Radeon R9 285 vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile with Radeon R9 285, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile
2019
6 GB GDDR6, 80 Watt
29.00
+67.4%

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile outperforms R9 285 by an impressive 67% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking192313
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation100.008.58
Power efficiency25.096.31
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameTU116Tonga
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)2 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 $249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile has 1066% better value for money than R9 285.

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 cores15361792
Core clock speed1455 MHz918 MHz
Boost clock speed1590 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,600 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt190 Watt
Texture fill rate152.6102.8
Floating-point processing power4.884 TFLOPS3.29 TFLOPS
ROPs4832
TMUs96112

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data221 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount6 GB2 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s176.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.170
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
+67.4%
R9 285 17.32

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
+72.9%
R9 285 8570

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
+74%
50−55
−74%
1440p58
+93.3%
30−35
−93.3%
4K34
+88.9%
18−21
−88.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.634.98
1440p3.958.30
4K6.7413.83

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 86
+72%
50−55
−72%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80
+77.8%
45−50
−77.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 66
+88.6%
35−40
−88.6%
Battlefield 5 129
+72%
75−80
−72%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 82
+82.2%
45−50
−82.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 68
+70%
40−45
−70%
Far Cry 5 98
+78.2%
55−60
−78.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 102
+70%
60−65
−70%
Forza Horizon 4 304
+68.9%
180−190
−68.9%
Hitman 3 77
+71.1%
45−50
−71.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 209
+74.2%
120−130
−74.2%
Metro Exodus 126
+68%
75−80
−68%
Red Dead Redemption 2 99
+80%
55−60
−80%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 155
+72.2%
90−95
−72.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 225
+73.1%
130−140
−73.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 125
+78.6%
70−75
−78.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 49
+81.5%
27−30
−81.5%
Battlefield 5 109
+67.7%
65−70
−67.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 73
+82.5%
40−45
−82.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 54
+80%
30−33
−80%
Far Cry 5 77
+71.1%
45−50
−71.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 70
+75%
40−45
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 256
+70.7%
150−160
−70.7%
Hitman 3 74
+85%
40−45
−85%
Horizon Zero Dawn 207
+72.5%
120−130
−72.5%
Metro Exodus 104
+73.3%
60−65
−73.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 83
+84.4%
45−50
−84.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 118
+68.6%
70−75
−68.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+86.7%
30−33
−86.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 214
+78.3%
120−130
−78.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 53
+76.7%
30−33
−76.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 42
+75%
24−27
−75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 53
+76.7%
30−33
−76.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 52
+73.3%
30−33
−73.3%
Far Cry 5 57
+90%
30−33
−90%
Forza Horizon 4 99
+80%
55−60
−80%
Hitman 3 63
+80%
35−40
−80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90
+80%
50−55
−80%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 101
+68.3%
60−65
−68.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55
+83.3%
30−33
−83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 33
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 80
+77.8%
45−50
−77.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 66
+88.6%
35−40
−88.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 46
+70.4%
27−30
−70.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 36
+71.4%
21−24
−71.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 32
+77.8%
18−20
−77.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 38
+81%
21−24
−81%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+78.6%
14−16
−78.6%
Far Cry 5 36
+71.4%
21−24
−71.4%
Forza Horizon 4 182
+82%
100−105
−82%
Hitman 3 41
+70.8%
24−27
−70.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65
+85.7%
35−40
−85.7%
Metro Exodus 60
+71.4%
35−40
−71.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+93.3%
30−33
−93.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 203
+69.2%
120−130
−69.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 56
+86.7%
30−33
−86.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 31
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 25
+78.6%
14−16
−78.6%
Hitman 3 25
+78.6%
14−16
−78.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 76
+68.9%
45−50
−68.9%
Metro Exodus 41
+70.8%
24−27
−70.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
+94.4%
18−20
−94.4%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 22
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 19
+90%
10−11
−90%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+100%
5−6
−100%
Far Cry 5 18
+80%
10−11
−80%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+71.4%
21−24
−71.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 13
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27
+68.8%
16−18
−68.8%

This is how GTX 1660 Ti Mobile and R9 285 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 74% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 93% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 89% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 29.00 17.32
Recency 23 April 2019 2 September 2014
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 190 Watt

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile has a 67.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 137.5% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 285 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is a notebook card while Radeon R9 285 is a desktop one.


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
AMD Radeon R9 285
Radeon R9 285

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 1544 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 76 votes

Rate Radeon R9 285 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.