Quadro T2000 Mobile vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

GTX 1660 Ti
2019
6 GB GDDR6
33.40
+61.9%

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti outperforms Quadro T2000 Mobile by 62% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking150248
Place by popularity34not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation25.854.69
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2021)Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code nameTuring TU116N19P-Q3
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date22 February 2019 (5 years ago)27 May 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 no data
Current price$284 (1x MSRP)$2221

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 Ti has 451% better value for money than T2000 Mobile.

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 cores15361024
Core clock speed1500 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speed1770 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors6,600 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate169.9114.2

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1660 Ti and Quadro T2000 Mobile 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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno data

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 GB4 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed12000 MHz8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s128.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+no data

API compatibility

List of supported graphics 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 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 33.40
+61.9%
T2000 Mobile 20.63

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti outperforms Quadro T2000 Mobile by 62% based on our aggregated 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 12927
+61.9%
T2000 Mobile 7985

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti outperforms Quadro T2000 Mobile by 62% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 1660 Ti 22892
+69.3%
T2000 Mobile 13524

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti outperforms Quadro T2000 Mobile by 69% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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
+75%
60−65
−75%
1440p59
+68.6%
35−40
−68.6%
4K38
+81%
21−24
−81%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 78
+136%
30−35
−136%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 86
+105%
40−45
−105%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 74
+106%
35−40
−106%
Battlefield 5 129
+87%
65−70
−87%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 120
+122%
50−55
−122%
Cyberpunk 2077 71
+115%
30−35
−115%
Far Cry 5 109
+102%
50−55
−102%
Far Cry New Dawn 98
+78.2%
55−60
−78.2%
Forza Horizon 4 131
+84.5%
70−75
−84.5%
Hitman 3 100−110
+75%
60−65
−75%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+63.6%
40−45
−63.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 82
+141%
30−35
−141%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 94
+114%
40−45
−114%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+57.5%
40−45
−57.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 72
+71.4%
40−45
−71.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55
+52.8%
35−40
−52.8%
Battlefield 5 112
+62.3%
65−70
−62.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 89
+64.8%
50−55
−64.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 57
+72.7%
30−35
−72.7%
Far Cry 5 99
+83.3%
50−55
−83.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 93
+69.1%
55−60
−69.1%
Forza Horizon 4 122
+71.8%
70−75
−71.8%
Hitman 3 100−110
+75%
60−65
−75%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+63.6%
40−45
−63.6%
Metro Exodus 55
+66.7%
30−35
−66.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45
+32.4%
30−35
−32.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 82
+86.4%
40−45
−86.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 116
+158%
45−50
−158%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+57.5%
40−45
−57.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 53
+26.2%
40−45
−26.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50
+38.9%
35−40
−38.9%
Battlefield 5 102
+47.8%
65−70
−47.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+39.4%
30−35
−39.4%
Far Cry 5 94
+74.1%
50−55
−74.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 84
+52.7%
55−60
−52.7%
Forza Horizon 4 97
+36.6%
70−75
−36.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62
+37.8%
45−50
−37.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+57.5%
40−45
−57.5%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 57
+83.9%
30−35
−83.9%
Hitman 3 60−65
+81.8%
30−35
−81.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+70.4%
27−30
−70.4%
Metro Exodus 33
+65%
20−22
−65%
Red Dead Redemption 2 28
+86.7%
14−16
−86.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 51
+88.9%
27−30
−88.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 41
+86.4%
21−24
−86.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 36
+89.5%
18−20
−89.5%
Battlefield 5 76
+65.2%
45−50
−65.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 27
+125%
12−14
−125%
Far Cry 5 67
+91.4%
35−40
−91.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 65
+62.5%
40−45
−62.5%
Forza Horizon 4 77
+83.3%
40−45
−83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+95.7%
21−24
−95.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+86.7%
14−16
−86.7%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 31
+107%
14−16
−107%
Hitman 3 30−35
+73.7%
18−20
−73.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+84.6%
12−14
−84.6%
Metro Exodus 21
+75%
12−14
−75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 19
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 26
+85.7%
14−16
−85.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 43
+105%
21−24
−105%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 25
+92.3%
12−14
−92.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 19
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Battlefield 5 43
+79.2%
24−27
−79.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+175%
4−5
−175%
Far Cry 5 35
+106%
16−18
−106%
Far Cry New Dawn 35
+75%
20−22
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 51
+75.9%
27−30
−75.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%

This is how GTX 1660 Ti and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Ti is 75% faster than T2000 Mobile in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Ti is 68.6% faster than T2000 Mobile in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 Ti is 81% faster than T2000 Mobile in 4K

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1660 Ti is 175% faster than the T2000 Mobile.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 1660 Ti surpassed T2000 Mobile in all 68 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.40 20.63
Recency 22 February 2019 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 60 Watt

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T2000 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is a desktop card while Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation 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
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 Mobile

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.


4.2 6681 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 292 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile 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.