Radeon R5 M435 vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile

Place in performance ranking	189	832
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	30.53	0.11
Architecture	Turing (2018−2021)	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code name	N18E-G0	Jet
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)	15 May 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229	no data
Current price	$682 (3x MSRP)	$120

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile has 27655% better value for money than R5 M435.

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	1536	320
Core clock speed	1455 MHz	780 MHz
Boost clock speed	1590 MHz	1030 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	690 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	152.6	20.60
Floating-point performance	no data	547.2 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile and Radeon R5 M435 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Width	no data	IGP

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	12000 MHz	4500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	288.0 GB/s	36 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

No outputs

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 Ti Mobile 26.37
+1174%

R5 M435 2.07

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile outperforms Radeon R5 M435 by 1174% 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 Ti Mobile 10182
+1173%

R5 M435 800

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile outperforms Radeon R5 M435 by 1173% 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	86 +1333%	6−7 −1333%
1440p	58 +1350%	4−5 −1350%
4K	37 +1750%	2−3 −1750%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

1050−1100

+1121%

86
−1121%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1000−1050 +1150%	80 −1150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	800−850 +1112%	66 −1112%
Battlefield 5	1600−1650 +1140%	129 −1140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1000−1050 +1120%	82 −1120%
Cyberpunk 2077	850−900 +1150%	68 −1150%
Far Cry 5	1200−1250 +1124%	98 −1124%
Far Cry New Dawn	1250−1300 +1125%	102 −1125%
Forza Horizon 4	1700−1750 +1169%	134 −1169%
Hitman 3	950−1000 +1134%	77 −1134%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1800−1850 +1159%	143 −1159%
Metro Exodus	1600−1650 +1170%	126 −1170%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1250−1300 +1163%	99 −1163%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1850−1900 +1159%	147 −1159%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1000−1050 +1120%	82 −1120%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	850−900 +1132%	69 −1132%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	600−650 +1124%	49 −1124%
Battlefield 5	1350−1400 +1139%	109 −1139%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	900−950 +1133%	73 −1133%
Cyberpunk 2077	650−700 +1104%	54 −1104%
Far Cry 5	950−1000 +1134%	77 −1134%
Far Cry New Dawn	850−900 +1114%	70 −1114%
Forza Horizon 4	3250−3300 +1170%	256 −1170%
Hitman 3	800−850 +1131%	65 −1131%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2600−2650 +1156%	207 −1156%
Metro Exodus	1150−1200 +1123%	94 −1123%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1100−1150 +1150%	88 −1150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1500−1550 +1171%	118 −1171%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1300−1350 +1162%	103 −1162%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2700−2750 +1162%	214 −1162%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	650−700 +1126%	53 −1126%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	500−550 +1090%	42 −1090%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	650−700 +1126%	53 −1126%
Cyberpunk 2077	650−700 +1150%	52 −1150%
Far Cry 5	700−750 +1128%	57 −1128%
Forza Horizon 4	1250−1300 +1163%	99 −1163%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1100−1150 +1122%	90 −1122%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1250−1300 +1138%	101 −1138%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	700−750 +1173%	55 −1173%
Watch Dogs: Legion	400−450 +1112%	33 −1112%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

1000−1050

+1150%

80
−1150%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	800−850 +1112%	66 −1112%
Far Cry New Dawn	900−950 +1150%	72 −1150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	450−500 +1150%	36 −1150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	400−450 +1150%	32 −1150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	600−650 +1076%	51 −1076%
Cyberpunk 2077	300−310 +1100%	25 −1100%
Far Cry 5	750−800 +1150%	60 −1150%
Forza Horizon 4	650−700 +1126%	50−55 −1126%
Hitman 3	500−550 +1120%	41 −1120%
Horizon Zero Dawn	800−850 +1131%	65 −1131%
Metro Exodus	750−800 +1150%	60 −1150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	750−800 +1171%	55−60 −1171%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	400−450 +1112%	30−35 −1112%
Watch Dogs: Legion	290−300 +1161%	23 −1161%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

700−750
+1150%

−1150%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	350−400 +1029%	31 −1029%
Far Cry New Dawn	300−310 +1100%	25 −1100%
Hitman 3	300−310 +1100%	25 −1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	350−400 +1029%	30−35 −1029%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	300−310 +1150%	24 −1150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	400−450 +1043%	35 −1043%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	280−290 +1173%	22 −1173%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	160−170 +1131%	13 −1131%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	240−250 +1163%	19 −1163%
Cyberpunk 2077	120−130 +1100%	10 −1100%
Far Cry 5	220−230 +1122%	18 −1122%
Forza Horizon 4	450−500 +1150%	35−40 −1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	450−500 +1116%	37 −1116%
Metro Exodus	400−450 +1150%	32 −1150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	160−170 +1131%	13 −1131%