660 vs 670

I am trying to choose between the MSI GT60 and Asus G55vw. My question is, how much can the 670 be overclocked? since it is already an overclocked version of 570, how much space does it have for overclocking? Will the 660 be able to overclock to the same point so that its performance is on par with 670? Thanks

 

on 3dMark's result table, highest score for both on a 3610QM is:
660M: 3200
670M: 3900

That said, I think the Asus G55vw is a good machine, I almost bought it instead of this one. Never really conisdered the MSI.

Are you only concerned with the GPU or was there other things about the two that were decision makers?

I will say, take it with a grain of salt like everything on notebookcheck.net, but thier review of the G55 praised the quiet and well designed cooling solution and also the display. It is heavy for a 15.6" though.. 8.4lb!

 

yeah its a bit bigger and heavier than the MSI GT60, but i dont like the multicolored backlight of GT60. also on asus you are able to turn off the LCD, but on MSI the screen can be turned back on when you touch the mouse or keyboard.

 

If the lights bother you and the monstrous size of the G55, likely bigger than many 17" laptops, then opt for a Clevo then. I believe with some sellers you can get it with the 660M. And with it's cooling system, the fan may never go on high.

 

Well... you can push a 650m (ddr5) at 1200core/3000mem... and for that price... its probably the best bet...

 

660m is far better as it is the new 28nm kepler gpu even though it performs slightly less. 660m is more designed as a mid range card for its generation while 670m is like an extreme end 40nm card. Power consumption should be double for the 670m over a 660m.

660m should oc good enough to reach over 670m performance. If you want to be future proof get the 660m.

 

on average

660m scores 2.6k
670m scores 3.0k

in 3dmark11.

 

I believe the 660m is already proven the same TDP @ 75watts same with gtx 670m and gtx 560m.

 

TDP doesn't necessarily equals power consumption. TDP (Thermal Design Power) means the maximum amount of power (in form of heat) the cooling system has to be capable of dissipate.
However, given the generally low consumption of laptop cards, the estimated amount of power necessary for a gpu to work, won't vary much from its rated TDP. That is, of course, if we consider everything at stock settings.

 

If gaming is your main concern, the gtx670 will alwats offer better performance both stock and overclocked.

The gtx660 is still a decent card tho. As others havr mentioned, an oc 660m will reach a stock 670.

 

I read somewhere it is 50w. Eitherway the 670m takes more power consumption then a 680m, while the 650m/660m takes similar power consumption to a gt555m. Also the 660m is slightly an oc 650m and most tests with a dual core i5 plays game and takes 80-85w. Most 670m take 120-160w

http://forum.notebookreview.com/gaming-software-graphics-cards/675454-new-gtx-680m-review-truth.html

Look at that and then even if the tdp is close the power consumption must be completely different which is the main thing.

 

Notebookcheck has synthetic values, we can use them. When considering similar specs, the wattage difference in laptops with the 660 vs. 670 (G55 for the 660, G75 for the 670) is only 15W (Gaming - 112W, Full Load 153W; Vs. 127W - 170W). The Msi GT60 with the 670m also achieves similar results: 110-162W. For some reason, the the GT70 peaks at 217W, but at least we know 170W in full load is possible for the 670m, when a similar laptop with a 660 only tops 15W less. And this is without considering the LCD and processor difference (3610QM for the 15', 3720 for the 17').

 

i think the 675 and 670 sits at 100W? not sure where i got that info though, but must have seen it somewhere

 

The reason is the psu on the msi is bigger hence why the msi gt70 is worth comparing to with the 660m. 660m is basically an oc 650m and 650m normally takes 75-85w gaming full system load. I saw cloudfire post that 670m takes around 161w ish gaming. So it takes around double which makes sense in a way. If any nbr memebers have a 660m and 670m and they run the same settings fully utilising the gpu and cpu furmark and prime together and see the power difference it would comeback on average around 50w-70w difference.

 

Yeah, but as listed the G55 with a 660M did 112W while gaming, and 153 in full load, when the G75 with the 670M did 127 and 170W, respectively. Also, laptops with a 650M average 80 and 115W, for full comparisons.

 

That is general. I will just say a quick word as I am advised to cool it down on these threads:

http://www.hardwareluxx.de/images/stories/galleries/reviews/gtx_680m/bench_strom_load.jpg

That is power consumption of 680m and 670m so you can imagine 660m takes far less then the 670m.

 

Unfornately that's not what measurings show. Remember the 660m is the most pushed gk107 chip, which inevitably will raise power consumption. It's still cheaper to push an existing chip (GT640 and 650m) than designing and producing a new one.

 

The reason they did was because the 670m is basically a 570m and the 660m is so close to 670m that they had to make the 660m slightly faster then a 650m. Normal world 18003dmark11 for 640m 650m would be about 2300 3dmark11 and then 655m would be around 3000 3dmark11 660m would have been 4000 3dmark11 670m would have been 5000 3dmark11 etc then the 680m with around 6000 ish score would give a balanced look. Unfortunately nvidia decided to rebrand again.

Normally they increase the bit of the card from 128bit to something like 192bit for a card like a 660m but they couldn't as then it would easily outperform a 670m. Also there are quadro cards now coming with more shaders which shows what I am on about. I reckon the revised 760m will have like double the 384 shaders (to 768) we see today in the 660m and the power consumption shouldn't change much.