GeForce GTX 1660 vs Quadro FX 4600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro FX 4600 Quadro FX 4600 SDI Quadro FX 5600 Quadro FX 5600 Mac Edition Quadro Plex 1000 Model IV Quadro Plex 2100 S4 Tesla C870 Tesla D870 Tesla S870
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 1650 SUPER GTX 1650 TU116 GTX 1660 GTX 1660 Super GTX 1660 Ti

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 4600 with GeForce GTX 1660, including specs and performance data.

FX 4600
2007
768 MB GDDR3, 134 Watt
1.09

GTX 1660 outperforms FX 4600 by a whopping 2650% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

FX 4600 FX 4600
GTX 1660 GTX 1660

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1095196
Place by popularitynot in top-10044
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0146.71
Power efficiency0.5617.34
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameG80TU116
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date5 March 2007 (17 years ago)14 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,999 $219

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

GTX 1660 has 467000% better value for money than FX 4600.

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 cores961408
Core clock speed500 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1785 MHz
Number of transistors681 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)134 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate24.00157.1
Floating-point processing power0.2304 TFLOPS5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs2448
TMUs2488

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 1.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length229 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 amount768 MB6 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz2001 MHz
Memory bandwidth67.2 GB/s192.1 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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
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.

FX 4600 1.09
GTX 1660 29.97
+2650%

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.

FX 4600 425
GTX 1660 11659
+2643%

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 HD3−4
−2767%
86
+2767%
1440p1−2
−5100%
52
+5100%
4K1−2
−2800%
29
+2800%

Cost per frame, $

1080p666.33
−26067%
2.55
+26067%
1440p1999.00
−47365%
4.21
+47365%
4K1999.00
−26371%
7.55
+26371%
  • GTX 1660 has 26067% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 has 47365% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 has 26371% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 111
+0%
111
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 72
+0%
72
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 71
+0%
71
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 83
+0%
83
+0%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 56
+0%
56
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+0%
58
+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 86
+0%
86
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 306
+0%
306
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 49
+0%
49
+0%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 48
+0%
48
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 47
+0%
47
+0%
Dota 2 219
+0%
219
+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 63
+0%
63
+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 Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 43
+0%
43
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+0%
40
+0%
Dota 2 197
+0%
197
+0%
Far Cry 5 86
+0%
86
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 98
+0%
98
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 59
+0%
59
+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 Preset

Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+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 Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Far Cry 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 76
+0%
76
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40
+0%
40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+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 Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Dota 2 87
+0%
87
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50
+0%
50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

This is how FX 4600 and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 is 2767% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 is 5100% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 is 2800% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 1.09 29.97
Recency 5 March 2007 14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount 768 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 134 Watt 120 Watt

GTX 1660 has a 2649.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 650% more advanced lithography process, and 11.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4600 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 4600 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 FX 4600
Quadro FX 4600
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.

FX 4600 Quadro FX 4600
vs
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
GTX 1660 GeForce GTX 1660
vs
RTX 3050 OEM GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
FX 4600 Quadro FX 4600
vs
FX 1800 Quadro FX 1800
NVS 290 Quadro NVS 290
vs
ATI HD 2400 XT Radeon HD 2400 XT
NVS 290 Quadro NVS 290
vs
Arc 5 A550M Arc 5 A550M
FX 1700 Quadro FX 1700
vs
R7 Graphics Radeon R7 Graphics
FX 1700 Quadro FX 1700
vs
FX 5200 LE GeForce FX 5200 LE
FX 370 Quadro FX 370
vs
Radeon 610M Radeon 610M
FX 4500 Quadro FX 4500
vs
RTX A4000 RTX A4000
FX 1300 Quadro FX 1300
vs
Radeon 620 Radeon 620
Quadro K200M Quadro K200M
vs
RTX 6000 Quadro RTX 6000
K2200M Quadro K2200M
vs
R9 M360 Radeon R9 M360
GeForce MX150 GeForce MX150
vs
FirePro W5100 FirePro W5100

Community ratings

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

3.8 13 votes

Rate Quadro FX 4600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 5612 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 4600 or GeForce GTX 1660, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.