GeForce FX 5600 vs GTX 1660 Ti

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1660 Ti and GeForce FX 5600, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1660 Ti
2019
6 GB GDDR6, 120 Watt
32.80
+109233%

GTX 1660 Ti outperforms FX 5600 by a whopping 109233% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1651495
Place by popularity27not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation42.79no data
Power efficiency19.190.06
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameTU116NV31
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date22 February 2019 (5 years ago)6 March 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 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 cores1536no data
Core clock speed1500 MHz325 MHz
Boost clock speed1770 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,600 million80 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt37 Watt
Texture fill rate169.91.300
Floating-point processing power5.437 TFLOPSno data
ROPs484
TMUs964

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 x16AGP 8x
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR6DDR
Maximum RAM amount6 GB128 MB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz250 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s8 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0a
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.61.5 (2.1)
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 Ti 32.80
+109233%
FX 5600 0.03

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 12907
+107458%
FX 5600 12

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 HD105-0−1
1440p60-0−1
4K39-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.66no data
1440p4.65no data
4K7.15no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 90−95 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 65−70 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 78 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 90−95 0−1
Battlefield 5 129 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 65−70 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 71 0−1
Far Cry 5 109 0−1
Fortnite 247 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 131 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 94 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 200 0−1
Valorant 190−200 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 90−95 0−1
Battlefield 5 112 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 65−70 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 57 0−1
Dota 2 181 0−1
Far Cry 5 99 0−1
Fortnite 143 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 122 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 72 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 119 0−1
Metro Exodus 55 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 116 0−1
Valorant 190−200 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 102 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 65−70 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 46 0−1
Dota 2 168 0−1
Far Cry 5 94 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 97 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 66 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 129 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62 0−1
Valorant 118 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 117 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 62 0−1
Metro Exodus 33 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
Valorant 230−240 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 76 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 27 0−1
Far Cry 5 67 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 77 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 47 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 56 0−1
Metro Exodus 21 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 43 0−1
Valorant 180−190 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 43 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 11 0−1
Dota 2 94 0−1
Far Cry 5 35 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 51 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 24 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 39 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 25 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 32.80 0.03
Recency 22 February 2019 6 March 2003
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 12 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 37 Watt

GTX 1660 Ti has a 109233.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

FX 5600, on the other hand, has 224.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5600 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 Ti
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600
GeForce FX 5600

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.


4.2 8226 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 71 vote

Rate GeForce FX 5600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 1660 Ti or GeForce FX 5600, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.