Arc A550M vs GeForce GTX 1660

Place in performance ranking	171	213
Place by popularity	52	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	25.02	no data
Architecture	Turing (2018−2021)	Xe HPG (2020−2022)
GPU code name	Turing TU116	Alchemist
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	14 March 2019 (5 years ago)	30 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$219	no data
Current price	$252 (1.2x MSRP)	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	1408	16
Core clock speed	1530 MHz	900 MHz
Boost clock speed	1785 MHz	2005 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	80 Watt (60 - 80 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	157.1	115.2

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1660 and Arc A550M 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.

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	229 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	no data

Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	8000 MHz	14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.1 GB/s	192.0 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 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)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
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 30.20
+27.5%

Arc A550M 23.69

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Arc A550M by 27% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 1660 14055

Arc A550M 14350
+2.1%

Arc A550M outperforms GeForce GTX 1660 by 2% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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	86 +32.3%	65−70 −32.3%
1440p	48 +37.1%	35−40 −37.1%
4K	28 +33.3%	21−24 −33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

71
+86.8%

35−40

−86.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +21.3%	45−50 −21.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	59 +40.5%	40−45 −40.5%
Battlefield 5	90−95 +22.1%	75−80 −22.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	112 +80.6%	60−65 −80.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	58 +52.6%	35−40 −52.6%
Far Cry 5	100 +61.3%	60−65 −61.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	95 +50.8%	60−65 −50.8%
Forza Horizon 4	132 +65%	80−85 −65%
Hitman 3	110 +54.9%	70−75 −54.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	82 +60.8%	50−55 −60.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	73 +87.2%	35−40 −87.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	93 +78.8%	50−55 −78.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	78 +73.3%	45−50 −73.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +21.3%	45−50 −21.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	42 +0%	40−45 +0%
Battlefield 5	90−95 +22.1%	75−80 −22.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	85 +37.1%	60−65 −37.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	47 +23.7%	35−40 −23.7%
Far Cry 5	92 +48.4%	60−65 −48.4%
Far Cry New Dawn	89 +41.3%	60−65 −41.3%
Forza Horizon 4	123 +53.8%	80−85 −53.8%
Hitman 3	90 +26.8%	70−75 −26.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	61 +19.6%	50−55 −19.6%
Metro Exodus	57 +46.2%	35−40 −46.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40 +2.6%	35−40 −2.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	78 +50%	50−55 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	102 +92.5%	50−55 −92.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	66 +46.7%	45−50 −46.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +21.3%	45−50 −21.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	37 −13.5%	40−45 +13.5%
Battlefield 5	90−95 +22.1%	75−80 −22.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	40 +5.3%	35−40 −5.3%
Far Cry 5	86 +38.7%	60−65 −38.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	82 +30.2%	60−65 −30.2%
Forza Horizon 4	98 +22.5%	80−85 −22.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	57 +7.5%	50−55 −7.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	29 −55.2%	45−50 +55.2%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	57 +58.3%	35−40 −58.3%
Hitman 3	57 +46.2%	35−40 −46.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40 +29%	30−35 −29%
Metro Exodus	33 +43.5%	21−24 −43.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	25 +38.9%	18−20 −38.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	48 +54.8%	30−35 −54.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +26.9%	24−27 −26.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27 +17.4%	21−24 −17.4%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +24.5%	50−55 −24.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	24 +60%	14−16 −60%
Far Cry 5	59 +43.9%	40−45 −43.9%
Far Cry New Dawn	59 +28.3%	45−50 −28.3%
Forza Horizon 4	76 +58.3%	45−50 −58.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +39.3%	27−30 −39.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	19 +5.6%	18−20 −5.6%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	32 +77.8%	18−20 −77.8%
Hitman 3	31 +40.9%	21−24 −40.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	11 −36.4%	14−16 +36.4%
Metro Exodus	20 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +23.1%	12−14 −23.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24 +50%	16−18 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35 +40%	24−27 −40%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	15 +15.4%	12−14 −15.4%
Battlefield 5	35−40 +28.6%	27−30 −28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	10 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	30 +50%	20−22 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	31 +34.8%	21−24 −34.8%
Forza Horizon 4	50 +51.5%	30−35 −51.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%

This is how GTX 1660 and Arc A550M compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 is 32.3% faster than Arc A550M in 1080p
GTX 1660 is 37.1% faster than Arc A550M in 1440p
GTX 1660 is 33.3% faster than Arc A550M in 4K

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 is 92.5% faster than the Arc A550M.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A550M is 55.2% faster than the GTX 1660.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1660 is ahead in 64 tests (94%)
Arc A550M is ahead in 3 tests (4%)
there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	30.20	23.69
Recency	14 March 2019	30 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	80 Watt