GeForce GTX 1660 vs Quadro K2100M

Place in the ranking	723	183
Place by popularity	not in top-100	52
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.63	48.68
Power efficiency	4.46	17.58
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GK106	TU116
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	23 July 2013 (11 years ago)	14 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$84.95	$219

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 has 7627% better value for money than K2100M.

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 cores	576	1408
Core clock speed	667 MHz	1530 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	2,540 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	120 Watt
Texture fill rate	32.02	157.1
Floating-point processing power	0.7684 TFLOPS	5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	48
TMUs	48	88

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	752 MHz	2001 MHz
Memory bandwidth	48.0 GB/s	192.1 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
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.

K2100M 3.52

GTX 1660 30.26
+760%

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.

K2100M 1357

GTX 1660 11674
+760%

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.

K2100M 2394

GTX 1660 21064
+780%

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.

K2100M 10648

GTX 1660 71229
+569%

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.

K2100M 1606

GTX 1660 14164
+782%

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.

K2100M 11835

GTX 1660 81755
+591%

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.

K2100M 4542

GTX 1660 57905
+1175%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

K2100M 4104

GTX 1660 56067
+1266%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

K2100M 3028

GTX 1660 60172
+1887%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

K2100M 18

GTX 1660 120
+574%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

K2100M 32

GTX 1660 49
+56%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

K2100M 21
+143%

GTX 1660 9

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

K2100M 21

GTX 1660 60
+190%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

K2100M 20

GTX 1660 40
+103%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

K2100M 6

GTX 1660 27
+375%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

K2100M 11

GTX 1660 63
+496%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

K2100M 0

GTX 1660 6
+1833%

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 HD	23 −257%	82 +257%
1440p	5−6 −880%	49 +880%
4K	3−4 −800%	27 +800%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.69	2.67
1440p	16.99	4.47
4K	28.32	8.11

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7

−1083%

71
+1083%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −550%	65−70 +550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −2850%	59 +2850%
Battlefield 5	7−8 −1314%	95−100 +1314%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −813%	73 +813%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −867%	58 +867%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −871%	65−70 +871%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 −670%	75−80 +670%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −725%	160−170 +725%
Hitman 3	9−10 −667%	69 +667%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −1124%	306 +1124%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −2300%	144 +2300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −1144%	112 +1144%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 −650%	100−110 +650%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −454%	227 +454%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −1130%	123 +1130%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −2000%	42 +2000%
Battlefield 5	7−8 −1314%	95−100 +1314%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −738%	67 +738%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −683%	47 +683%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −871%	65−70 +871%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 −670%	75−80 +670%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −725%	160−170 +725%
Hitman 3	9−10 −644%	67 +644%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −1048%	287 +1048%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −1783%	113 +1783%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −778%	79 +778%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 −686%	110 +686%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	25 −156%	60−65 +156%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −422%	214 +422%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −550%	65−70 +550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −1750%	37 +1750%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −513%	49 +513%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −567%	40 +567%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −871%	65−70 +871%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −390%	98 +390%
Hitman 3	9−10 −556%	59 +556%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −272%	93 +272%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 −579%	95 +579%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −280%	57 +280%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +41.4%	29 −41.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

−800%

81
+800%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −850%	55−60 +850%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −820%	45−50 +820%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −967%	30−35 +967%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1033%	34 +1033%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1100%	24 +1100%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −775%	35−40 +775%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −17300%	170−180 +17300%
Hitman 3	8−9 −388%	39 +388%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 −644%	67 +644%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Watch Dogs: Legion	21−24 −750%	187 +750%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

−657%

53
+657%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −1400%	30−33 +1400%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −850%	18−20 +850%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1400%	15 +1400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −1600%	17 +1600%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	10
Far Cry 5	2−3 −750%	16−18 +750%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −4900%	50 +4900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −1100%	12 +1100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−550%

26
+550%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27 +0%	27 +0%
Metro Exodus	59 +0%	59 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	67 +0%	67 +0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3	21 +0%	21 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	63 +0%	63 +0%
Metro Exodus	44 +0%	44 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35 +0%	35 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

+0%

This is how K2100M and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 is 257% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 is 880% faster in 1440p
GTX 1660 is 800% 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 K2100M is 41% faster.
in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1660 is 17300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

K2100M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
GTX 1660 is ahead in 62 tests (87%)
there's a draw in 8 tests (11%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.52	30.26
Recency	23 July 2013	14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	120 Watt

K2100M has 118.2% lower power consumption.

GTX 1660, on the other hand, has a 759.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2100M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K2100M is a mobile workstation 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.