AMD Radeon R9 Nano vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
Comparison of Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660 architecture, market type and release date.
Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660's general performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core clock, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660's performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider its benchmark and gaming test results.
Core clock speed
Manufacturing process technology
Power consumption (TDP)
Texture fill rate
256.0 GTexel / s
157.1 GTexel / s
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Information on Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
PCIe 3.0 x16
PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors
Parameters of memory installed on Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Note that GPUs integrated into processors don't have dedicated memory and use a shared part of system RAM.
High Bandwidth Memory (HBM)
High bandwidth memory (HBM)
Maximum RAM amount
Memory bus width
Memory clock speed
512 GB / s
192.1 GB / s
Video outputs and ports
Types and number of video connectors present on Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660.
1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Number of Eyefinity displays
Technological solutions and APIs supported by Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660. You'll probably need this information if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
APIs supported by Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660, sometimes including their particular versions.
DirectX 12_1, Shader 6.4
Non-gaming benchmarks performance of Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range.
Overall benchmark performance
R9 Nano 55.39 +5.4%
GTX 1660 52.56
3DMark Ice Storm GPU
R9 Nano 402499
GTX 1660 478810 +19%
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
R9 Nano 81374 +2.4%
GTX 1660 79435
3DMark Fire Strike Score
R9 Nano 12081
GTX 1660 12629 +4.5%
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
R9 Nano 14362 +3.7%
GTX 1660 13847
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
R9 Nano 17282
GTX 1660 20696 +19.8%
3DMark Vantage Performance
R9 Nano 43546
GTX 1660 57895 +33%
Cryptocurrency mining performance of Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660. Usually measured in megahashes per second.
Ethereum / ETH (DaggerHashimoto)
Zcash / ZEC (Equihash)
Let's see how good Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660 are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Advantages of AMD Radeon R9 Nano
5.4% faster in synthetic tests
Wider memory bus (4096 vs 192 bit)
More pipelines (4096 vs 1408)
Higher memory bandwidth (512 vs 192.1 GB/s)
Mantle (an API developed by AMD for 3D graphics acceleration. Discontinued and later superceded by Vulkan)
Eyefinity (allows using several displays with an AMD GPU)
AMD PowerTune technology
AMD ZeroCore Power technology
AMD App Acceleration
Vulkan (a contemporary API for graphics acceleration, based on now-discontinued Mantle)
Advantages of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
Much newer (14 March 2019 vs 10 September 2015)
Cheaper ($219 vs $649)
Finer manufacturing process technology (12 vs 28 nm)
Less power hungry (120 vs 175 watts)
So, R9 Nano or GTX 1660?
Technical City couldn't decide between AMD Radeon R9 Nano and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660. The differences in performance seem too small.
Should you still have questions on choice between Radeon R9 Nano and GeForce GTX 1660, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.