Qualcomm Adreno 690 vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile and Qualcomm Adreno 690, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile
2019
6 GB GDDR6, 80 Watt
29.00
+990%

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 690 by a whopping 990% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking192808
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation100.00no data
Power efficiency25.2726.49
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)no data
GPU code nameTU116no data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)6 December 2018 (5 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 cores1536no data
Core clock speed1455 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1590 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,600 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate152.6no data
Floating-point processing power4.884 TFLOPSno data
ROPs48no data
TMUs96no data

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data

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 typeGDDR6no data
Maximum RAM amount6 GBno data
Memory bus width192 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1500 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
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 Ti Mobile 29.00
+990%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 2.66

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile 20119
+591%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 2912

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile 14818
+405%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 2933

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile 97517
+484%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 16708

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile 5659
+598%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 811

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 HD87
+295%
22
−295%
1440p58
+1060%
5−6
−1060%
4K34
+1033%
3−4
−1033%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.63no data
1440p3.95no data
4K6.74no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 86
+975%
8−9
−975%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80
+515%
12−14
−515%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 66
+1220%
5−6
−1220%
Battlefield 5 129
+975%
12−14
−975%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 82
+720%
10−11
−720%
Cyberpunk 2077 68
+750%
8−9
−750%
Far Cry 5 98
+880%
10−11
−880%
Far Cry New Dawn 102
+629%
14−16
−629%
Forza Horizon 4 304
+913%
30−33
−913%
Hitman 3 77
+600%
10−12
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 209
+574%
30−35
−574%
Metro Exodus 126
+1045%
10−12
−1045%
Red Dead Redemption 2 99
+662%
12−14
−662%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 155
+761%
18−20
−761%
Watch Dogs: Legion 225
+389%
45−50
−389%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 125
+862%
12−14
−862%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 49
+880%
5−6
−880%
Battlefield 5 109
+808%
12−14
−808%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 73
+630%
10−11
−630%
Cyberpunk 2077 54
+575%
8−9
−575%
Far Cry 5 77
+670%
10−11
−670%
Far Cry New Dawn 70
+400%
14−16
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 256
+753%
30−33
−753%
Hitman 3 74
+573%
10−12
−573%
Horizon Zero Dawn 207
+568%
30−35
−568%
Metro Exodus 104
+845%
10−12
−845%
Red Dead Redemption 2 83
+538%
12−14
−538%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 118
+556%
18−20
−556%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+229%
16−18
−229%
Watch Dogs: Legion 214
+365%
45−50
−365%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 53
+308%
12−14
−308%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 42
+740%
5−6
−740%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 53
+430%
10−11
−430%
Cyberpunk 2077 52
+550%
8−9
−550%
Far Cry 5 57
+470%
10−11
−470%
Forza Horizon 4 99
+230%
30−33
−230%
Hitman 3 63
+473%
10−12
−473%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90
+190%
30−35
−190%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 101
+461%
18−20
−461%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55
+511%
9
−511%
Watch Dogs: Legion 33
−39.4%
45−50
+39.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 80
+515%
12−14
−515%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 66
+633%
9−10
−633%
Far Cry New Dawn 46
+557%
7−8
−557%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 36
+800%
4−5
−800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 32
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 38
+850%
4−5
−850%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Far Cry 5 36
+500%
6−7
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 182
+1720%
10−11
−1720%
Hitman 3 41
+356%
9−10
−356%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65
+491%
10−12
−491%
Metro Exodus 60
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+1060%
5−6
−1060%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Watch Dogs: Legion 203
+555%
30−35
−555%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 56
+522%
9−10
−522%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 31
+933%
3−4
−933%
Far Cry New Dawn 25
+733%
3−4
−733%
Hitman 3 25
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 76
+1167%
6−7
−1167%
Metro Exodus 41
+4000%
1−2
−4000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
+3400%
1−2
−3400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 22
+633%
3−4
−633%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+550%
2−3
−550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 19
+850%
2−3
−850%
Cyberpunk 2077 10 0−1
Far Cry 5 18
+800%
2−3
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+800%
4−5
−800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 13
+1200%
1−2
−1200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27
+440%
5−6
−440%

This is how GTX 1660 Ti Mobile and Qualcomm Adreno 690 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 295% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 1060% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 1033% faster in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 4000% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 690 is 39% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is ahead in 67 tests (99%)
  • Qualcomm Adreno 690 is ahead in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 29.00 2.66
Recency 23 April 2019 6 December 2018
Chip lithography 12 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 7 Watt

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile has a 990.2% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 4 months.

Qualcomm Adreno 690, on the other hand, has a 140% more advanced lithography process, and 1042.9% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 690 in performance tests.


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 Ti Mobile
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile
Qualcomm Adreno 690
Adreno 690

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 1553 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 10 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 690 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.