Radeon Graphics 384SP vs GeForce GTX 1660 Super

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking159not rated
Place by popularity8not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation59.30no data
Power efficiency18.30no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTU116Cezanne
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date29 October 2019 (5 years ago)13 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores1408384
Core clock speed1530 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1785 MHz1700 MHz
Number of transistors6,600 million9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate157.140.80
Floating-point processing power5.027 TFLOPS1.306 TFLOPS
ROPs488
TMUs8824

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16IGP
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR6System Shared
Maximum RAM amount6 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width192 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1750 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth336.0 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

NVENC+-
Ansel+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.7 (6.4)
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.5-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 29 October 2019 13 April 2021
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 45 Watt

Graphics 384SP has an age advantage of 1 year, a 71.4% more advanced lithography process, and 177.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1660 Super and Radeon Graphics 384SP. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 GTX 1660 Super
GeForce GTX 1660 Super
AMD Radeon Graphics 384SP
Radeon Graphics 384SP

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 19544 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 20 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics 384SP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.