1660 Ti Vs 1070 Series GPUs Deliver

An AMD Ryzen 3700X bottlenecks a 2070S: the 3700X costs 40 more money for 11 less performance.

The lost performance is similar to downgrading from a 2070S to a 2060S.

Publishing EFps data puts UserBenchmark in conflict with the marketers that represent billion dollar corporations, but it also helps our users to build faster PCs by dodging marketing traps.

Intel continues to offer better CPUs at lower prices but they also appear oblivious to social media marketing: forums, reddit, youtube etc.

As a result, publishers are openly accused of bias for reporting replicable, real world performance data.

Since the launch of Ryzen, AMD have carved 50 billion 100 billion dollars off Intels bottom line.

After failing to grasp new-age marketing, and consequently losing significant market share, Intel is finally motivated to deliver material CPU improvements.

1660 Ti Vs 1070 Series GPUs Deliver

AMDs Vega (56, 64) and Navi (5000) series GPUs deliver great performance in specific games with specific hardwaresoftware configurations.

Unfortunately, following the initial surge in sales fueled by AMDs class-leading marketers, many users discovered that they exhibit widespread stability and compatibility issues (blueblack screens and driver resets).

The cards are engineered to shine in benchmarks, often at the expense of real world performance and hair dryer levels of noise.

For example, the reference 5700 XT has its stock clocks set so high that it overheats and stutters in popular games.

Expert users, that are happy to tinker with BIOS updates and voltage curves can sometimes extract excellent priceperformance but many users end up getting a refund instead.

By comparison, Nvidias cards have better compatibility, lower return rates and rock solid stability.