Radeon Pro 5700 XT vs GeForce GTX 1660 Super

Place in performance ranking	153	157
Place by popularity	8	not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation	28.57	53.33
Architecture	Turing (2018−2021)	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code name	Turing TU116	Navi 10
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	29 October 2019 (4 years ago)	4 August 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229	no data
Current price	$277 (1.2x MSRP)	$457

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro 5700 XT has 87% better value for money than GTX 1660 Super.

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	2560
Core clock speed	1530 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1785 MHz	1499 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	10,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	125 Watt	130 Watt
Texture fill rate	157.1	239.8

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 4.0 x16
Length	229 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	IGP
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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	14000 MHz	12 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	336.0 GB/s	384.0 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	No outputs
HDMI	+	no data
HDCP	+	no data
G-SYNC support	+	no data

Supported GPU 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 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.5	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2
CUDA	7.5	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 1660 Super 33.00
+1.3%

Pro 5700 XT 32.58

GeForce GTX 1660 Super outperforms Radeon Pro 5700 XT by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 1660 Super 12775
+1.3%

Pro 5700 XT 12613

GeForce GTX 1660 Super outperforms Radeon Pro 5700 XT by 1% in Passmark.

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 +4.4%	90−95 −4.4%
1440p	54 +8%	50−55 −8%
4K	31 +3.3%	30−35 −3.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

76
+1.3%

75−80

−1.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	88 +3.5%	85−90 −3.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	66 +1.5%	65−70 −1.5%
Battlefield 5	97 +2.1%	95−100 −2.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	117 +6.4%	110−120 −6.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	63 +5%	60−65 −5%
Far Cry 5	112 +1.8%	110−120 −1.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	108 +8%	100−105 −8%
Forza Horizon 4	144 +2.9%	140−150 −2.9%
Hitman 3	117 +6.4%	110−120 −6.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	88 +3.5%	85−90 −3.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	77 +2.7%	75−80 −2.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	102 +2%	100−105 −2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	83 +3.8%	80−85 −3.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	73 +4.3%	70−75 −4.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	48 +6.7%	45−50 −6.7%
Battlefield 5	83 +3.8%	80−85 −3.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	90 +5.9%	85−90 −5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	52 +4%	50−55 −4%
Far Cry 5	103 +3%	100−105 −3%
Far Cry New Dawn	101 +6.3%	95−100 −6.3%
Forza Horizon 4	135 +3.8%	130−140 −3.8%
Hitman 3	97 +2.1%	95−100 −2.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	65 +8.3%	60−65 −8.3%
Metro Exodus	56 +1.8%	55−60 −1.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	43 +7.5%	40−45 −7.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	86 +7.5%	80−85 −7.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	113 +2.7%	110−120 −2.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	71 +1.4%	70−75 −1.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	51 +2%	50−55 −2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	44 +10%	40−45 −10%
Battlefield 5	77 +2.7%	75−80 −2.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	49 +8.9%	45−50 −8.9%
Far Cry 5	95 +5.6%	90−95 −5.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	93 +3.3%	90−95 −3.3%
Forza Horizon 4	107 +7%	100−105 −7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	61 +1.7%	60−65 −1.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	31 +3.3%	30−33 −3.3%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	59 +7.3%	55−60 −7.3%
Hitman 3	61 +1.7%	60−65 −1.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	44 +10%	40−45 −10%
Metro Exodus	36 +2.9%	35−40 −2.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27 +12.5%	24−27 −12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	53 +6%	50−55 −6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40 +14.3%	35−40 −14.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	34 +13.3%	30−33 −13.3%
Battlefield 5	60 +9.1%	55−60 −9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	26 +8.3%	24−27 −8.3%
Far Cry 5	65 +8.3%	60−65 −8.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	67 +3.1%	65−70 −3.1%
Forza Horizon 4	84 +5%	80−85 −5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +10%	40−45 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24 +14.3%	21−24 −14.3%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	32 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%
Hitman 3	32 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12 +20%	10−11 −20%
Metro Exodus	22 +4.8%	21−24 −4.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27 +12.5%	24−27 −12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40 +14.3%	35−40 −14.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24 +14.3%	21−24 −14.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18 +12.5%	16−18 −12.5%
Battlefield 5	36 +2.9%	35−40 −2.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +10%	10−11 −10%
Far Cry 5	33 +10%	30−33 −10%
Far Cry New Dawn	35 +16.7%	30−33 −16.7%
Forza Horizon 4	54 +8%	50−55 −8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12 +20%	10−11 −20%

This is how GTX 1660 Super and Pro 5700 XT compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 Super is 4.4% faster than Pro 5700 XT in 1080p
GTX 1660 Super is 8% faster than Pro 5700 XT in 1440p
GTX 1660 Super is 3.3% faster than Pro 5700 XT in 4K

Pros & Cons Summary

Performance score	33.00	32.58
Recency	29 October 2019	4 August 2020
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	125 Watt	130 Watt