Radeon Pro Vega 20 vs GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition with Radeon Pro Vega 20, including specs and performance data.

GTX 660M Mac Edition
2013
512 MB GDDR5, 50 Watt
1.56

Pro Vega 20 outperforms GTX 660M Mac Edition by a whopping 780% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking961373
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.179.53
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGK107Vega 12
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date1 April 2013 (11 years ago)14 November 2018 (5 years ago)

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 cores3841280
Core clock speed950 MHz815 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1283 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate30.40102.6
Floating-point processing power0.7296 TFLOPS3.284 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs3280

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeGDDR5HBM2
Maximum RAM amount512 MB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit1024 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz740 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s189.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA3.0-

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 HD7−8
−786%
62
+786%
4K4−5
−925%
41
+925%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 51
+0%
51
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hitman 3 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 76
+0%
76
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 46
+0%
46
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hitman 3 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hitman 3 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

This is how GTX 660M Mac Edition and Pro Vega 20 compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 20 is 786% faster in 1080p
  • Pro Vega 20 is 925% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.56 13.73
Recency 1 April 2013 14 November 2018
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 100 Watt

GTX 660M Mac Edition has 100% lower power consumption.

Pro Vega 20, on the other hand, has a 780.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro Vega 20 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro Vega 20 is a mobile workstation 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 660M Mac Edition
GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20
Radeon Pro Vega 20

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.


3 22 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 85 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 20 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.