GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q vs GTX 260

Place in the ranking	752	242
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.14	64.70
Power efficiency	1.27	27.95
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GT200	TU116
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	16 June 2008 (16 years ago)	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	$229

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has 46114% better value for money than GTX 260.

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	192	1536
CUDA cores	192	no data
Core clock speed	576 MHz	1140 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1335 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	60 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	36.86	128.2
Floating-point processing power	0.4769 TFLOPS	4.101 TFLOPS
ROPs	28	48
TMUs	64	96

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).

Laptop size	no data	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	None
SLI options	+	-

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	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	896 MB	6 GB
Memory bus width	448 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	999 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	111.9 GB/s	288.0 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	Dual Link DVIHDTV	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.5
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
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 260 3.16

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 22.85
+623%

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 260 1217

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 8814
+624%

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	10−12 −710%	81 +710%
1440p	4−5 −650%	30 +650%
4K	4−5 −800%	36 +800%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	56 +0%	56 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Battlefield 5	88 +0%	88 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	70 +0%	70 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	92 +0%	92 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Metro Exodus	120 +0%	120 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	92 +0%	92 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Battlefield 5	84 +0%	84 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	66 +0%	66 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	77 +0%	77 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Metro Exodus	95 +0%	95 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	74 +0%	74 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	42 +0%	42 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50 +0%	50 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	54 +0%	54 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	79 +0%	79 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	51 +0%	51 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Hitman 3	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	31 +0%	31 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

20−22

+0%

20−22

+0%

This is how GTX 260 and GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 710% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 650% faster in 1440p
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 800% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.16	22.85
Recency	16 June 2008	23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount	896 MB	6 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	60 Watt

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has a 623.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 585.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 441.7% more advanced lithography process, and 203.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 260 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is a notebook one.

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