GeForce GT 630 OEM vs GTX 1660 Super
Aggregated performance score
GTX 1660 Super outperforms GT 630 OEM by a whopping 1889% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 154 | 898 |
| Place by popularity | 8 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 28.58 | 0.02 |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2021) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | Turing TU116 | GK107 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 29 October 2019 (4 years ago) | 24 April 2012 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $229 | no data |
| Current price | $277 (1.2x MSRP) | $429 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 1660 Super has 142800% better value for money than GT 630 OEM.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1408 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 1530 MHz | 875 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 6,600 million | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 157.1 | 14.00 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 336.0 gflops |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 229 mm | 145 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 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 | GDDR6 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz | 1782 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 336.0 GB/s | 28.51 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| HDMI | + | + |
| HDCP | + | no data |
| G-SYNC support | + | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| NVENC | + | no data |
| Ansel | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | 7.5 | 3.0 |
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:
| Full HD | 94
+2250%
| 4−5
−2250%
|
| 1440p | 54
+2600%
| 2−3
−2600%
|
| 4K | 31
+3000%
| 1−2
−3000%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 76
+2433%
|
3−4
−2433%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 88
+2100%
|
4−5
−2100%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 66
+2100%
|
3−4
−2100%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 97
+2325%
|
4−5
−2325%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 117
+2240%
|
5−6
−2240%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 63
+2000%
|
3−4
−2000%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 112
+2140%
|
5−6
−2140%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 108
+2060%
|
5−6
−2060%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 144
+1957%
|
7−8
−1957%
|
| Hitman 3 | 117
+2240%
|
5−6
−2240%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 88
+2100%
|
4−5
−2100%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 77
+2467%
|
3−4
−2467%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 102
+1940%
|
5−6
−1940%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 83
+1975%
|
4−5
−1975%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 73
+2333%
|
3−4
−2333%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 48
+2300%
|
2−3
−2300%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 83
+1975%
|
4−5
−1975%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 90
+2150%
|
4−5
−2150%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 52
+2500%
|
2−3
−2500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 103
+1960%
|
5−6
−1960%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 101
+1920%
|
5−6
−1920%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 135
+2150%
|
6−7
−2150%
|
| Hitman 3 | 97
+2325%
|
4−5
−2325%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 65
+2067%
|
3−4
−2067%
|
| Metro Exodus | 56
+2700%
|
2−3
−2700%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 43
+2050%
|
2−3
−2050%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 86
+2050%
|
4−5
−2050%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 113
+2160%
|
5−6
−2160%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 71
+2267%
|
3−4
−2267%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 51
+2450%
|
2−3
−2450%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 44
+2100%
|
2−3
−2100%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 77
+2467%
|
3−4
−2467%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 49
+2350%
|
2−3
−2350%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95
+2275%
|
4−5
−2275%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 93
+2225%
|
4−5
−2225%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 107
+2040%
|
5−6
−2040%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 61
+1933%
|
3−4
−1933%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 31
+3000%
|
1−2
−3000%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 59
+2850%
|
2−3
−2850%
|
| Hitman 3 | 61
+1933%
|
3−4
−1933%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 44
+2100%
|
2−3
−2100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 36
+3500%
|
1−2
−3500%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 27
+2600%
|
1−2
−2600%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 53
+2550%
|
2−3
−2550%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 40
+1900%
|
2−3
−1900%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 34
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 60
+1900%
|
3−4
−1900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 26
+2500%
|
1−2
−2500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65
+2067%
|
3−4
−2067%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 67
+2133%
|
3−4
−2133%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 84
+2000%
|
4−5
−2000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+2100%
|
2−3
−2100%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 24
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 32
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
| Hitman 3 | 32
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 12 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 22
+2100%
|
1−2
−2100%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18 | 0−1 |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 27
+2600%
|
1−2
−2600%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40
+1900%
|
2−3
−1900%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 24
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 18 | 0−1 |
| Battlefield 5 | 36
+3500%
|
1−2
−3500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 11 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 33
+3200%
|
1−2
−3200%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 35
+3400%
|
1−2
−3400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 54
+2600%
|
2−3
−2600%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 12 | 0−1 |
This is how GTX 1660 Super and GT 630 OEM compete in popular games:
- GTX 1660 Super is 2250% faster in 1080p
- GTX 1660 Super is 2600% faster in 1440p
- GTX 1660 Super is 3000% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 33.02 | 1.66 |
| Recency | 29 October 2019 | 24 April 2012 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 50 Watt |
The GeForce GTX 1660 Super is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 630 OEM in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
