GeForce GTX 1660 vs Quadro CX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
CX FX 3800 FX 4800 FX 4800 Mac Edition FX 5800 Plex 2200 D2 Plex 2200 S4 Tesla C1060 Tesla C1080 Tesla M1060 Tesla S1070 Tesla T10 Processor
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
1630 1650 1650 GDDR6 1650 SUPER 1650 TU106 1650 TU116 1660 1660 Super 1660 Ti

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro CX with GeForce GTX 1660, including specs and performance data.

Quadro CX
2008, $1,999
1536 MB GDDR3, 150 Watt
2.24

GTX 1660 outperforms CX by a whopping 1126% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Quadro CX Quadro CX
GTX 1660 GTX 1660

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking899231
Place by popularitynot in top-10048
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0235.79
Power efficiency1.1617.81
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGT200BTU116
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date11 November 2008 (17 years ago)14 March 2019 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,999 $219

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

GTX 1660 has 178850% better value for money than Quadro CX.

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores1921408
Core clock speed602 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1785 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate38.53157.1
Floating-point processing power0.4623 TFLOPS5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs2448
TMUs6488
L1 Cacheno data1.4 MB
L2 Cache192 KB1536 KB

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm229 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB6 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2001 MHz
Memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s192.1 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.37.5

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Quadro CX 2.24
GTX 1660 27.47
+1126%

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.

Quadro CX 947
Samples: 3
GTX 1660 11637
+1129%
Samples: 8172

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 HD6−7
−1283%
83
+1283%
1440p4−5
−1150%
50
+1150%
4K2−3
−1250%
27
+1250%

Cost per frame, $

1080p333.17
−12527%
2.64
+12527%
1440p499.75
−11310%
4.38
+11310%
4K999.50
−12223%
8.11
+12223%
  • GTX 1660 has 12527% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 has 11310% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 has 12223% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 271
+0%
271
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 71
+0%
71
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 223
+0%
223
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+0%
58
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 121
+0%
121
+0%
Far Cry 5 100
+0%
100
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 132
+0%
132
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 100
+0%
100
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 306
+0%
306
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 107
+0%
107
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 47
+0%
47
+0%
Dota 2 219
+0%
219
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 93
+0%
93
+0%
Far Cry 5 92
+0%
92
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 123
+0%
123
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 88
+0%
88
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 115
+0%
115
+0%
Metro Exodus 57
+0%
57
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 102
+0%
102
+0%
Valorant 287
+0%
287
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+0%
40
+0%
Dota 2 197
+0%
197
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 79
+0%
79
+0%
Far Cry 5 86
+0%
86
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 98
+0%
98
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+0%
57
+0%
Valorant 115
+0%
115
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 62
+0%
62
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 52
+0%
52
+0%
Metro Exodus 33
+0%
33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 129
+0%
129
+0%
Valorant 226
+0%
226
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 48
+0%
48
+0%
Far Cry 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 76
+0%
76
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 49
+0%
49
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
+0%
35
+0%
Valorant 125
+0%
125
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Dota 2 87
+0%
87
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 24
+0%
24
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50
+0%
50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

This is how Quadro CX and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 is 1283% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 is 1150% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 is 1250% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 2.24 27.47
Recency 11 November 2008 14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 120 Watt

GTX 1660 has a 1126.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 358.3% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

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

Be aware that Quadro CX is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 1660 is a desktop one.

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 Quadro CX
Quadro CX
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
GeForce GTX 1660
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

Quadro CX Quadro CX
vs
FirePro W2100 FirePro W2100
GTX 1660 GeForce GTX 1660
vs
RTX 3050 OEM GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
Quadro CX Quadro CX
vs
FX 4800 Quadro FX 4800
Quadro CX Quadro CX
vs
6000 SDI 6000 SDI
Quadro CX Quadro CX
vs
5000 SDI 5000 SDI
Quadro CX Quadro CX
vs
GeForce2 MX DH Pro TV PCI DH Pro TV PCI
Quadro CX Quadro CX
vs
ATI FireGL X2-256T 256T
Quadro CX Quadro CX
vs
Quadro 4100 4100
Quadro CX Quadro CX
vs
GTX 1650 TU106 1650 TU106
Quadro CX Quadro CX
vs
GTX 1630 1630
Quadro CX Quadro CX
vs
RX 7900 XTX 7900 XTX
FX 4800 NVIDIA FX 4800
vs
ATI Mobility X600 X600
FX 4800 NVIDIA FX 4800
vs
GT 740A 740A

Community ratings

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

5 1 vote

Rate Quadro CX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 6264 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro CX or GeForce GTX 1660, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.