ATI Radeon X800 XT Platinum vs GeForce GTX 1660 Super

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1660 Super and Radeon X800 XT Platinum, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1660 Super
2019
6 GB GDDR6, 125 Watt
28.45
+15706%

GTX 1660 Super outperforms ATI X800 XT Platinum by a whopping 15706% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1771403
Place by popularity8not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation51.80no data
Power efficiency18.020.23
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)R400 (2004−2008)
GPU code nameTU116R423
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date29 October 2019 (5 years ago)1 March 2004 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores1408no data
Core clock speed1530 MHz520 MHz
Boost clock speed1785 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,600 million160 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt63 Watt
Texture fill rate157.18.320
Floating-point processing power5.027 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4816
TMUs8816

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 1.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1x 6-pin

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 typeGDDR6GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount6 GB256 MB
Memory bus width192 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz560 MHz
Memory bandwidth336.0 GB/s35.84 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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0b (9_2)
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
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.

GTX 1660 Super 28.45
+15706%
ATI X800 XT Platinum 0.18

  • Passmark

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 12713
+15595%
ATI X800 XT Platinum 81

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 HD890−1
1440p55-0−1
4K30-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.57no data
1440p4.16no data
4K7.63no data

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Counter-Strike 2 285
+28400%
1−2
−28400%
Cyberpunk 2077 76 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 88 0−1
Battlefield 5 97 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 243
+24200%
1−2
−24200%
Cyberpunk 2077 63 0−1
Far Cry 5 112 0−1
Fortnite 140−150 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 144 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 108 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 65 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130 0−1
Valorant 321
+15950%
2−3
−15950%
Battlefield 5 83 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 119 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+27300%
1−2
−27300%
Cyberpunk 2077 52 0−1
Dota 2 231
+23000%
1−2
−23000%
Far Cry 5 103 0−1
Fortnite 140−150 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 135 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 94 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 133 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 51 0−1
Metro Exodus 56 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 139 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 113 0−1
Valorant 290
+28900%
1−2
−28900%
Battlefield 5 77 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 49 0−1
Dota 2 211
+21000%
1−2
−21000%
Far Cry 5 95 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 107 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 27 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 104 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 61 0−1
Valorant 122 0−1
Fortnite 140−150 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 67 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+21200%
1−2
−21200%
Grand Theft Auto V 62 0−1
Metro Exodus 36 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 162
+16100%
1−2
−16100%
Valorant 262
+26100%
1−2
−26100%
Battlefield 5 60 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 26 0−1
Far Cry 5 65 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 84 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 39 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60 0−1
Fortnite 75−80 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 16 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 60 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22 0−1
Metro Exodus 22 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40 0−1
Valorant 132 0−1
Battlefield 5 36 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 30−35 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 11 0−1
Dota 2 95 0−1
Far Cry 5 33 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 54 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 15 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 36 0−1
Fortnite 35−40 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.45 0.18
Recency 29 October 2019 1 March 2004
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 12 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 63 Watt

GTX 1660 Super has a 15705.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

ATI X800 XT Platinum, on the other hand, has 98.4% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Super is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X800 XT Platinum in performance tests.

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
ATI Radeon X800 XT Platinum
Radeon X800 XT Platinum

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
21760 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5
1 vote

Rate Radeon X800 XT Platinum on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 1660 Super or Radeon X800 XT Platinum, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.