RTX A4500 vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q

Place in the ranking	241	45
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	68.61	no data
Power efficiency	26.44	19.49
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	TU116	GA102
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)	23 November 2021 (2 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 cores	1536	7168
Core clock speed	1140 MHz	1050 MHz
Boost clock speed	1335 MHz	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	200 Watt
Texture fill rate	128.2	369.6
Floating-point processing power	4.101 TFLOPS	23.65 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	96
TMUs	96	224
Tensor Cores	no data	224
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	56

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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 8-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 type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	20 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	320 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	288.0 GB/s	640.0 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 Connectors

No outputs

4x DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	8.6

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 Ti Max-Q 22.84

RTX A4500 56.12
+146%

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 Ti Max-Q 8814

RTX A4500 21654
+146%

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	76 −137%	180−190 +137%
4K	34 −135%	80−85 +135%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

35−40

−143%

90−95
+143%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	56 −132%	130−140 +132%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 −144%	95−100 +144%
Battlefield 5	88 −139%	210−220 +139%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	70 −143%	170−180 +143%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −143%	90−95 +143%
Far Cry 5	92 −139%	220−230 +139%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 −133%	140−150 +133%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −119%	300−310 +119%
Hitman 3	45−50 −144%	110−120 +144%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 −143%	260−270 +143%
Metro Exodus	120 −142%	290−300 +142%
Red Dead Redemption 2	92 −139%	220−230 +139%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 −134%	180−190 +134%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 −145%	240−250 +145%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50−55 −140%	120−130 +140%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 −144%	95−100 +144%
Battlefield 5	84 −138%	200−210 +138%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	66 −142%	160−170 +142%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −143%	90−95 +143%
Far Cry 5	77 −134%	180−190 +134%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 −133%	140−150 +133%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −119%	300−310 +119%
Hitman 3	45−50 −144%	110−120 +144%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 −143%	260−270 +143%
Metro Exodus	95 −142%	230−240 +142%
Red Dead Redemption 2	74 −143%	180−190 +143%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 −134%	180−190 +134%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −140%	120−130 +140%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 −145%	240−250 +145%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	42 −138%	100−105 +138%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 −144%	95−100 +144%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50 −140%	120−130 +140%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −143%	90−95 +143%
Far Cry 5	54 −141%	130−140 +141%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −119%	300−310 +119%
Hitman 3	45−50 −144%	110−120 +144%
Horizon Zero Dawn	79 −141%	190−200 +141%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 −134%	180−190 +134%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	51 −135%	120−130 +135%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 −145%	240−250 +145%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

72
−136%

170−180

+136%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −133%	100−105 +133%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 −143%	85−90 +143%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 −129%	55−60 +129%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 −127%	50−55 +127%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	24−27 −131%	60−65 +131%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −131%	60−65 +131%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −131%	300−310 +131%
Hitman 3	27−30 −141%	65−70 +141%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −134%	110−120 +134%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −133%	100−105 +133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 −145%	120−130 +145%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −141%	65−70 +141%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 −129%	300−310 +129%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40

−137%

90−95
+137%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −127%	50−55 +127%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%
Hitman 3	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 −137%	280−290 +137%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −140%	60−65 +140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	31 −142%	75−80 +142%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −125%	27−30 +125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −131%	30−33 +131%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −131%	30−33 +131%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −142%	75−80 +142%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −141%	65−70 +141%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 −140%	24−27 +140%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

20−22

−125%

45−50
+125%

This is how GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q and RTX A4500 compete in popular games:

RTX A4500 is 137% faster in 1080p
RTX A4500 is 135% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	22.84	56.12
Recency	23 April 2019	23 November 2021
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	20 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	200 Watt

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has 233.3% lower power consumption.

RTX A4500, on the other hand, has a 145.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 233.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 50% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A4500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is a notebook card while RTX A4500 is a workstation one.

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