1660 vs 860M

#ad
Buy
SLI
VS

Combined performance score

GTX 860M
7.83

1660 outperforms 860M by 285% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking483170
Place by popularitynot in top-10048
Value for money1.0225.04
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code nameN15P-GXTuring TU116
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date12 March 2014 (10 years old)14 March 2019 (5 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$219
Current price$875 $252 (1.2x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 has 2355% better value for money than GTX 860M.

Technical specs

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 cores6401408
CUDA cores1152 or 640no data
Core clock speed797 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speed915 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate43.40157.1
Floating-point performance1,389 gflopsno data

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 860M and GeForce GTX 1660 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin
SLI options+no data

Memory

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 amount4 GB6 GB
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2500 MHz8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.0 GB/s192.1 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI++
HDCP content protection+no data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+no data
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+no data

Technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+no data
Optimus+no data
Ansel+no data

API support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA+7.5

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 860M 7.83
GTX 1660 30.17
+285%

1660 outperforms 860M by 285% in our combined 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 860M 3033
GTX 1660 11692
+285%

1660 outperforms 860M by 285% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 860M 19216
GTX 1660 71229
+271%

1660 outperforms 860M by 271% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 860M 4902
GTX 1660 21131
+331%

1660 outperforms 860M by 331% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 860M 3904
GTX 1660 14055
+260%

1660 outperforms 860M by 260% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 860M 27961
GTX 1660 80889
+189%

1660 outperforms 860M by 189% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GTX 860M 10076
GTX 1660 57413
+470%

1660 outperforms 860M by 470% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

GTX 860M 215144
GTX 1660 524782
+144%

1660 outperforms 860M by 144% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GTX 860M 10627
GTX 1660 55668
+424%

1660 outperforms 860M by 424% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 860M 11144
GTX 1660 60172
+440%

1660 outperforms 860M by 440% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GTX 860M 23
GTX 1660 120
+417%

1660 outperforms 860M by 417% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GTX 860M 12
GTX 1660 49
+321%

1660 outperforms 860M by 321% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GTX 860M 2
GTX 1660 9
+378%

1660 outperforms 860M by 378% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GTX 860M 15
GTX 1660 60
+291%

1660 outperforms 860M by 291% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GTX 860M 23
GTX 1660 40
+74.1%

1660 outperforms 860M by 74% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GTX 860M 7
GTX 1660 27
+317%

1660 outperforms 860M by 317% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GTX 860M 17
GTX 1660 63
+267%

1660 outperforms 860M by 267% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GTX 860M 9
+50%
GTX 1660 6

860M outperforms 1660 by 50% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01.

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:

900p91
−285%
350−400
+285%
Full HD37
−132%
86
+132%
1440p12−14
−300%
48
+300%
4K13
−115%
28
+115%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−492%
71
+492%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
−256%
55−60
+256%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−436%
59
+436%
Battlefield 5 24−27
−262%
90−95
+262%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
−409%
112
+409%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−383%
58
+383%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−426%
100
+426%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
−375%
95
+375%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−389%
132
+389%
Hitman 3 18−20
−479%
110
+479%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−413%
82
+413%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−421%
73
+421%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−447%
93
+447%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
−500%
78
+500%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
−256%
55−60
+256%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−282%
42
+282%
Battlefield 5 24−27
−262%
90−95
+262%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
−286%
85
+286%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−292%
47
+292%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−384%
92
+384%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
−345%
89
+345%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−356%
123
+356%
Hitman 3 18−20
−374%
90
+374%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−281%
61
+281%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−418%
57
+418%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−186%
40
+186%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−359%
78
+359%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
−410%
102
+410%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
−408%
66
+408%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
−256%
55−60
+256%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−236%
37
+236%
Battlefield 5 24−27
−262%
90−95
+262%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−233%
40
+233%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−353%
86
+353%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
−310%
82
+310%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−263%
98
+263%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
−375%
57
+375%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
−123%
29
+123%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−375%
57
+375%
Hitman 3 12−14
−375%
57
+375%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−186%
40
+186%
Metro Exodus 6−7
−450%
33
+450%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−400%
25
+400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−336%
48
+336%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−371%
30−35
+371%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−800%
27
+800%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−560%
65−70
+560%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−500%
24
+500%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−392%
59
+392%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
−436%
59
+436%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−485%
76
+485%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−457%
35−40
+457%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−533%
19
+533%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−540%
32
+540%
Hitman 3 7−8
−343%
31
+343%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−37.5%
11
+37.5%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−900%
20
+900%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−300%
16−18
+300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
−700%
24
+700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−600%
35
+600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−400%
15
+400%
Battlefield 5 5−6
−620%
35−40
+620%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−900%
10
+900%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−329%
30
+329%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−244%
31
+244%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−456%
50
+456%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−500%
12
+500%

This is how GTX 860M and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

900p resolution:

  • GTX 1660 is 285% faster than GTX 860M

1080p resolution:

  • GTX 1660 is 132% faster than GTX 860M

1440p resolution:

  • GTX 1660 is 300% faster than GTX 860M

4K resolution:

  • GTX 1660 is 115% faster than GTX 860M

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 is 900% faster than the GTX 860M.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 1660 surpassed GTX 860M in all 68 of our tests.

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 7.83 30.17
Recency 12 March 2014 14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 120 Watt

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 860M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 860M 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.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M
GeForce GTX 860M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
GeForce GTX 1660

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 400 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 4594 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.