GeForce GTX 1660 vs Radeon Pro WX 4150

Place in the ranking	564	194
Place by popularity	not in top-100	44
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	46.68
Power efficiency	9.64	17.44
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Baffin	TU116
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	1 March 2017 (7 years ago)	14 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$219

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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	896	1408
Core clock speed	1002 MHz	1530 MHz
Boost clock speed	1053 MHz	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	120 Watt
Texture fill rate	58.97	157.1
Floating-point processing power	1.887 TFLOPS	5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	48
TMUs	56	88

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	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	2001 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96 GB/s	192.1 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
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.

Pro WX 4150 6.83

GTX 1660 29.65
+334%

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 WX 4150 2687

GTX 1660 11660
+334%

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	18−20 −367%	84 +367%
1440p	10−12 −410%	51 +410%
4K	6−7 −350%	27 +350%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.61
1440p	no data	4.29
4K	no data	8.11

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −350%	72 +350%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −407%	71 +407%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −305%	85−90 +305%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −250%	56 +250%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −293%	55 +293%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −371%	132 +371%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 −438%	86 +438%
Metro Exodus	18−20 −428%	95 +428%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 −460%	112 +460%
Valorant	24−27 −475%	138 +475%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −305%	85−90 +305%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −200%	48 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −221%	45 +221%
Dota 2	24−27 −525%	150 +525%
Far Cry 5	30−35 −368%	145 +368%
Fortnite	40−45 −251%	140−150 +251%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −293%	110 +293%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 −294%	63 +294%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 −379%	115 +379%
Metro Exodus	18−20 −267%	66 +267%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 −279%	216 +279%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 −100%	40 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −364%	100−110 +364%
Valorant	24−27 −171%	65 +171%
World of Tanks	100−110 −154%	270−280 +154%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −305%	85−90 +305%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −169%	43 +169%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −171%	38 +171%
Dota 2	24−27 −721%	197 +721%
Far Cry 5	30−35 −174%	85−90 +174%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −239%	95 +239%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 −269%	59 +269%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 −211%	170−180 +211%
Valorant	24−27 −379%	115 +379%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −125%	27−30 +125%
Dota 2	8−9 −550%	52 +550%
Grand Theft Auto V	8−9 −550%	52 +550%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −239%	129 +239%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −317%	25 +317%
World of Tanks	50−55 −292%	190−200 +292%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −400%	60−65 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −283%	23 +283%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −527%	90−95 +527%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −379%	67 +379%
Forza Horizon 5	10−11 −300%	40 +300%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −490%	59 +490%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −380%	45−50 +380%
Valorant	18−20 −300%	72 +300%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2 −1200%	12−14 +1200%
Dota 2	18−20 −172%	49 +172%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 −172%	49 +172%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −900%	20 +900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	20−22 −305%	81 +305%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −375%	18−20 +375%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −172%	49 +172%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −450%	30−35 +450%
Counter-Strike 2	1−2 −500%	6 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −400%	10 +400%
Dota 2	18−20 −383%	87 +383%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −425%	40−45 +425%
Fortnite	7−8 −471%	40−45 +471%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −350%	36 +350%
Forza Horizon 5	4−5 −450%	22 +450%
Valorant	7−8 −443%	38 +443%

This is how Pro WX 4150 and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 is 367% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 is 410% faster in 1440p
GTX 1660 is 350% faster in 4K

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 is 1200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GTX 1660 surpassed Pro WX 4150 in all 64 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.83	29.65
Recency	1 March 2017	14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	120 Watt

Pro WX 4150 has 140% lower power consumption.

GTX 1660, on the other hand, has a 334.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX 4150 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 4150 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 1660 is a desktop one.

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