Radeon R5 430 OEM vs GeForce GTX 1660 Super

Place in performance ranking	148	774
Place by popularity	8	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	28.61	no data
Architecture	Turing (2018−2021)	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code name	Turing TU116	Oland
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	29 October 2019 (4 years ago)	30 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229	no data
Current price	$277 (1.2x MSRP)	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	384
Core clock speed	1530 MHz	730 MHz
Boost clock speed	1785 MHz	780 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	950 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	125 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	157.1	18.72
Floating-point performance	no data	599.0 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 x8
Length	229 mm	no data
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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	14000 MHz	4600 MHz
Memory bandwidth	336.0 GB/s	36.8 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 DisplayPort
HDMI	+	no data
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_1)
Shader Model	6.5	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
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 33.07
+1139%

R5 430 OEM 2.67

GeForce GTX 1660 Super outperforms Radeon R5 430 OEM by 1139% based on our aggregate 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 12772
+1139%

R5 430 OEM 1031

GeForce GTX 1660 Super outperforms Radeon R5 430 OEM by 1139% 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	90 +1186%	7−8 −1186%
1440p	54 +1250%	4−5 −1250%
4K	30 +1400%	2−3 −1400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

900−950
+1084%

−1084%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1050−1100 +1093%	88 −1093%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	800−850 +1112%	66 −1112%
Battlefield 5	1300−1350 +1115%	100−110 −1115%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	950−1000 +1088%	80 −1088%
Cyberpunk 2077	750−800 +1090%	63 −1090%
Far Cry 5	900−950 +1116%	70−75 −1116%
Far Cry New Dawn	1450−1500 +1098%	121 −1098%
Forza Horizon 4	1750−1800 +1115%	144 −1115%
Hitman 3	950−1000 +1134%	77 −1134%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2300−2350 +1137%	186 −1137%
Metro Exodus	1750−1800 +1115%	144 −1115%
Red Dead Redemption 2	950−1000 +1088%	80 −1088%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2000−2050 +1127%	163 −1127%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1000−1050 +1105%	83 −1105%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	900−950 +1133%	73 −1133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	550−600 +1046%	48 −1046%
Battlefield 5	1300−1350 +1115%	100−110 −1115%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	850−900 +1081%	72 −1081%
Cyberpunk 2077	600−650 +1054%	52 −1054%
Far Cry 5	900−950 +1116%	70−75 −1116%
Far Cry New Dawn	1050−1100 +1121%	86 −1121%
Forza Horizon 4	1600−1650 +1103%	130−140 −1103%
Hitman 3	750−800 +1090%	63 −1090%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3550−3600 +1124%	290 −1124%
Metro Exodus	1350−1400 +1116%	111 −1116%
Red Dead Redemption 2	750−800 +1072%	64 −1072%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1550−1600 +1102%	129 −1102%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1350−1400 +1095%	113 −1095%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2550−2600 +1126%	208 −1126%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	600−650 +1076%	51 −1076%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	500−550 +1036%	44 −1036%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	650−700 +1082%	55 −1082%
Cyberpunk 2077	600−650 +1124%	49 −1124%
Far Cry 5	900−950 +1116%	70−75 −1116%
Forza Horizon 4	1300−1350 +1115%	107 −1115%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1200−1250 +1112%	99 −1112%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1350−1400 +1105%	112 −1105%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	750−800 +1130%	61 −1130%
Watch Dogs: Legion	350−400 +1029%	31 −1029%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

700−750
+1128%

−1128%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	750−800 +1090%	60−65 −1090%
Far Cry New Dawn	1000−1050 +1120%	82 −1120%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	450−500 +1025%	40 −1025%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	400−450 +1076%	34 −1076%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	650−700 +1126%	53 −1126%
Cyberpunk 2077	300−310 +1054%	26 −1054%
Far Cry 5	800−850 +1131%	65 −1131%
Forza Horizon 4	1000−1050 +1090%	84 −1090%
Hitman 3	500−550 +1063%	43 −1063%
Horizon Zero Dawn	850−900 +1097%	71 −1097%
Metro Exodus	800−850 +1094%	67 −1094%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	950−1000 +1088%	80 −1088%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	550−600 +1122%	45−50 −1122%
Watch Dogs: Legion	290−300 +1108%	24 −1108%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

650−700
+1061%

−1061%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	400−450 +1112%	30−35 −1112%
Far Cry New Dawn	350−400 +1029%	31 −1029%
Hitman 3	300−310 +1100%	25 −1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	450−500 +1025%	40−45 −1025%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	300−310 +1011%	27 −1011%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	450−500 +1025%	40 −1025%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	290−300 +1108%	24 −1108%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	220−230 +1122%	18 −1122%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	230−240 +1111%	19 −1111%
Cyberpunk 2077	130−140 +1082%	11 −1082%
Far Cry 5	230−240 +1111%	18−20 −1111%
Forza Horizon 4	650−700 +1104%	54 −1104%
Horizon Zero Dawn	450−500 +1025%	40 −1025%
Metro Exodus	400−450 +1043%	35 −1043%
Watch Dogs: Legion	140−150 +1067%	12 −1067%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

300−310
+971%

−971%

This is how GTX 1660 Super and R5 430 OEM compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 Super is 1186% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 Super is 1250% faster in 1440p
GTX 1660 Super is 1400% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	33.07	2.67
Recency	29 October 2019	30 June 2016
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	125 Watt	50 Watt