GeForce GTX 1660 vs ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 2600 XT and GeForce GTX 1660, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI HD 2600 XT
2007
256 MB GDDR3, 45 Watt
0.73

GTX 1660 outperforms ATI HD 2600 XT by a whopping 4056% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1167190
Place by popularitynot in top-10040
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0247.49
Power efficiency1.1217.40
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameRV630TU116
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date28 June 2007 (17 years ago)14 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $219

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 has 237350% better value for money than ATI HD 2600 XT.

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 cores1201408
Core clock speed800 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1785 MHz
Number of transistors390 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate6.400157.1
Floating-point processing power0.192 TFLOPS5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs448
TMUs888

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
Lengthno data229 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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount256 MB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz2001 MHz
Memory bandwidth22.4 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 compatibility

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

DirectX10.0 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
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. 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.

ATI HD 2600 XT 0.73
GTX 1660 30.34
+4056%

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.

ATI HD 2600 XT 282
GTX 1660 11660
+4035%

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 HD2−3
−4100%
84
+4100%
1440p1−2
−5000%
51
+5000%
4K0−127

Cost per frame, $

1080p99.50
−3716%
2.61
+3716%
1440p199.00
−4534%
4.29
+4534%
4Kno data8.11
  • GTX 1660 has 3716% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 has 4534% lower cost per frame in 1440p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 72
+0%
72
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 71
+0%
71
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 56
+0%
56
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55
+0%
55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 132
+0%
132
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 86
+0%
86
+0%
Metro Exodus 95
+0%
95
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 112
+0%
112
+0%
Valorant 138
+0%
138
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 48
+0%
48
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45
+0%
45
+0%
Dota 2 150
+0%
150
+0%
Far Cry 5 145
+0%
145
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110
+0%
110
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 63
+0%
63
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 115
+0%
115
+0%
Metro Exodus 66
+0%
66
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 216
+0%
216
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Valorant 65
+0%
65
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 43
+0%
43
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
+0%
38
+0%
Dota 2 197
+0%
197
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95
+0%
95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 115
+0%
115
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 52
+0%
52
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 52
+0%
52
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 129
+0%
129
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 25
+0%
25
+0%
World of Tanks 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 26
+0%
26
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+0%
23
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 67
+0%
67
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40
+0%
40
+0%
Metro Exodus 59
+0%
59
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 72
+0%
72
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Dota 2 49
+0%
49
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 49
+0%
49
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 81
+0%
81
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 49
+0%
49
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Dota 2 87
+0%
87
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 36
+0%
36
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
Valorant 38
+0%
38
+0%

This is how ATI HD 2600 XT and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 is 4100% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 is 5000% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.73 30.34
Recency 28 June 2007 14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 120 Watt

ATI HD 2600 XT has 166.7% lower power consumption.

GTX 1660, on the other hand, has a 4056.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 441.7% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 2600 XT in performance tests.


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

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.


ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT
Radeon HD 2600 XT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
GeForce GTX 1660

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

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


3.4 93 votes

Rate Radeon HD 2600 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 5508 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.