Radeon Pro W6400 vs GeForce GTX 1660

Place in performance ranking	170	246
Place by popularity	47	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	24.98	73.34
Architecture	Turing (2018−2021)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2022)
GPU code name	Turing TU116	Navi 24
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	14 March 2019 (5 years ago)	19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$219	no data
Current price	$252 (1.2x MSRP)	$206

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro W6400 has 194% better value for money than GTX 1660.

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	768
Core clock speed	1530 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1785 MHz	2331 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	157.1	111.9

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Length	229 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	1-slot
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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	8000 MHz	14 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	192.1 GB/s	112.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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	2x DisplayPort 1.4a
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	2.2
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 30.27
+45.2%

Pro W6400 20.84

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Radeon Pro W6400 by 45% 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 11689
+45.3%

Pro W6400 8047

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Radeon Pro W6400 by 45% 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	84 +52.7%	55−60 −52.7%
1440p	50 +66.7%	30−35 −66.7%
4K	27 +50%	18−20 −50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

100−105

+40.8%

71
−40.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	80−85 +42.9%	55−60 −42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	85−90 +44.1%	59 −44.1%
Battlefield 5	140−150 +41.4%	95−100 −41.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−105 +37%	73 −37%
Cyberpunk 2077	80−85 +37.9%	58 −37.9%
Far Cry 5	95−100 +39.7%	65−70 −39.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	110−120 +42.9%	75−80 −42.9%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +43.9%	132 −43.9%
Hitman 3	100−105 +44.9%	69 −44.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	240−250 +39.5%	172 −39.5%
Metro Exodus	200−210 +38.9%	144 −38.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	160−170 +42.9%	112 −42.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	190−200 +43.9%	132 −43.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +41%	78 −41%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	80−85 +42.9%	55−60 −42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	60−65 +42.9%	42 −42.9%
Battlefield 5	140−150 +41.4%	95−100 −41.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	95−100 +41.8%	67 −41.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 +38.3%	47 −38.3%
Far Cry 5	95−100 +39.7%	65−70 −39.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	110−120 +42.9%	75−80 −42.9%
Forza Horizon 4	180−190 +44%	120−130 −44%
Hitman 3	80−85 +42.9%	56 −42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	400−450 +39.4%	287 −39.4%
Metro Exodus	140−150 +40%	100 −40%
Red Dead Redemption 2	130−140 +44.4%	90 −44.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	150−160 +36.4%	110 −36.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	140−150 +37.3%	102 −37.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	300−310 +40.2%	214 −40.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	80−85 +42.9%	55−60 −42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50−55 +35.1%	37 −35.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	70−75 +42.9%	49 −42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +37.5%	40 −37.5%
Far Cry 5	95−100 +39.7%	65−70 −39.7%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +42.9%	98 −42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +39.8%	93 −39.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	130−140 +36.8%	95 −36.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	80−85 +40.4%	57 −40.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +37.9%	29 −37.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

110−120

+35.8%

81
−35.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +40.4%	55−60 −40.4%
Far Cry New Dawn	110−120 +42.9%	77 −42.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +40.6%	30−35 −40.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +29.6%	27 −29.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	70−75 +37.3%	51 −37.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 +25%	24 −25%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +44.1%	59 −44.1%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +44.7%	76 −44.7%
Hitman 3	55−60 +41%	39 −41%
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100 +41.8%	67 −41.8%
Metro Exodus	85−90 +44.1%	59 −44.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	95−100 +41.8%	67 −41.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 +37.5%	40−45 −37.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +42.1%	19 −42.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

75−80
+41.5%

−41.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 +33.3%	30−33 −33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−33 +25%	24−27 −25%
Hitman 3	30−33 +42.9%	21 −42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +38.9%	35−40 −38.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +25%	24 −25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 +42.9%	35 −42.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +42.1%	18−20 −42.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 +40%	15 −40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	24−27 +41.2%	17 −41.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +40%	10 −40%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +41.2%	16−18 −41.2%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +40%	50 −40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 +44.7%	38 −44.7%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +45.2%	31 −45.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 +33.3%	12 −33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40
+34.6%

−34.6%

This is how GTX 1660 and Pro W6400 compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 is 53% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 is 67% faster in 1440p
GTX 1660 is 50% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	30.27	20.84
Recency	14 March 2019	19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	50 Watt