GeForce Go 7900 GTX vs 1660 Ti

Place in performance ranking	147	1133
Place by popularity	36	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	25.84	no data
Architecture	Turing (2018−2021)	G7x (2005−2007)
GPU code name	Turing TU116	G71M
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	22 February 2019 (5 years ago)	18 April 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$279	no data
Current price	$284 (1x MSRP)	$535

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 Ti and Go 7900 GTX have a nearly equal value for money.

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	32
Core clock speed	1500 MHz	8 MHz
Boost clock speed	1770 MHz	500 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	278 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	169.9	12.00

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1660 Ti and GeForce Go 7900 GTX 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	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 1.0 x16
Length	229 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	None

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	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	12000 MHz	1200 MHz
Memory bandwidth	288.0 GB/s	38.4 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	6.5	3.0
OpenGL	4.6	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	N/A
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
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 33.46
+4680%

Go 7900 GTX 0.70

1660 Ti outperforms Go 7900 by 4680% 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 12926
+4687%

Go 7900 GTX 270

1660 Ti outperforms Go 7900 by 4687% 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	104 +5100%	2−3 −5100%
1440p	57 +5600%	1−2 −5600%
4K	38	0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

78
+2500%

3−4

−2500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	86	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	74 +7300%	1−2 −7300%
Battlefield 5	130 +6400%	2−3 −6400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	95 +3067%	3−4 −3067%
Cyberpunk 2077	71 +2267%	3−4 −2267%
Far Cry 5	104 +5100%	2−3 −5100%
Far Cry New Dawn	112 +11100%	1−2 −11100%
Forza Horizon 4	131 +6450%	2−3 −6450%
Hitman 3	65−70 +3350%	2−3 −3350%
Horizon Zero Dawn	180 +1400%	12−14 −1400%
Metro Exodus	134 +6600%	2−3 −6600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	119	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	156 +2129%	7−8 −2129%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +770%	10−11 −770%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	72	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55 +5400%	1−2 −5400%
Battlefield 5	121 +5950%	2−3 −5950%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	85 +2733%	3−4 −2733%
Cyberpunk 2077	57 +1800%	3−4 −1800%
Far Cry 5	82 +8100%	1−2 −8100%
Far Cry New Dawn	79 +7800%	1−2 −7800%
Forza Horizon 4	218 +5350%	4−5 −5350%
Hitman 3	65−70 +3350%	2−3 −3350%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +1017%	12−14 −1017%
Metro Exodus	103 +5050%	2−3 −5050%
Red Dead Redemption 2	103	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	127 +1714%	7−8 −1714%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	116 +3767%	3−4 −3767%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +770%	10−11 −770%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	53	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50 +4900%	1−2 −4900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	70 +2233%	3−4 −2233%
Cyberpunk 2077	46 +1433%	3−4 −1433%
Far Cry 5	61 +6000%	1−2 −6000%
Forza Horizon 4	97 +4750%	2−3 −4750%
Horizon Zero Dawn	102 +750%	12−14 −750%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110 +1471%	7−8 −1471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	62 +1967%	3−4 −1967%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +770%	10−11 −770%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75 +7400%	1−2 −7400%
Far Cry New Dawn	82 +8100%	1−2 −8100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	41	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	36	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	55 +1275%	4−5 −1275%
Cyberpunk 2077	27 +2600%	1−2 −2600%
Far Cry 5	67 +6600%	1−2 −6600%
Forza Horizon 4	77 +7600%	1−2 −7600%
Hitman 3	40−45 +500%	7−8 −500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	75 +2400%	3−4 −2400%
Metro Exodus	65 +6400%	1−2 −6400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	78 +7700%	1−2 −7700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30	0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

65
+2067%

3−4

−2067%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	36	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	29	0−1
Hitman 3	27−30	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +4000%	1−2 −4000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	26	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	43	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	25 +2400%	1−2 −2400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	19	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	25	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	11	0−1
Far Cry 5	20	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	51 +5000%	1−2 −5000%
Horizon Zero Dawn	42 +4100%	1−2 −4100%
Metro Exodus	35 +775%	4−5 −775%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

44
+2100%

2−3

−2100%

This is how GTX 1660 Ti and Go 7900 GTX compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 Ti is 5100% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 Ti is 5600% faster in 1440p

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

in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1660 Ti is 11100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GTX 1660 Ti surpassed Go 7900 GTX in all 33 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	33.46	0.70
Recency	22 February 2019	18 April 2006
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	12 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	45 Watt