GeForce GTX 1660 vs Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition with GeForce GTX 1660, including specs and performance data.

R9 M295X Mac Edition
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
13.27

GTX 1660 outperforms R9 M295X Mac Edition by a whopping 126% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking385191
Place by popularitynot in top-10044
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data47.06
Power efficiency3.7017.40
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameAmethystTU116
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date23 November 2014 (10 years ago)14 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$219

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 cores20481408
Core clock speed850 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1785 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate108.8157.1
Floating-point processing power3.482 TFLOPS5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs12888

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).

InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1362 MHz2001 MHz
Memory bandwidth174.3 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-7.5

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 HD35−40
−140%
84
+140%
1440p21−24
−143%
51
+143%
4K10−12
−170%
27
+170%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.61
1440pno data4.29
4Kno data8.11

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%
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 12−14
+0%
12−14
+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 6
+0%
6
+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 R9 M295X Mac Edition and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 is 140% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 is 143% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 is 170% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.27 29.95
Recency 23 November 2014 14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 120 Watt

GTX 1660 has a 125.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 108.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition is a notebook 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.

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 R9 M295X Mac Edition
Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
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.


2.8 6 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 5514 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.