GeForce GTX 1660 vs Quadro P400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
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 P400 with GeForce GTX 1660, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P400
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
3.69

GTX 1660 outperforms P400 by a whopping 607% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Quadro P400 Quadro P400
GTX 1660 GTX 1660

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking691196
Place by popularitynot in top-10050
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.3242.58
Power efficiency9.7217.17
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP107TU116
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date7 February 2017 (8 years ago)14 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$119.99 $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 1735% better value for money than Quadro P400.

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 cores2561408
Core clock speed1228 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speed1252 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors3,300 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate20.03157.1
Floating-point processing power0.641 TFLOPS5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs1688

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 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length145 mm229 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB6 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1002 MHz2001 MHz
Memory bandwidth32.06 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 Connectors3x mini-DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA6.17.5

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.

Quadro P400 3.69
GTX 1660 26.09
+607%

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 P400 1648
GTX 1660 11657
+607%

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.

Quadro P400 5625
GTX 1660 57946
+930%

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.

Quadro P400 5157
GTX 1660 56067
+987%

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.

Quadro P400 5691
GTX 1660 60172
+957%

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 HD10−12
−730%
83
+730%
1440p7−8
−614%
50
+614%
4K3−4
−800%
27
+800%

Cost per frame, $

1080p12.00
−355%
2.64
+355%
1440p17.14
−291%
4.38
+291%
4K40.00
−393%
8.11
+393%
  • GTX 1660 has 355% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 has 291% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 has 393% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 111
+0%
111
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 271
+0%
271
+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 2 223
+0%
223
+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 5 100
+0%
100
+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 2 107
+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%
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 Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+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%
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 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 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%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+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 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 Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+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%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

This is how Quadro P400 and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 is 730% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 is 614% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 is 800% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.69 26.09
Recency 7 February 2017 14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 120 Watt

Quadro P400 has 300% lower power consumption.

GTX 1660, on the other hand, has a 607% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P400 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 P400
Quadro P400
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 P400 Quadro P400
vs
FirePro W600 FirePro W600
GTX 1660 GeForce GTX 1660
vs
RTX 3050 OEM GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
vs
GRID M40 GRID M40
GTX 1060 6 GB GDDR5X GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB GDDR5X
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
RX 580 2048SP Radeon RX 580 2048SP
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
GeForce MX230 GeForce MX230
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
GTX 1650 GeForce GTX 1650
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
GTX 1650 Max-Q GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
RX 560 XT Radeon RX 560 XT
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
Pro WX 3200 Radeon Pro WX 3200
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
RX 640 Radeon RX 640
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
RTX 3000 Mobile Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
T2000 Mobile Quadro T2000 Mobile
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400

Community ratings

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

4.1 495 votes

Rate Quadro P400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 5683 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 P400 or GeForce GTX 1660, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.