GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition vs GT 620
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 620 with GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition, including specs and performance data.
660M Mac Edition outperforms GT 620 by a substantial 35% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1188 | 1046 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.02 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.50 | 2.28 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | GF108 | GK107 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 May 2012 (14 years ago) | 1 April 2013 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $39.99 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 96 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 700 MHz | 950 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 950 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 585 million | 1.27 billion |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 49 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 98 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 11.20 | 30.40 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.2688 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 16 |
| TMUs | 16 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 256 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Bus support | PCI Express 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Length | 145 mm | no data |
| Height | 2.7" (6.9 cm) | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1.8 GB/s | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 80 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI, VGA | Portable Device Dependent |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| HDCP | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Blu-Ray | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.5 (5.1) |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.175 |
| CUDA | + | 3.0 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.95 | 1.47 |
| Recency | 15 May 2012 | 1 April 2013 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 49 Watt | 50 Watt |
GT 620 has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 2% lower power consumption.
GTX 660M Mac Edition, on the other hand, has a 35% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 months, and a 30% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 620 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GT 620 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
