FirePro W8100 vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile with FirePro W8100, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile
2019, $229
6 GB GDDR6, 80 Watt
25.71
+62.4%

1660 Ti Mobile outperforms W8100 by an impressive 62% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking252376
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation26.43no data
Power efficiency24.865.57
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameTU116Hawaii
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date23 April 2019 (7 years ago)23 June 2014 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores15362560
Core clock speed1455 MHz824 MHz
Boost clock speed1590 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,600 million6,200 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt220 Watt
Texture fill rate152.6131.8
Floating-point processing power4.884 TFLOPS4.219 TFLOPS
ROPs4864
TMUs96160
L1 Cache1.5 MB640 KB
L2 Cache1536 KB1024 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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data279 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 6-pin

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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount6 GB8 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit512 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s320 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x DisplayPort, 1x SDI
StereoOutput3D-+
DisplayPort countno data4
Dual-link DVI support-+
HD сomponent video output-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.56.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA7.5-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD88
+76%
50−55
−76%
1440p58
+65.7%
35−40
−65.7%
4K35
+66.7%
21−24
−66.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.60no data
1440p3.95no data
4K6.54no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 147
+63.3%
90−95
−63.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 86
+72%
50−55
−72%
Palworld 81
+80%
45−50
−80%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 75
+66.7%
45−50
−66.7%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 111
+70.8%
65−70
−70.8%
Counter-Strike 2 133
+66.3%
80−85
−66.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 68
+70%
40−45
−70%
Far Cry 5 93
+69.1%
55−60
−69.1%
Fortnite 120−130
+68%
75−80
−68%
Forza Horizon 4 134
+67.5%
80−85
−67.5%
Palworld 70
+75%
40−45
−75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+73.3%
60−65
−73.3%
Valorant 209
+74.2%
120−130
−74.2%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 103
+71.7%
60−65
−71.7%
Counter-Strike 2 101
+68.3%
60−65
−68.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 260−270
+65.6%
160−170
−65.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 54
+80%
30−33
−80%
Dota 2 121
+72.9%
70−75
−72.9%
Far Cry 5 89
+78%
50−55
−78%
Fortnite 120−130
+68%
75−80
−68%
Forza Horizon 4 125
+66.7%
75−80
−66.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 105
+75%
60−65
−75%
Metro Exodus 54
+80%
30−33
−80%
Palworld 55
+83.3%
30−33
−83.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+73.3%
60−65
−73.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 103
+71.7%
60−65
−71.7%
Valorant 207
+72.5%
120−130
−72.5%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 94
+70.9%
55−60
−70.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 52
+73.3%
30−33
−73.3%
Dota 2 116
+65.7%
70−75
−65.7%
Far Cry 5 83
+66%
50−55
−66%
Forza Horizon 4 99
+65%
60−65
−65%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 109
+67.7%
65−70
−67.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55
+83.3%
30−33
−83.3%
Valorant 125
+66.7%
75−80
−66.7%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 107
+64.6%
65−70
−64.6%
Palworld 51
+70%
30−33
−70%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+65.7%
35−40
−65.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+68.2%
110−120
−68.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+63.3%
30−33
−63.3%
Metro Exodus 30
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+75%
100−105
−75%
Valorant 197
+64.2%
120−130
−64.2%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 69
+72.5%
40−45
−72.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+78.6%
14−16
−78.6%
Far Cry 5 60
+71.4%
35−40
−71.4%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+70%
40−45
−70%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+79.2%
24−27
−79.2%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 69
+72.5%
40−45
−72.5%
Palworld 35−40
+76.2%
21−24
−76.2%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+68.8%
16−18
−68.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 50−55
+66.7%
30−33
−66.7%
Metro Exodus 19
+90%
10−11
−90%
Palworld 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
+66.7%
21−24
−66.7%
Valorant 152
+68.9%
90−95
−68.9%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 38
+81%
21−24
−81%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+68.8%
16−18
−68.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Dota 2 85
+70%
50−55
−70%
Far Cry 5 31
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+70.4%
27−30
−70.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+81.3%
16−18
−81.3%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+81.3%
16−18
−81.3%
Palworld 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%

This is how GTX 1660 Ti Mobile and FirePro W8100 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 76% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 66% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 67% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 25.71 15.83
Recency 23 April 2019 23 June 2014
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 220 Watt

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile has a 62% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 133% more advanced lithography process, and 175% lower power consumption.

FirePro W8100, on the other hand, has a 33% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W8100 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is a notebook graphics card while FirePro W8100 is a workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 1821 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 22 votes

Rate FirePro W8100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile or FirePro W8100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.