Radeon Pro W6600M vs GeForce GTX 1660 Super

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1660 Super with Radeon Pro W6600M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1660 Super
2019
6 GB GDDR6, 125 Watt
33.12
+33.8%

GTX 1660 Super outperforms Pro W6600M by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking163224
Place by popularity9not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation57.99no data
Power efficiency18.2818.98
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTU116Navi 23
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date29 October 2019 (5 years ago)8 June 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 cores14081792
Core clock speed1530 MHz1224 MHz
Boost clock speed1785 MHz2034 MHz
Number of transistors6,600 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt90 Watt
Texture fill rate157.1227.8
Floating-point processing power5.027 TFLOPS7.29 TFLOPS
ROPs4864
TMUs88112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount6 GB8 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth336.0 GB/s224.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
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 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.5-

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. 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 33.12
+33.8%
Pro W6600M 24.76

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.

GTX 1660 Super 12735
+33.8%
Pro W6600M 9521

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 HD91
+40%
65−70
−40%
1440p55
+37.5%
40−45
−37.5%
4K30
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.52no data
1440p4.16no data
4K7.63no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 90
+95.7%
45−50
−95.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 76
+52%
50−55
−52%
Elden Ring 93
+14.8%
80−85
−14.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 92
+21.1%
75−80
−21.1%
Counter-Strike 2 62
+34.8%
45−50
−34.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 59
+18%
50−55
−18%
Forza Horizon 4 163
+50.9%
100−110
−50.9%
Metro Exodus 108
+66.2%
65−70
−66.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 80
+48.1%
50−55
−48.1%
Valorant 143
+43%
100−105
−43%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+23.7%
75−80
−23.7%
Counter-Strike 2 52
+13%
45−50
−13%
Cyberpunk 2077 49
−2%
50−55
+2%
Dota 2 166
+95.3%
85−90
−95.3%
Elden Ring 96
+18.5%
80−85
−18.5%
Far Cry 5 147
+93.4%
75−80
−93.4%
Fortnite 150−160
+23.4%
120−130
−23.4%
Forza Horizon 4 129
+19.4%
100−110
−19.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 133
+56.5%
85−90
−56.5%
Metro Exodus 73
+12.3%
65−70
−12.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 233
+49.4%
150−160
−49.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 43
−25.6%
50−55
+25.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110−120
+41.3%
80−85
−41.3%
Valorant 77
−29.9%
100−105
+29.9%
World of Tanks 270−280
+7.8%
250−260
−7.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 79
+3.9%
75−80
−3.9%
Counter-Strike 2 48
+4.3%
45−50
−4.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 44
−13.6%
50−55
+13.6%
Dota 2 211
+148%
85−90
−148%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+17.1%
75−80
−17.1%
Forza Horizon 4 112
+3.7%
100−110
−3.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 180−190
+19.2%
150−160
−19.2%
Valorant 122
+22%
100−105
−22%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 62
+51.2%
40−45
−51.2%
Elden Ring 56
+27.3%
40−45
−27.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 62
+47.6%
40−45
−47.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 162
−8%
170−180
+8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27
+17.4%
21−24
−17.4%
World of Tanks 210−220
+29.3%
160−170
−29.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 56
+12%
50−55
−12%
Counter-Strike 2 29
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+19%
21−24
−19%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+44.4%
70−75
−44.4%
Forza Horizon 4 80
+21.2%
65−70
−21.2%
Metro Exodus 67
+19.6%
55−60
−19.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+50%
35−40
−50%
Valorant 73
+9%
65−70
−9%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16
−37.5%
21−24
+37.5%
Dota 2 60
+39.5%
40−45
−39.5%
Elden Ring 27
+35%
20−22
−35%
Grand Theft Auto V 60
+39.5%
40−45
−39.5%
Metro Exodus 22
+15.8%
18−20
−15.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 101
+32.9%
75−80
−32.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
+39.5%
40−45
−39.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 29
+11.5%
24−27
−11.5%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+50%
21−24
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Dota 2 95
+121%
40−45
−121%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+39.4%
30−35
−39.4%
Fortnite 40−45
+41.9%
30−35
−41.9%
Forza Horizon 4 44
+15.8%
35−40
−15.8%
Valorant 34
+6.3%
30−35
−6.3%

This is how GTX 1660 Super and Pro W6600M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Super is 40% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Super is 38% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 Super is 43% faster in 4K

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

  • in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1660 Super is 148% faster.
  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Pro W6600M is 38% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Super is ahead in 57 tests (90%)
  • Pro W6600M is ahead in 6 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.12 24.76
Recency 29 October 2019 8 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 90 Watt

GTX 1660 Super has a 33.8% higher aggregate performance score.

Pro W6600M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 71.4% more advanced lithography process, and 38.9% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Super is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro W6600M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1660 Super is a desktop card while Radeon Pro W6600M is a mobile workstation one.


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 Pro W6600M
Radeon Pro W6600M

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.


4.3 20772 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6600M 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.