GeForce GTX 660M vs GRID M3-3020

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GRID M3-3020 GRID M10-8Q GRID M40 NVS 810 K620 K1200 K2200 Tesla M10
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GT 640M GT 645M GT 650M GT 650M Mac Edition GT 730M GT 745A GT 745M GT 750M GT 750M Mac Edition GT 755M GTX 660M GTX 660M Mac Edition

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GRID M3-3020 with GeForce GTX 660M, including specs and performance data.

GRID M3-3020
2016
4 GB GDDR5
7.00
+103%

M3-3020 outperforms 660M by a whopping 103% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GRID M3-3020 GRID M3-3020
GTX 660M GTX 660M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking587774
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data5.33
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGM107GK107
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date18 May 2016 (9 years ago)22 March 2012 (13 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores640384
Core clock speed1033 MHz835 MHz
Boost clock speed1306 MHz950 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rate52.2430.40
Floating-point processing power1.672 TFLOPS0.7296 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4032
L1 Cache320 KB32 KB
L2 Cache2 MB256 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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno data
SLI options-+

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128bit
Memory clock speed1300 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth83.2 GB/s64.0 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 outputsNo outputs
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno dataUp to 2048x1536

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA5.0+

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:

900p60−65
+100%
30
−100%
Full HD70−75
+100%
35
−100%
1200p75−80
+97.4%
38
−97.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 89
+0%
89
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how GRID M3-3020 and GTX 660M compete in popular games:

  • GRID M3-3020 is 100% faster in 900p
  • GRID M3-3020 is 100% faster in 1080p
  • GRID M3-3020 is 97% faster in 1200p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 7.00 3.44
Recency 18 May 2016 22 March 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB

GRID M3-3020 has a 103.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GRID M3-3020 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 660M in performance tests.

Be aware that GRID M3-3020 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 660M is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.

NVIDIA GRID M3-3020
GRID M3-3020
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M
GeForce GTX 660M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

GRID M3-3020 GRID M3-3020
vs
FirePro W5000 FirePro W5000
GTX 660M GeForce GTX 660M
vs
R9 M365X Radeon R9 M365X
GRID M3-3020 GRID M3-3020
vs
FirePro W5100 FirePro W5100
GRID M10-8Q GRID M10-8Q
vs
Jetson TX1 Jetson TX1
GRID M10-8Q GRID M10-8Q
vs
RX 9060 XT 16 GB RX 9060 XT 16 GB
RX 560 896SP Radeon RX 560 896SP
vs
Arc A770M Arc A770M
RX 560 896SP Radeon RX 560 896SP
vs
RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell PRO 5000 Blackwell
Quadro P620 Quadro P620
vs
RTX A4000 Max-Q RTX A4000 Max-Q
GRID M3-3020 GRID M3-3020
vs
GT 540M GT 540M
GRID M3-3020 GRID M3-3020
vs
HD 8950 OEM HD 8950 OEM
GRID M3-3020 GRID M3-3020
vs
GT 610 PCIe x1 GT 610 PCIe x1
GRID M3-3020 GRID M3-3020
vs
S10000 Passive 12GB FirePro S10000 Passive 12GB
GRID M3-3020 GRID M3-3020
vs
ATI HD 5770 Mac Edition HD 5770 Mac Edition

Community ratings

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

5 1 vote

Rate GRID M3-3020 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 233 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GRID M3-3020 or GeForce GTX 660M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.