We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
[nextpage title=”Introduction”]
The new GeForce GTX 660 is the latest GPU from NVIDIA, and EVGA is providing six different video card models based on this new GPU. Let’s see how the SuperClocked model fared on our tests.
In the table below, you can see the six models that EVGA is releasing and how they compare to the standard GeForce GTX 660. The “Signature 2” models feature a custom cooling solution with two fans. All models use the same clock rate for the memory (6,008 MHz).
| Model | Base Clock | Memory Configuration | MSRP |
| Standard GeForce GTX 660 | 980 MHz | 2 GB | USD 230 |
| SuperClocked 2 GB | 1,046 MHz | 2 GB | USD 230 |
| SuperClocked 3 GB | 1,046 MHz | 3 GB | USD 270 |
| SuperClocked 2 GB Signature 2 | 1,046 MHz | 2 GB | USD 230 |
| SuperClocked 3 GB Signature 2 | 1,046 MHz | 3 GB | USD 270 |
| FTW 2 GB | 1,072 MHz | 2 GB | NA |
| FTW 3 GB | 1,072 MHz | 3 GB | NA |
| FTW 2 GB Signature 2 | 1,072 MHz | 2 GB | USD 240 |
| FTW 3 GB Signature 2 | 1,072 MHz | 3 GB | USD 280 |
At USD 230, the new GeForce GTX 660 is the quintessential mid-range video card, targeted to users who want to buy a powerful video card but don’t want to spend the money on an expensive high-end model. It comes to replace the GeForce GTX 560 Ti, and its main competitor is the Radeon HD 7850.
The new GeForce GTX 660 uses the PCI Express 3.0 interface, similarly to its main competitor, while the GeForce 560 Ti, which we also included in our comparisons, uses the PCI Express 2.0 interface. This new GPU has an automatic overclocking feature that increases the core clock from 980 MHz to 1,033 MHz when more performance is needed (1,046 MHz to 1,111 MHz on the EVGA’s SuperClocked model).
In the table below, we compare the main specifications for the video cards included in our review. The prices listed below were researched at Newegg.com and do not include rebates.
| Video Card | Core Clock | Shader Clock | Memory Clock (Effective) | Memory Interface | Memory Transfer Rate | Memory | Shaders | DirectX | Price |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 822 MHz | 1,644 MHz | 4,008 MHz | 256-bit | 128.3 GB/s | 1 GB GDDR5 | 384 | 11 | USD 190 – 230 |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 980 MHz | 980 MHz | 6,008 MHz | 192-bit | 144.2 GB/s | 2 GB GDDR5 | 960 | 11 | USD 230 |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 1,046 MHz | 1,046 MHz | 6,008 MHz | 192-bit | 144.2 GB/s | 2 GB GDDR5 | 960 | 11 | USD 230 |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 860 MHz | 860 MHz | 4.8 GHz | 256-bit | 153.6 GB/s | 2 GB GDDR5 | 1,024 | 11.1 | USD 200 – 230 |
You can compare the specs of these video cards with other video cards by taking a look at our “AMD ATI Chips Comparison Table” and “NVIDIA Chips Comparison Table” tutorials.
Now let’s take an in-depth look at the EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SuperClocked.
[nextpage title=”The EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SuperClocked”]
Below we have an overall look at the EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SuperClocked. It requires one six-pin auxiliary power connector.
Figure 1: EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SuperClocked video card
Figure 2: EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SuperClocked video card
The reviewed video card comes with one DVI-I connector, one DVI-D connector, one HDMI connector, and one DisplayPort connector.
Figure 3: Video connectors
The cooler uses a 65 mm radial fan placed beside an aluminum heatsink, which is connected to a copper base using an 8 mm heatpipe. The plate that holds the heatsink touches the memory chips located on the component side of the printed circuit board, but the memory chips located on the solder side of the printed circuit board don’t have any cooling mechanism. The GeForce GTX 660 has a TDP of 140 W, 10 W less than the TDP of the GeForce GTX 660 Ti.
Figure 4: The heatsink
Figure 5: The base of the heatsink
[nextpage title=”The EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SuperClocked (Cont’d)”]
In Figure 6, you can see the video card with its cooler removed. We were impressed by how short the printed circuit board is, at 6.7” (170 mm). The video card, however, is a little longer, at 9.5” (240 mm) because of the fan.
It uses a voltage regulator with four phases for the GPU and one phase for the memory chips. The voltage regulator circuit uses a digital design and is controlled by an NCP5395G chip. All coils use ferrite cores and all capacitors are solid.
Figure 6: EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SuperClocked video card
Figure 7: Voltage regulator
The reviewed video card uses eight Samsung K4G20325FD-FC03 GDDR5 chips, each one storing 2 Gbit of data, comprising the 2 GB of memory available on this video card. These chips can run up to 6 GHz. On this video card, they are accessed at 6,008 MHz.
Figure 8: Memory chips
In Figure 9, you can see the accessories that come with this video card.
Figure 9: Accessories
Before seeing the performance results, let’s recap the main features of this video card.
[nextpage title=”Main Specifications”]
The main specifications for the EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SuperClocked include:
- Graphics chip: GeForce GTX 660 running at 1,046 MHz (up to 1,111 MHz in boost mode)
- Memory: 2 GB GDDR5 memory (192-bit interface), eight Samsung K4G20325FD-FC03 chips running at 6,008 MHz QDR
- Bus type: PCI Express 3.0 x16
- Video Connectors: One DVI-I, one DVI-D, one HDMI, and one DisplayPort
- Video Capture (VIVO): No
- Cables and adapters that come with this board: One DVI-to-VGA adapter and one power adapter
- Number of CDs/DVDs that come with this board: One
- Games included: None
- Programs included: None
- More information: https://www.evga.com
- Average Price in the U.S.*: USD 230.00
* Researched at Newegg.com on the day we published this review.
[nextpage title=”How We Tested”]
During our benchmarking sessions, we used the configuration listed below. Between our benchmarking sessions, the only variable was the video card being tested.
Hardware Configuration
- CPU: Core i7-3960X (3.3 GHz)
- Motherboard: ASRock X79 Fatal1ty Champion (1.40 BIOS)
- Memories: 16 GB DDR3-2133/PC3-1700, four G.Skill Ripjaws Z F3-17000CL9Q-16GBBZH memory modules
- Hard disk drive: Western Digital VelociRaptor WD3000GLFS (300 GB, SATA-300, 10,000 rpm, 16 MB cache)
- Video monitor: Samsung SyncMaster 305T (30” LCD, 2560×1600)
- Power Supply: Antec TruePower New 750 W
- CPU Cooler: Intel Liquid Cooling
Software Configuration
- Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
- Video resolution: 2560×1600 @ 60 Hz
Driver Versions
- AMD video driver version: Catalyst 12.6
- NVIDIA video driver version: 306.23
- Intel Inf driver version: 9.2.3.1020
Software Used
- 3DMark 11 Professional 1.0.3
- Aliens vs. Predator + Benchmark Tool
- Battlefield 3
- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
- DiRT3
- Far Cry 2 – Patch 1.03
- Media Espresso 6.5
- StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty – Patch 1.5
Error Margin
We adopted a 3% error margin. Thus, differences below 3% cannot be considered relevant. In other words, products with a performance difference below 3% should be considered as having similar performance.
[nextpage title=”StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty”]
StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty is a very popular DirectX 9 game that was released in 2010. Though this game uses an old version of DirectX, the number of textures that can be represented on one screen can push most of the top-end graphics cards to their limits. StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty uses its own physics engine that is bound to the CPU and thus does not benefit from PhysX.
We tested this game at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600. The “Graphics Quality” was set to “Extreme” and the “Texture Quality” was set to “Ultra.” We then used FRAPS to collect the frame rate of a replay on the “Unit Testing” custom map. We used a battle between very large armies to stress the video cards.
| Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 248.3 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 232.7 | 7% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 218.7 | 14% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 210.6 | 18% |
| Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 180.7 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 171.4 | 5% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 138.4 | 31% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 133.5 | 35% |
[nextpage title=”Far Cry 2″]
Released in 2008, Far Cry 2 is based on a game engine called Dunia, which is DirectX 10. We used the benchmarking utility that comes with this game at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600, setting overall quality to “ultra high,” maximizing all image quality settings, adjusting anti-aliasing to “8x,” and running the “Ranch Long” demo three times. The results below are expressed in frames per second and are an arithmetic average of the three results collected.
| FarCry 2 | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 96.5 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 91.5 | 5% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 82.5 | 17% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 81.4 | 19% |
| FarCry 2 | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 65.5 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 61.5 | 7% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 57.6 | 14% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 55.2 | 19% |
[nextpage title=”Aliens vs. Predator”]
Aliens vs. Predator is a DirectX 11 game that makes full use of tessellation and advanced shadow rendering. We used the Aliens vs. Predator Benchmark Tool developed by Rebellion. This program reads its configuration from a text file. (Our configuration files can be found here.) We ran this program at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600, with texture set at “very high,” shadows set at “medium,” anisotropic filtering set at “8x,” and anti-aliasing set at “2x.”
| Aliens vs. Predator | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 50.2 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 48.1 | 4% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 44.1 | 14% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 42.8 | 17% |
| Aliens vs. Predator | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 39.8 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 35.8 | 11% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 33.4 | 19% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti |
29.5 |
35% |
[nextpage title=”DiRT3″]
DiRT3 is a DirectX 11 game. We measured performance using this game by running a race and then playing it back using FRAPS. We ran this game at 1920×1200 and 2560×1536 with image quality set to “ultra,” and with anti-aliasing set at “8xMSAA.”
| DiRT3 | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 72.2 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 69.6 | 4% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 64.9 | 11% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 62.9 | 15% |
| DiRT3 | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 60.8 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 55.8 | 9% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 44.6 | 36% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 40.2 | 51% |
[nextpage title=”Deus Ex: Human Revolution”]
Deus Ex: Human Revolution is another DirectX 11 game. We used the in-game introduction to measure the number of frames per second, using FRAPS. We ran the introduction in two resolutions, 1920×1200 and 2560×1536, maximizing all image quality settings, configuring anti-aliasing as “MLAA” and anisotropic filtering at “16x.”
| Deus Ex: Human Revolution | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 189.4 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 179.4 | 6% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 164.4 | 15% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 156.3 | 21% |
| Deus Ex: Human Revolution | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 148.2 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 132.4 | 12% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 118.3 | 25% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 112.1 | 32% |
[nextpage title=”Battlefield 3″]
Battlefield 3 is the latest installment in the Battlefield franchise released in 2011. It is based on the Frostbite 2 engine, which is DirectX 11. In order to measure performance using this game, we walked our way through the first half of the “Operation Swordbreaker” mission, measuring the number of frames per second using FRAPS. We ran this game at 1920×1200 and 2560×1536, maximizing all image quality settings, configuring anti-aliasing as “4xMSAA” and anisotropic filtering at “16x.”
| Battlefield 3 | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 62.5 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 60.6 | 3% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 57.8 | 8% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 54.4 | 15% |
| Battlefield 3 | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC | 48.8 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 | 44.3 | 10% |
| Radeon HD 7850 | 41.7 | 17% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti | 38.6 | 26% |
[nextpage title=”3DMark 11 Professional”]
3DMark 11 Professional measures Shader 5.0 (i.e., DirectX 11) performance. We ran this program at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600, selecting the four graphics tests available and deselecting the other tests available. We used two image quality settings, “performance” and “extreme,” both at their default settings. The results being compared are the “GPU Score” achieved by each video card.
| 3DMark 11 – Performance | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC |
3409 |
|
| GeForce GTX 660 |
3214 |
6% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti |
2766 |
23% |
| Radeon HD 7850 |
2748 |
24% |
| 3DMark 11 – Performance | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC |
2096 |
|
| GeForce GTX 660 |
1958 |
7% |
| Radeon HD 7850 |
1671 |
25% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti |
1589 |
32% |
| 3DMark 11 – Extreme | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC |
1987 |
|
| GeForce GTX 660 |
1914 |
4% |
| Radeon HD 7850 |
1667 |
19% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti |
1566 |
27% |
| 3DMark 11 – Extreme | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC |
1360 |
|
| GeForce GTX 660 |
1226 |
11% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti |
1128 |
21% |
| Radeon HD 7850 |
1093 |
24% |
[nextpage title=”Media Espresso 6.5″]
Media Espresso is a video conversion program that uses the graphics processing unit of the video card to speed up the conversion process. We converted a 449 MB, 1920x1080i, 18,884 kbps, MPEG2 video file to a smaller 640×360, H.264, .MPG4 file for viewing on a portable device such as an iPhone or iPod Touch.
| Media Espresso 6.5 | Seconds | Difference |
| EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SC |
30 |
|
| GeForce GTX 660 |
31 |
3% |
| Radeon HD 7850 |
35 |
17% |
| GeForce GTX 560 Ti |
36 |
20% |
[nextpage title=”Conclusions”]
We were really impressed by the EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SuperClocked. It was between 3% and 12% faster than the standard GeForce GTX 660, and the best news: both cost the same. The reviewed video card was between 8% and 36% faster than its main competitor, the Radeon HD 7850, and between 15% and 51% faster than the video card it replaces, the GeForce GTX 560 Ti.
We highly recommend the EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SuperClocked for the user who is looking for a powerful video card but doesn’t want to spend a lot of money on a high-end model.