Radeon RX 6300M vs GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GT 640M GT 640M Mac Edition GT 645M GT 650M GT 650M Mac Edition GT 730M GT 745M GT 750M GT 750M Mac Edition GT 755M GT 755M Mac Edition GTX 660M
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
6300M 6450M 6500 6500M 6550M 6550S 6600M 6600S 6650M 6650M XT 6700M 6700S 6800M 6800S 6850M XT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition and Radeon RX 6300M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 660M Mac Edition
2013
512 MB GDDR5, 50 Watt
1.47

6300M outperforms 660M Mac Edition by a whopping 776% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GTX 660M Mac Edition GTX 660M Mac Edition
RX 6300M RX 6300M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1047440
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.2828.46
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGK107Navi 24
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2013 (13 years ago)4 January 2022 (4 years ago)

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 cores384768
Core clock speed950 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors1.27 billion5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate30.40115.2
Floating-point processing powerno data3.686 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs3248
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L0 Cacheno data192 KB
L1 Cache32 KB256 KB
L2 Cache256 KB1024 KB
L3 Cacheno data8 MB

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).

InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit32 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s72 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.5 (5.1)6.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.2
Vulkan1.2.1751.3
CUDA3.0-

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 1.47 12.87
Recency 1 April 2013 4 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 35 Watt

RX 6300M has a 776% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 367% more advanced lithography process, and 43% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6300M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition in performance tests.

Other comparisons

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

GTX 660M Mac Edition GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition
vs
R7 (Kaveri) Radeon R7 (Kaveri)
RX 6300M Radeon RX 6300M
vs
GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
GTX 660M Mac Edition GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition
vs
GeForce 910M GeForce 910M
GeForce 720M GeForce 720M
vs
GTX 275 PhysX Edition 275 PhysX Edition
GeForce 720M GeForce 720M
vs
R5 A220 A220
GeForce 720M GeForce 720M
vs
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) (Jasper Lake 16 EU)
GeForce 720M GeForce 720M
vs
R2E Mobile Graphics Mobile Graphics
GTX 660M Mac Edition NVIDIA GTX 660M Mac Edition
vs
RTX A2000 A2000
GTX 660M Mac Edition NVIDIA GTX 660M Mac Edition
vs
UHD Graphics 48EU 48EU
GTX 660M Mac Edition NVIDIA GTX 660M Mac Edition
vs
Tesla T10 24 GB T10 24 GB
GTX 675MX Mac Edition GeForce GTX 675MX Mac Edition
vs
GTX 1650 GDDR6 GeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6
GT 640M Mac Edition NVIDIA GT 640M Mac Edition
vs
FX 5100 5100
GT 640M Mac Edition NVIDIA GT 640M Mac Edition
vs
GT 240M LE 240M LE

Community ratings

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

2.9 25 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 16 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition or Radeon RX 6300M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.