GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile vs Quadro P4200

Place in the ranking	211	192
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	100.00
Power efficiency	17.47	25.20
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GP104	TU116
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	21 February 2018 (6 years ago)	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$229

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	2304	1536
Core clock speed	1227 MHz	1455 MHz
Boost clock speed	1647 MHz	1590 MHz
Number of transistors	7,200 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	237.2	152.6
Floating-point processing power	7.589 TFLOPS	4.884 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	48
TMUs	144	96

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	medium sized
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.3 GB/s	288.0 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

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	6.1	7.5

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	75−80 −16%	87 +16%
1440p	50−55 −16%	58 +16%
4K	27−30 −25.9%	34 +25.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.63
1440p	no data	3.95
4K	no data	6.74

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

40−45

−110%

86
+110%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 −45.5%	80 +45.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	40−45 −53.5%	66 +53.5%
Battlefield 5	80−85 −57.3%	129 +57.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 −60.8%	82 +60.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −65.9%	68 +65.9%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −69%	98 +69%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 −54.5%	102 +54.5%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 −108%	304 +108%
Hitman 3	50−55 −51%	77 +51%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 −80.2%	209 +80.2%
Metro Exodus	85−90 −46.5%	126 +46.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 −52.3%	99 +52.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	85−90 −82.4%	155 +82.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	100−110 −118%	225 +118%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 −127%	125 +127%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	40−45 −14%	49 +14%
Battlefield 5	80−85 −32.9%	109 +32.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 −43.1%	73 +43.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −31.7%	54 +31.7%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −32.8%	77 +32.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 −6.1%	70 +6.1%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 −75.3%	256 +75.3%
Hitman 3	50−55 −45.1%	74 +45.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 −78.4%	207 +78.4%
Metro Exodus	85−90 −20.9%	104 +20.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 −27.7%	83 +27.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	85−90 −38.8%	118 +38.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −3.7%	55−60 +3.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	100−110 −108%	214 +108%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +3.8%	53 −3.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	40−45 +2.4%	42 −2.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 −3.9%	53 +3.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −26.8%	52 +26.8%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +1.8%	57 −1.8%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +47.5%	99 −47.5%
Hitman 3	50−55 −23.5%	63 +23.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 +28.9%	90 −28.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	85−90 −18.8%	101 +18.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −1.9%	55 +1.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	100−110 +212%	33 −212%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

65−70

−23.1%

80
+23.1%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −37.5%	66 +37.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 −21.1%	46 +21.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 −38.5%	36 +38.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 −28%	32 +28%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 −31%	38 +31%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −56.3%	25 +56.3%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −24.1%	36 +24.1%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 −26.4%	182 +26.4%
Hitman 3	30−33 −36.7%	41 +36.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −25%	65 +25%
Metro Exodus	45−50 −25%	60 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60 −5.5%	55−60 +5.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 −6.5%	30−35 +6.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	140−150 −43%	203 +43%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

40−45

−33.3%

56
+33.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −24%	31 +24%
Far Cry New Dawn	20−22 −25%	25 +25%
Hitman 3	20−22 −25%	25 +25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +69.7%	76 −69.7%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −41.4%	41 +41.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −29.6%	35 +29.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −46.7%	22 +46.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +7.7%	13 −7.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 −35.7%	19 +35.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −66.7%	10 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −28.6%	18 +28.6%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −5.9%	35−40 +5.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 −6.5%	30−35 +6.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−12 −18.2%	13 +18.2%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

21−24

−22.7%

27
+22.7%

This is how Quadro P4200 and GTX 1660 Ti Mobile compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 16% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 16% faster in 1440p
GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 26% 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 Quadro P4200 is 212% faster.
in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is 127% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro P4200 is ahead in 8 tests (11%)
GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is ahead in 64 tests (89%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	25.14	29.00
Recency	21 February 2018	23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	80 Watt

Quadro P4200 has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile, on the other hand, has a 15.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 33.3% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P4200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P4200 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.