GeForce GTX 1660 vs Quadro M5500

Place in the ranking	274	191
Place by popularity	not in top-100	44
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	47.06
Power efficiency	9.45	17.40
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GM204	TU116
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	8 April 2016 (8 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 cores	2048	1408
Core clock speed	1140 MHz	1530 MHz
Boost clock speed	1165 MHz	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	120 Watt
Texture fill rate	149.1	157.1
Floating-point processing power	4.772 TFLOPS	5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	48
TMUs	128	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	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	1753 MHz	2001 MHz
Memory bandwidth	211 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
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
VR Ready	+	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	6.4	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.

Quadro M5500 20.33

GTX 1660 29.95
+47.3%

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 M5500 7915

GTX 1660 11659
+47.3%

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	55−60 −52.7%	84 +52.7%
1440p	30−35 −70%	51 +70%
4K	18−20 −50%	27 +50%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.61
1440p	no data	4.29
4K	no data	8.11

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −94.6%	72 +94.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −73.2%	71 +73.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −36.9%	85−90 +36.9%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −51.4%	56 +51.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −34.1%	55 +34.1%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −51.7%	132 +51.7%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 −56.4%	86 +56.4%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −72.7%	95 +72.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −138%	112 +138%
Valorant	80−85 −66.3%	138 +66.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −36.9%	85−90 +36.9%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −29.7%	48 +29.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −9.8%	45 +9.8%
Dota 2	70−75 −105%	150 +105%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −113%	145 +113%
Fortnite	100−110 −33.3%	140−150 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −26.4%	110 +26.4%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 −14.5%	63 +14.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	70−75 −59.7%	115 +59.7%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −20%	66 +20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −57.7%	216 +57.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 +17.5%	40 −17.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 −56.9%	100−110 +56.9%
Valorant	80−85 +27.7%	65 −27.7%
World of Tanks	230−240 −16.6%	270−280 +16.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −36.9%	85−90 +36.9%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −16.2%	43 +16.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +7.9%	38 −7.9%
Dota 2	70−75 −170%	197 +170%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −25%	85−90 +25%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −9.2%	95 +9.2%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 −7.3%	59 +7.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −29.2%	170−180 +29.2%
Valorant	80−85 −38.6%	115 +38.6%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	30−35 −57.6%	52 +57.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −57.6%	52 +57.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +33.3%	129 −33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −31.6%	25 +31.6%
World of Tanks	130−140 −41%	190−200 +41%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −42.9%	60−65 +42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −35.3%	23 +35.3%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −67.9%	90−95 +67.9%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −26.4%	67 +26.4%
Forza Horizon 5	30−35 −21.2%	40 +21.2%
Metro Exodus	45−50 −25.5%	59 +25.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −65.5%	45−50 +65.5%
Valorant	50−55 −35.8%	72 +35.8%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −44.4%	12−14 +44.4%
Dota 2	35−40 −40%	49 +40%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −40%	49 +40%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −33.3%	20 +33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 −30.6%	81 +30.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −46.2%	18−20 +46.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −40%	49 +40%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −57.1%	30−35 +57.1%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +50%	6 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −66.7%	10 +66.7%
Dota 2	35−40 −149%	87 +149%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −55.6%	40−45 +55.6%
Fortnite	24−27 −60%	40−45 +60%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −16.1%	36 +16.1%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 −29.4%	22 +29.4%
Valorant	24−27 −52%	38 +52%

This is how Quadro M5500 and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 is 53% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 is 70% faster in 1440p
GTX 1660 is 50% faster in 4K

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro M5500 is 50% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1660 is 170% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro M5500 is ahead in 5 tests (8%)
GTX 1660 is ahead in 58 tests (92%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	20.33	29.95
Recency	8 April 2016	14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	120 Watt

Quadro M5500 has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1660, on the other hand, has a 47.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M5500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M5500 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.