Radeon 660M vs Pro Vega II

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega II with Radeon 660M, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega II
2019
32 GB HBM2, 475 Watt
40.58
+489%

Pro Vega II outperforms 660M by a whopping 489% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking100563
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation17.23no data
Power efficiency5.8911.87
ArchitectureGCN 5.1 (2018−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameVega 20Rembrandt+
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date3 June 2019 (5 years ago)3 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,199 no data

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 cores4096384
Core clock speed1574 MHz1500 MHz
Boost clock speed1720 MHz1900 MHz
Number of transistors13,230 million13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)475 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate440.345.60
Floating-point processing power14.09 TFLOPS1.459 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs25624
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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).

InterfaceApple MPXPCIe 4.0 x8
WidthQuad-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeHBM2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount32 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width4096 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed806 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth825.3 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x ThunderboltPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.76.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.12.0
Vulkan1.31.3

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.

Pro Vega II 40.58
+489%
Radeon 660M 6.89

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.

Pro Vega II 15596
+489%
Radeon 660M 2647

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 HD140−150
+483%
24
−483%

Cost per frame, $

1080p15.71no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 42
+0%
42
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Metro Exodus 32
+0%
32
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 36
+0%
36
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+0%
7
+0%
Dota 2 35
+0%
35
+0%
Far Cry 5 29
+0%
29
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 25
+0%
25
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 19
+0%
19
+0%
World of Tanks 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 48
+0%
48
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 28
+0%
28
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
World of Tanks 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how Pro Vega II and Radeon 660M compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega II is 483% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 40.58 6.89
Recency 3 June 2019 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 7 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 475 Watt 40 Watt

Pro Vega II has a 489% higher aggregate performance score.

Radeon 660M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 1087.5% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro Vega II is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 660M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega II is a workstation card while Radeon 660M is a notebook one.


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.


AMD Radeon Pro Vega II
Radeon Pro Vega II
AMD Radeon 660M
Radeon 660M

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.


2.4 81 vote

Rate Radeon Pro Vega II on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 339 votes

Rate Radeon 660M 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.