Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS vs GeForce GTX 1660

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1660 with Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1660
2019
6 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
30.26
+163%

GTX 1660 outperforms Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS by a whopping 163% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking182412
Place by popularity52not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation48.68no data
Power efficiency17.5319.97
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)no data
GPU code nameTU116no data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date14 March 2019 (5 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$219 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores14081536
Core clock speed1530 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1785 MHz1500 MHz
Number of transistors6,600 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate157.1no data
Floating-point processing power5.027 TFLOPSno data
ROPs48no data
TMUs88no data

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 x16no data
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 typeGDDR5LPDDR5x
Maximum RAM amount6 GBno data
Memory bus width192 Bitno data
Memory clock speed2001 MHz8448 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.1 GB/sno data
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 data
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12_1
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
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. 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 30.26
+163%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 11.49

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 21064
+198%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 7061

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 71229
+196%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 24058

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 14164
+103%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 6982

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 HD82
+105%
40
−105%
1440p49
+172%
18−20
−172%
4K27
+170%
10−12
−170%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.67no data
1440p4.47no data
4K8.11no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 71
+196%
24−27
−196%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+171%
24−27
−171%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 59
+181%
21−24
−181%
Battlefield 5 95−100
+183%
35−40
−183%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 73
+170%
27−30
−170%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+176%
21−24
−176%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+183%
24−27
−183%
Far Cry New Dawn 75−80
+185%
27−30
−185%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+175%
60−65
−175%
Hitman 3 69
+188%
24−27
−188%
Horizon Zero Dawn 306
+178%
110−120
−178%
Metro Exodus 144
+188%
50−55
−188%
Red Dead Redemption 2 112
+180%
40−45
−180%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−110
+200%
35−40
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 227
+167%
85−90
−167%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 123
+173%
45−50
−173%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 42
+200%
14−16
−200%
Battlefield 5 95−100
+183%
35−40
−183%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 67
+179%
24−27
−179%
Cyberpunk 2077 47
+194%
16−18
−194%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+183%
24−27
−183%
Far Cry New Dawn 75−80
+185%
27−30
−185%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+175%
60−65
−175%
Hitman 3 67
+179%
24−27
−179%
Horizon Zero Dawn 287
+187%
100−105
−187%
Metro Exodus 113
+183%
40−45
−183%
Red Dead Redemption 2 79
+193%
27−30
−193%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110
+175%
40−45
−175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+167%
24−27
−167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 214
+168%
80−85
−168%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+171%
24−27
−171%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 37
+164%
14−16
−164%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 49
+172%
18−20
−172%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+186%
14−16
−186%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+183%
24−27
−183%
Forza Horizon 4 98
+180%
35−40
−180%
Hitman 3 59
+181%
21−24
−181%
Horizon Zero Dawn 93
+166%
35−40
−166%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 95
+171%
35−40
−171%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+171%
21−24
−171%
Watch Dogs: Legion 29
+190%
10−11
−190%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 81
+170%
30−33
−170%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+171%
21−24
−171%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+188%
16−18
−188%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+167%
12−14
−167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27
+170%
10−11
−170%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34
+183%
12−14
−183%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+167%
9−10
−167%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+168%
65−70
−168%
Hitman 3 39
+179%
14−16
−179%
Horizon Zero Dawn 67
+179%
24−27
−179%
Metro Exodus 59
+181%
21−24
−181%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 67
+179%
24−27
−179%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+186%
14−16
−186%
Watch Dogs: Legion 187
+167%
70−75
−167%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 53
+194%
18−20
−194%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+200%
10−11
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+167%
9−10
−167%
Hitman 3 21
+200%
7−8
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 63
+200%
21−24
−200%
Metro Exodus 44
+175%
16−18
−175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
+192%
12−14
−192%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 15
+200%
5−6
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 17
+183%
6−7
−183%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Forza Horizon 4 50
+178%
18−20
−178%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 36
+200%
12−14
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12
+200%
4−5
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 26
+189%
9−10
−189%

This is how GTX 1660 and Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 is 105% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 is 172% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 is 170% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 30.26 11.49
Chip lithography 12 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 40 Watt

GTX 1660 has a 163.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS, on the other hand, has a 200% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1660 is a desktop card while Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is a notebook 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
GeForce GTX 1660
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS

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.


4.1 5196 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 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.