture Units
Core Clock
Boost Clock
Memory Clock
6.008GHz GDDR5
6.008GHz GDDR5
5.4GHz GDDR5
4.1GHz GDDR5
Memory Bus Width
1/24 FP32
1/24 FP32
1/24 FP32
1/12 FP32
Transistor Count
Manufacturing Process
TSMC 28nm
TSMC 28nm
TSMC 28nm
TSMC 40nm
Launch Price $229 $149/$169 $149 $149

When NVIDIA produced the original GTX 650 Ti, they cut down their GK106 GPU by a fairly large degree to reach the performance and power levels we see with that card. From 5 SMXes and 3 ROP/Memory partitions, GK106 was cut down to 4 SMXes and 2 ROP partitions, along with having GPU boost removed and overall clockspeeds lowered. In practice this left a pretty big gap between the GTX 650 Ti and the GTX 660, one which AMD’s 7850 and now their 7790 serve to fill.

Despite the name GTX 650 Ti Boost, it’s probably more meaningful to call NVIDIA’s new card the GTX 660 light. The GTX 650 Ti Boost restores many of the cuts NVIDIA made for the GTX 650 Ti; this latest 650 has the core clockspeed, memory clockspeed, GPU boost functionality, and ROP partitions of the GTX 660. In fact the only thing differentiating the GTX 660 from the GTX 650 Ti Boost is a single SMX; the GTX 650 Ti Boost is still a 4 SMX part, and this is what makes it a 650 in NVIDIA’s product stack (note that this means GTX 650 Ti Boost parts will similarly have either 2 or 3 GPCs depending on which SMX is cut). Because clockspeeds are identical to the GTX 660, the GTX 650 Ti Boost will be shipping at 980MHz for the base clock, 1033MHz for the boost clock, and 6GHz for the memory clock.

The result of this configuration is that the GTX 650 Ti Boost is much more powerful than the name would let on, and in practice is closer to the GTX 660 in performance than it is the GTX 650 Ti. Compared to the GTX 650 Ti, the GTX 650 TI Boost has just 106% of the shading/texturing/geometry throughput, but due in large part to the return of the 3rd ROP partition, ROP throughput has been boosted to 159%. Meanwhile thanks to the combination of higher memory clocks and the full 192bit memory bus, memory bandwidth has been increased to 166% of the GTX 650 Ti’s. Or compared to a GTX 660, the GTX 650 Ti Boost has 100% the ROP throughput, 100% the memory bandwidth, and 80% of the shading/texturing/geometry performance. The end result being that in memory/ROP bound scenarios performance will trend close to the GTX 660, while in shader/texture/geometry bound situations performance will easily exceed the GTX 650 Ti’s performance by 6-16%, depending on where GPU boost settles at.

Of course GTX 660-like performance does come with some tradeoffs. While the GTX 650 Ti was a 110W TDP part, the GTX 650 Ti Boost will be a 134W part, just shy of the 140W GTX 660. The GTX 650 Ti Boost runs at the same clockspeeds and the same voltages with the same amount of RAM as the GTX 660, meaning the power savings are limited to whatever power is saved from fusing off that SMX, which in practice will not be all that much. Even by NVIDIA's own reckoning they're minimal. So what we’re effectively looking at is a somewhat slower GTX 660 operating at near-GTX 660 power levels.

Driving home the point that the GTX 650 Ti Boost is a reconfigured GTX 660, with the TDP being held at 140W NVIDIA and their partners will be recycling their GTX 660 designs for NVIDIA’s new card. Our reference card is identical to our GTX 660 reference card, and the same can be said for many partner designs. Partners need to provide the same power and cooling to the GTX 650 Ti Boost as they do the GTX 660, so there’s little point in rolling new designs and in fact this helps NVIDIA and their partners get the GTX 650 Ti Boost to market sooner.

Moving on to the launch and pricing details, as with NVIDIA’s other GK106 card launches, this is a pure virtual launch with partners rolling their custom designs from day one. Partners will be shipping both stock clocked and overclocked cards, and the mix should be very similar to what we saw with the GTX 660’s launch. Unexpectedly, partners will also have the option of going with 1GB or 2GB cards. 1GB cards are a late addition to NVIDIA’s lineup, in what appears to be an attempt to get down to price parity with AMD’s 7790. Our reference card is a 2GB model, and like other mixed cards like AMD’s 7850 we expect most GTX 650 Ti Boost cards to be 2GB cards.

In something of a coup for NVIDIA, 2GB GTX 650 Ti Boost cards will be hitting stores this week at $169, nearly a week ahead of the 7790. So despite launching second in this latest scuffle, NVIDIA will be the first to hit the market. Meanwhile 1GB cards will arrive later, hitting the market in early April at $149. Overclocked cards will of course carry their own premiums.

The competition for the GTX 650 Ti Boost will include a number of cards from both NVIDIA and AMD. The tight pricing of the market between $149 and $199 means that the GTX 650 Ti Boost will in practice be pulling double-duty as a 7790 and a 7850 competitor. Priced at $149, the later to arrive 1GB cards are the true 7790 competitor in every sense of the word.  Meanwhile with the 2GB cards launching at $169 they’re more akin to a 7850 competitor, something NVIDIA doesn’t hesitate to point this out.

In any case, the GTX 650 Ti Boost will be boxed in by the GTX 650 Ti below it at around $130, meanwhile above it will be the 7850 2GB at around $185 and the GTX 660 at around $200. Ultimately NVIDIA has to be sure to cover $149 to go up directly against the 7790, but if you can afford to spend a little more than $149, then between factory overclocked cards and new models there’s a different card at every $10.

Finally, like AMD, NVIDIA will be extending their promotional bundling to their latest card. The GTX 650 Ti Boost will quality for the same $75 in free-to-play game credits as the GTX 650 Ti, split up as $25 for World of Tanks, $25 for Hawken, and $25 for Planetside 2.

Spring 2013 GPU Pricing Comparison
  $209 GeForce GTX 660
Radeon HD 7850 2GB $184  
  $169 GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost 2GB
Radeon HD 7790 $149 GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost 1GB
  $134 GeForce GTX 650 Ti
Radeon HD 7770 $109 GeForce GTX 650
Radeon HD 7750 $99 GeForce GT 640


The Test


View All Comments

  • royalcrown - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    yeah, but the $$$ of a 660 is dropping every week, i just dont really see the point of the 650 ti when you have the 650 and 660 and they all have overclocked versions as well. a few places have the 2 gig 660 for $199.00 Reply
  • royalcrown - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    well, if the new 650 is 149, then I guess that'd be a great price preformance vs the 660. I suppose it depends on what they cost in real life. Reply
  • SAAB_340 - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link

    Is it just me thinking the 1GB model might be a bad idea given that these cards with the 192bit memory bus have asymetrical memory placement. The card only has 768MB of the memory at full bandwidth while the last 256MB will only give a 3rd of the bandwidth. (it's the same with the 2GB card but there 1.5GB has full bandwidth.) 768MB is not much with todays standards. Looking forward to the test showing how much that will impact on performance. Reply
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link

    It's absurd, just like the AMD 1 GB card that was just announced. I've read that Skyrim with high resolution textures needs 2 GB at minimum and I doubt most people consider Skyrim a high-end game. Reply
  • Parhel - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link

    The high resolution texture pack didn't really affect memory usage that much when I installed it. It was below 1GB both before and after. That's at 2560x1600, no AA. Maybe with mods it's a different story, but I think if you're trying to show where 1GB hits a wall, you'd be better off starting with a different game. Reply
  • mczak - Wednesday, March 27, 2013 - link

    Personally I'd think it would make more sense to just have a 1.5GB card (at say right between the 149$ of the 1GB model and the 169$ of the 2GB model). All the same performance characteristics as the 2GB model (as you say the those asymmetric configurations are a little dubious or at least suspect anyway) while being cheaper. But marketing doesn't like 1.5GB cards (and as intended competitor of 7850 2GB of course "looks" much better). Reply
  • drew_afx - Wednesday, March 27, 2013 - link

    How about Performance per dollar(retail) comparison for these very similarly spec'd cards?
    Make up some metric for 3d games(dx9/10/11), encoding/decoding, OpenCL, etc
    Because a lot of games are CPU intensive, for potential buyers, FPS comparison on a specific benchmarking setup is not going to reflect equally in real life.
    Also if a game can run 60+min. fps & maybe 75fps avg., then the card is as good as it can get for average people. This comparison proves X is better than Y when used with top of the line CPU Mobo RAM combo, but thats it. Many don't go for $2000+ gaming computer setup and put sub $170 GPU in it. What about overclocking potential? It's like comparing non-K cpu to unlocked one (just to put it in a perspective)
  • CiccioB - Wednesday, March 27, 2013 - link

    Still, the game list is quite obsolete.
    It is not time to replace Crysis: warhead with Crysis3 and Dirt: Showdown with Dirt3?
    And adding Skyrim? Last Tomb Raider?
    Gamers would like to know how today games run on these cards, not only if one GPU is faster than another playing ancient games with obsolete engines.

    This thing has already been pointed out during Titan's review. There someone suggested that games choice has been made to review games that are better on AMD rather than nvidia GPUs.
    However, no answer was made, either to give reasons on why so many old obsolete games or whether the list was going to be changed/enlarged.
    Still, new games are not considered for no apparent reason.
    After having spent so many efforts in upgrading the site's appearance, which I like very much, it would be nice also to spend a bit of time to make a new game benchmark suite. It's 2013 and many games have been published after Crysis: warhead and Dirt: showdown.
    Thanks in advance
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, March 29, 2013 - link

    We'll be adding two more games next month (or whenever I can find the time to validate them). Crysis: Warhead isn't going anywhere since it's our one legacy title for comparing DX10 cards to. And DiRT: Showdown is newer than DiRT 3, not older. It was Showdown that we replaced 3 with. Skyrim was also removed, since it's badly CPU limited on higher-end cards. Reply
  • medi01 - Wednesday, March 27, 2013 - link

    Any reason 7850 and not 7790 (direct competitor) is marked black? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now