Best in Graphics: Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti Review

Any individual sites conclusions are going to depend on the benchmark suite employed, level of game I.Q. and resolution. The 660Ti's performance is affected by high levels of AA and image quality- increase both and the 7870 is definitely going to assert itself. The 660Ti's 192-bit bus width won't help it at higher screen resolutions either. To get an accurate -usable- picture you would need to factor in the likely system set up that you/likely target market would employ + benchmarking philosophy of the reviewers involved. I'd tend to note:
-Whether image quality trumps gameplay framerate- an example being DiRT Showdown on "Ultra" (also in line with Hexus's figures) which would suggest testing largely for academic interest since I doubt anyone would in actuality suffer through low framerates (30-45) rather than ease up on game image quality and get a more fluid gaming experience.
-Whether the game selection is relevant within any given benchmark suite ( How current, popularity, weighted towards a particular genre)
-The screen resolution commensurate with the price point of the card(s)
-Whether the testing encompasses factors that are relevant ( I.e. max power draw/heat/noise under OCCT/Furmark for example)

Another thing to note would be whether the testing is "stock vs stock" situation - the GTX 660Ti may have reference clocks (although not many vendors are adhering to it), but I don't think there is a reference design, so many of these tests are in effect OC vs stock- although I note that a few sites are using AMD's new HD 7950 bios, which just adds to the level of subjectivity- since anyone competant enough to flash a VGA BIOS is generally competant enough to manually overclock using less voltage- and thus, less noise, heat output, and power consumption.

I think that the days of a straight comparison presented in a single set of performance figures are pretty much numbered for graphics reviews. The adoption of boost clocks, power saving configurations, adaptive v-sync (AMD will surely follow suit here) are rapidly marginalizing the traditional FPS bar graphs in favour of "gameplay-ability" - I.e. fluidity of rendering (framerate latency) for example

Im sorry, But all ive seen so far, is a GPU from nvidia which sacrificed a part of it's processing (GP-GPU) to boost all other aspects of the card. While it does make the card good for one thing (Gaming), It makes me wonder what else it is good for. And really Nothing comes to mind, The 7970 just has much more to offer than the Nvidia counterpart. Unless of course your a gamer using moderate resolution and on a cheaper set-up, but if that were the case, why would you buy a top end card?

That might make a shred of sense if... A. The GTX 660 Ti was a top end card... B. The GTX 660 Ti was the same price as the 7970 (its 30% cheaper) and... C. You delete the first two sentences because I really don't understand the point they are trying to make.

(different guest)
the 7950 got a bios upgrade which basically adds 50mhz, and here the 7950 is 20 euro cheaper then the 660TI (lowest price available, index of all webshops selling in my region)

so he is indeed reading different reviews... more recent ones.

If lack of realistic compute function renders a card good for nothing except gaming then AMD has had entire lineups (HD2000, HD3000, HD4000, HD5000, HD6000) that have fitted that description since the advent of GPGPU.

Strange that AMD suddenly produce a compute orientated architecture and it suddenly becomes the "must have" feature set. What happened to all those arguments for die size, performance-per-watt and performance-per-mm^2 ? Don't remember too many AMD fanboys bemoaning the fact that their cards lacked functional compute, or lacked the ability to add realistic water and bokeh filtering in JC2 or BF:BC2 for instance.