GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q vs 9600M GT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9600M GT and GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

9600M GT
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 23 Watt
0.32

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q outperforms 9600M GT by a whopping 6059% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1286257
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data69.57
Power efficiency1.1126.14
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameG96CTU116
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 June 2008 (16 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$229

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores321536
Core clock speed120 MHz1140 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1335 MHz
Number of transistors314 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate8.000128.2
Floating-point processing power0.08 TFLOPS4.101 TFLOPS
ROPs848
TMUs1696

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 sizedmedium sized
InterfaceMXM-IIPCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s288.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

9600M GT 0.32
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 19.71
+6059%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

9600M GT 143
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 8814
+6064%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

9600M GT 1459
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 31845
+2083%

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 HD1−2
−7800%
79
+7800%
4K0−133

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.90
4Kno data6.94

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2800%
55−60
+2800%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4500%
45−50
+4500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2800%
55−60
+2800%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4500%
45−50
+4500%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2767%
85−90
+2767%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1086%
80−85
+1086%
Valorant 27−30
−470%
150−160
+470%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2800%
55−60
+2800%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
−1643%
240−250
+1643%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4500%
45−50
+4500%
Dota 2 10−11
−840%
94
+840%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2767%
85−90
+2767%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1086%
80−85
+1086%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−2200%
92
+2200%
Valorant 27−30
−470%
150−160
+470%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4500%
45−50
+4500%
Dota 2 10−11
−760%
86
+760%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2767%
85−90
+2767%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1086%
80−85
+1086%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1175%
51
+1175%
Valorant 27−30
−244%
93
+244%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−5667%
170−180
+5667%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 21−24
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−3500%
35−40
+3500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 50−55

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−160%
35−40
+160%
Valorant 2−3
−6100%
120−130
+6100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−2900%
30
+2900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−1000%
21−24
+1000%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−1050%
21−24
+1050%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 83
+0%
83
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Fortnite 92
+0%
92
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 78
+0%
78
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 66
+0%
66
+0%
Fortnite 90
+0%
90
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 87
+0%
87
+0%
Metro Exodus 48
+0%
48
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 73
+0%
73
+0%
Far Cry 5 62
+0%
62
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 79
+0%
79
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how 9600M GT and GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 7800% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 6100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is ahead in 29 tests (48%)
  • there's a draw in 32 tests (52%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.32 19.71
Recency 4 June 2008 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 60 Watt

9600M GT has 160.9% lower power consumption.

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 6059.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 358.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9600M GT in performance tests.

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 GeForce 9600M GT
GeForce 9600M GT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q

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.


3.5 100 votes

Rate GeForce 9600M GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 567 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 9600M GT or GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.