Radeon RX 6750 XT vs GeForce GTX 1660

Place in the ranking	187	47
Place by popularity	40	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	47.69	51.88
Power efficiency	17.44	14.92
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	TU116	Navi 22
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	14 March 2019 (5 years ago)	3 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$219	$549

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6750 XT has 9% better value for money than GTX 1660.

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 cores	1408	2560
Core clock speed	1530 MHz	2150 MHz
Boost clock speed	1785 MHz	2600 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	157.1	416.0
Floating-point processing power	5.027 TFLOPS	13.31 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	64
TMUs	88	160
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	40

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 x16
Length	229 mm	267 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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	12 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	2001 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.1 GB/s	432.0 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	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	+	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	-

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 30.33

RX 6750 XT 54.05
+78.2%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

GTX 1660 11664

RX 6750 XT 20783
+78.2%

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

RX 6750 XT 48327
+129%

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

RX 6750 XT 104004
+46%

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

RX 6750 XT 37609
+166%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1660 81755

RX 6750 XT 170993
+109%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1660 570753
+7.8%

RX 6750 XT 529598

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 −96.4%	165 +96.4%
1440p	51 −70.6%	87 +70.6%
4K	27 −88.9%	51 +88.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.61 +27.6%	3.33 −27.6%
1440p	4.29 +47%	6.31 −47%
4K	8.11 +32.7%	10.76 −32.7%

GTX 1660 has 28% lower cost per frame in 1080p
GTX 1660 has 47% lower cost per frame in 1440p
GTX 1660 has 33% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	72 −131%	166 +131%
Cyberpunk 2077	71 −132%	165 +132%
Elden Ring	84 −135%	197 +135%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −31.5%	110−120 +31.5%
Counter-Strike 2	56 −132%	130 +132%
Cyberpunk 2077	55 −16.4%	64 +16.4%
Forza Horizon 4	132 −179%	368 +179%
Metro Exodus	95 −57.9%	150 +57.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	112 +12%	100−105 −12%
Valorant	138 −68.1%	230−240 +68.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −31.5%	110−120 +31.5%
Counter-Strike 2	48 −127%	109 +127%
Cyberpunk 2077	45 −20%	54 +20%
Dota 2	150 −6%	159 +6%
Elden Ring	90 +36.4%	66 −36.4%
Far Cry 5	145 +196%	49 −196%
Fortnite	140−150 −50%	210−220 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	110 −176%	304 +176%
Grand Theft Auto V	115 −40.9%	162 +40.9%
Metro Exodus	66 −81.8%	120 +81.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	216 +0.5%	210−220 −0.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40 −150%	100−105 +150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 −70.6%	170−180 +70.6%
Valorant	65 −257%	230−240 +257%
World of Tanks	270−280 −1.8%	270−280 +1.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −31.5%	110−120 +31.5%
Counter-Strike 2	43 −123%	96 +123%
Cyberpunk 2077	38 −28.9%	49 +28.9%
Dota 2	197 +50.4%	131 −50.4%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −32.9%	110−120 +32.9%
Forza Horizon 4	95 −174%	260 +174%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −21.5%	210−220 +21.5%
Valorant	115 −102%	230−240 +102%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	52 −104%	106 +104%
Elden Ring	47 −168%	126 +168%
Grand Theft Auto V	52 −104%	106 +104%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	129 −35.7%	170−180 +35.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	25 −140%	60−65 +140%
World of Tanks	190−200 −77.6%	300−350 +77.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 −41.7%	85−90 +41.7%
Counter-Strike 2	26 −119%	57 +119%
Cyberpunk 2077	23 −30.4%	30 +30.4%
Far Cry 5	90−95 −70.2%	160−170 +70.2%
Forza Horizon 4	67 −178%	186 +178%
Metro Exodus	59 −114%	126 +114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 −125%	100−110 +125%
Valorant	72 −176%	190−200 +176%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16 −106%	33 +106%
Dota 2	49 −112%	104 +112%
Elden Ring	21 −181%	59 +181%
Grand Theft Auto V	49 −112%	104 +112%
Metro Exodus	20 −135%	47 +135%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	81 −132%	180−190 +132%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −105%	35−40 +105%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	49 −112%	104 +112%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −106%	65−70 +106%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −110%	60−65 +110%
Cyberpunk 2077	10 −30%	13 +30%
Dota 2	87 −16.1%	101 +16.1%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −124%	90−95 +124%
Fortnite	40−45 −125%	90−95 +125%
Forza Horizon 4	36 −175%	99 +175%
Valorant	38 −192%	110−120 +192%

This is how GTX 1660 and RX 6750 XT compete in popular games:

RX 6750 XT is 96% faster in 1080p
RX 6750 XT is 71% faster in 1440p
RX 6750 XT is 89% faster in 4K

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

in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 is 196% faster.
in Valorant, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6750 XT is 257% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1660 is ahead in 5 tests (8%)
RX 6750 XT is ahead in 58 tests (92%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	30.33	54.05
Recency	14 March 2019	3 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	12 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	250 Watt

GTX 1660 has 108.3% lower power consumption.

RX 6750 XT, on the other hand, has a 78.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6750 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1660 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.