GeForce GTX 660M vs Radeon HD 6990M

Place in the ranking	619	710
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.62	5.23
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Blackcomb	GK107
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	12 July 2011 (13 years ago)	22 March 2012 (12 years ago)

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	1120	384
Core clock speed	715 MHz	835 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	950 MHz
Number of transistors	1,700 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	40.04	30.40
Floating-point processing power	1.602 TFLOPS	0.7296 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	56	32

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	large
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
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	2 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	115.2 GB/s	64.0 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	No outputs
HDMI	-	+
HDCP	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	Up to 2048x1536

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	11.2 (11_0)	12 API
Shader Model	5.0	5.1
OpenGL	4.4	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.126
CUDA	-	+

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.

HD 6990M 5.25
+38.5%

GTX 660M 3.79

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.

HD 6990M 3227
+36.2%

GTX 660M 2369

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.

HD 6990M 15113
+37.8%

GTX 660M 10971

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:

900p	54 +68.8%	32 −68.8%
Full HD	59 +68.6%	35 −68.6%
1200p	50−55 +31.6%	38 −31.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +18.2%	10−12 −18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Elden Ring	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +18.2%	10−12 −18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +29.4%	16−18 −29.4%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +23.1%	12−14 −23.1%
Valorant	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +18.2%	10−12 −18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Dota 2	16−18 +54.5%	10−12 −54.5%
Elden Ring	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +25%	20−22 −25%
Fortnite	30−35 +40.9%	21−24 −40.9%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +29.4%	16−18 −29.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +54.5%	10−12 −54.5%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +33.3%	30−35 −33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +23.1%	12−14 −23.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +30.8%	12−14 −30.8%
Valorant	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
World of Tanks	85−90 −4.7%	89 +4.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +18.2%	10−12 −18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Dota 2	16−18 +54.5%	10−12 −54.5%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +25%	20−22 −25%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +29.4%	16−18 −29.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +33.3%	30−35 −33.3%
Valorant	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Elden Ring	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Grand Theft Auto V	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +25.9%	27−30 −25.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
World of Tanks	35−40 +40.7%	27−30 −40.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +22.2%	9−10 −22.2%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Metro Exodus	5−6	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Valorant	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Elden Ring	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 +36.4%	10−12 −36.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Dota 2	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Fortnite	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Valorant	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%

This is how HD 6990M and GTX 660M compete in popular games:

HD 6990M is 69% faster in 900p
HD 6990M is 69% faster in 1080p
HD 6990M is 32% faster in 1200p

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 6990M is 300% faster.
in World of Tanks, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 660M is 5% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 6990M is ahead in 55 tests (93%)
GTX 660M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 3 tests (5%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.25	3.79
Recency	12 July 2011	22 March 2012
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	50 Watt