GeForce GTX 1660 vs Radeon R9 255 OEM
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 227 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 50 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 36.86 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 17.66 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | Cape Verde | TU116 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 21 December 2013 (11 years ago) | 14 March 2019 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $219 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 512 | 1408 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 1530 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 930 MHz | 1785 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,500 million | 6,600 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 29.76 | 157.1 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.9523 TFLOPS | 5.027 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 48 |
| TMUs | 32 | 88 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 1.4 MB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 1536 KB |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 229 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 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 | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1150 MHz | 2001 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 73.6 GB/s | 192.1 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 7.5 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 21 December 2013 | 14 March 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 120 Watt |
R9 255 OEM has 84.6% lower power consumption.
GTX 1660, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 255 OEM and GeForce GTX 1660. We've got no test results to judge.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
