GeForce GTX 1660 vs GTX 680M SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680M SLI with GeForce GTX 1660, including specs and performance data.

GTX 680M SLI
2012
2x 4 GB GDDR5
16.61

GTX 1660 outperforms GTX 680M SLI by an impressive 82% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking329186
Place by popularitynot in top-10039
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data48.20
Power efficiencyno data17.30
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameN13E-GTXTU116
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date4 June 2012 (12 years ago)14 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$219

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 cores26881408
Core clock speed720 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1785 MHz
Number of transistorsno data6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data120 Watt
Texture fill rateno data157.1
Floating-point processing powerno data5.027 TFLOPS
ROPsno data48
TMUsno data88

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2x 4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width2x 256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed3600 MHz2001 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.1 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 data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX1112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-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 680M SLI 16.61
GTX 1660 30.28
+82.3%

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 680M SLI 10952
GTX 1660 21064
+92.3%

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 680M SLI 32635
GTX 1660 71229
+118%

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:

900p133
−80.5%
240−250
+80.5%
Full HD95
+14.5%
83
−14.5%
1440p24−27
−104%
49
+104%
4K14−16
−85.7%
26
+85.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.64
1440pno data4.47
4Kno data8.42

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−173%
71
+173%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
−75.7%
65−70
+75.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
−119%
59
+119%
Battlefield 5 50−55
−83.3%
95−100
+83.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
−121%
73
+121%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−123%
58
+123%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−74.4%
65−70
+74.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
−71.1%
75−80
+71.1%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
−57.1%
160−170
+57.1%
Hitman 3 30−35
−116%
69
+116%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
−273%
306
+273%
Metro Exodus 55−60
−157%
144
+157%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
−149%
112
+149%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
−94.4%
100−110
+94.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
−177%
227
+177%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
−232%
123
+232%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
−55.6%
42
+55.6%
Battlefield 5 50−55
−83.3%
95−100
+83.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
−103%
67
+103%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−80.8%
47
+80.8%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−74.4%
65−70
+74.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
−71.1%
75−80
+71.1%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
−57.1%
160−170
+57.1%
Hitman 3 30−35
−109%
67
+109%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
−250%
287
+250%
Metro Exodus 55−60
−102%
113
+102%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
−75.6%
79
+75.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
−104%
110
+104%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−68.4%
60−65
+68.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
−161%
214
+161%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
−75.7%
65−70
+75.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
−37%
37
+37%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
−48.5%
49
+48.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−53.8%
40
+53.8%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−74.4%
65−70
+74.4%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+7.1%
98
−7.1%
Hitman 3 30−35
−84.4%
59
+84.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
−13.4%
93
+13.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
−75.9%
95
+75.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−50%
57
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+183%
29
−183%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
−80%
81
+80%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
−78.1%
55−60
+78.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−84%
45−50
+84%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
−88.2%
30−35
+88.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−92.9%
27
+92.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−88.9%
34
+88.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−167%
24
+167%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−84.2%
35−40
+84.2%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
−97.7%
170−180
+97.7%
Hitman 3 20−22
−95%
39
+95%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−103%
67
+103%
Metro Exodus 30−33
−96.7%
59
+96.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−116%
67
+116%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−105
−87%
187
+87%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
−96.3%
53
+96.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−87.5%
30−33
+87.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−100%
24−27
+100%
Hitman 3 12−14
−75%
21
+75%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+33.3%
63
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−159%
44
+159%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−119%
35
+119%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−90%
18−20
+90%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
−87.5%
15
+87.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−113%
17
+113%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−233%
10
+233%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−88.9%
16−18
+88.9%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−127%
50
+127%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−112%
36
+112%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
−71.4%
12
+71.4%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−73.3%
26
+73.3%

This is how GTX 680M SLI and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 is 80% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680M SLI is 14% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 is 104% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 is 86% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 680M SLI is 183% faster.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1660 is 273% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 680M SLI is ahead in 3 tests (4%)
  • GTX 1660 is ahead in 69 tests (96%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.61 30.28
Recency 4 June 2012 14 March 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm

GTX 1660 has a 82.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 680M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 680M SLI is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1660 is a desktop 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 680M SLI
GeForce GTX 680M SLI
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
GeForce GTX 1660

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.


4.7 3 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 5330 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 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.