GeForce GTX 1660 vs GTX 1660 Ti

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

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

GTX 1660 Ti
2019
6 GB GDDR6, 120 Watt
33.56
+10.6%

GTX 1660 Ti outperforms GTX 1660 by a moderate 11% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking161187
Place by popularity2440
Cost-effectiveness evaluation43.8647.69
Power efficiency19.3017.44
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTU116TU116
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date22 February 2019 (5 years ago)14 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 $219

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 has 9% better value for money than GTX 1660 Ti.

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 cores15361408
Core clock speed1500 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speed1770 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors6,600 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate169.9157.1
Floating-point processing power5.437 TFLOPS5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs4848
TMUs9688

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length229 mm229 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1x 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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount6 GB6 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz2001 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s192.1 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA7.57.5

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 33.56
+10.6%
GTX 1660 30.33

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 12904
+10.6%
GTX 1660 11664

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 22892
+8.7%
GTX 1660 21064

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 1660 Ti 61217
GTX 1660 71229
+16.4%

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 16024
+13.1%
GTX 1660 14164

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 93095
+13.9%
GTX 1660 81755

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 1660 Ti 60757
+4.9%
GTX 1660 57942

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1660 Ti 483604
GTX 1660 570753
+18%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

GTX 1660 Ti 57771
+3%
GTX 1660 56067

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

GTX 1660 Ti 65308
+8.5%
GTX 1660 60172

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

GTX 1660 Ti 90
GTX 1660 120
+33.8%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

GTX 1660 Ti 52
+5.1%
GTX 1660 49

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

GTX 1660 Ti 8
GTX 1660 9
+8.9%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

GTX 1660 Ti 51
GTX 1660 60
+16.2%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

GTX 1660 Ti 40
GTX 1660 40
+1.8%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

GTX 1660 Ti 27
GTX 1660 27
+1.5%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

GTX 1660 Ti 7
+25.9%
GTX 1660 6

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 3dsmax-05

GTX 1660 Ti 163
+21.6%
GTX 1660 134

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 HD103
+22.6%
84
−22.6%
1440p60
+17.6%
51
−17.6%
4K39
+44.4%
27
−44.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.71
−3.9%
2.61
+3.9%
1440p4.65
−8.3%
4.29
+8.3%
4K7.15
+13.4%
8.11
−13.4%
  • GTX 1660 Ti and GTX 1660 have nearly equal cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 has 8% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 Ti has 13% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 65−70
−7.5%
72
+7.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+9.9%
71
−9.9%
Elden Ring 84
+0%
84
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90
+1.1%
85−90
−1.1%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+19.6%
56
−19.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 36
−52.8%
55
+52.8%
Forza Horizon 4 156
+18.2%
132
−18.2%
Metro Exodus 98
+3.2%
95
−3.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 119
+6.3%
112
−6.3%
Valorant 161
+16.7%
138
−16.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 123
+38.2%
85−90
−38.2%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+39.6%
48
−39.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 28
−60.7%
45
+60.7%
Dota 2 140
−7.1%
150
+7.1%
Elden Ring 116
+28.9%
90
−28.9%
Far Cry 5 118
−22.9%
145
+22.9%
Fortnite 134
−7.5%
140−150
+7.5%
Forza Horizon 4 127
+15.5%
110
−15.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 119
+3.5%
115
−3.5%
Metro Exodus 68
+3%
66
−3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 180−190
−15.5%
216
+15.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45
+12.5%
40
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110−120
+12.7%
100−110
−12.7%
Valorant 82
+26.2%
65
−26.2%
World of Tanks 270−280
+1.5%
270−280
−1.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 78
−14.1%
85−90
+14.1%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+55.8%
43
−55.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
−65.2%
38
+65.2%
Dota 2 168
−17.3%
197
+17.3%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+5.9%
85−90
−5.9%
Forza Horizon 4 110
+15.8%
95
−15.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 98
−80.6%
170−180
+80.6%
Valorant 118
+2.6%
115
−2.6%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 62
+19.2%
52
−19.2%
Elden Ring 62
+31.9%
47
−31.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 62
+19.2%
52
−19.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+35.7%
129
−35.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 28
+12%
25
−12%
World of Tanks 210−220
+9.7%
190−200
−9.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 63
+5%
60−65
−5%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+19.2%
26
−19.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
−76.9%
23
+76.9%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+12.8%
90−95
−12.8%
Forza Horizon 4 78
+16.4%
67
−16.4%
Metro Exodus 65
+10.2%
59
−10.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+14.6%
45−50
−14.6%
Valorant 82
+13.9%
72
−13.9%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+106%
16
−106%
Dota 2 56
+14.3%
49
−14.3%
Elden Ring 25
+19%
21
−19%
Grand Theft Auto V 56
+14.3%
49
−14.3%
Metro Exodus 21
+5%
20
−5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+30.9%
81
−30.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 19
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56
+14.3%
49
−14.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 31
−6.5%
30−35
+6.5%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+13.8%
27−30
−13.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
−66.7%
10
+66.7%
Dota 2 94
+8%
87
−8%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+11.9%
40−45
−11.9%
Fortnite 45−50
+12.5%
40−45
−12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 43
+19.4%
36
−19.4%
Valorant 41
+7.9%
38
−7.9%

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

  • GTX 1660 Ti is 23% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Ti is 18% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 Ti is 44% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 Ti is 106% faster.
  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1660 is 81% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Ti is ahead in 47 tests (75%)
  • GTX 1660 is ahead in 14 tests (22%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.56 30.33

GTX 1660 Ti has a 10.6% higher aggregate performance score.

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

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 8069 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 5462 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 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.