GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q vs Radeon Vega Frontier Edition

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon Instinct MI25 Radeon Pro V320 Radeon Pro V320 MxGPU Radeon Pro V340 Radeon Pro V340 8 GB Radeon Pro V340 16 GB Radeon Pro V340 MxGPU Radeon Pro WX 8100 Radeon Pro WX 8200 Radeon PRO WX 9100 Radeon Vega Frontier Edition Radeon Vega Frontier Edition Watercooled
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 1660 Max-Q GTX 1660 Mobile GTX 1660 Ti Mobile GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GTX 1660 Ti Mobile Refresh

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Vega Frontier Edition with GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

Vega Frontier Edition
2017
16 GB HBM2, 300 Watt
30.88
+47.7%

Vega Frontier Edition outperforms GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q by a considerable 48% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Vega Frontier Edition Vega Frontier Edition
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking174264
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation19.1369.12
Power efficiency7.6425.87
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameVega 10TU116
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date27 June 2017 (7 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 $229

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has 261% better value for money than Vega Frontier Edition.

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 cores40961536
Core clock speed1382 MHz1140 MHz
Boost clock speed1600 MHz1335 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)300 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate409.6128.2
Floating-point processing power13.11 TFLOPS4.101 TFLOPS
ROPs6448
TMUs25696

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone

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 typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB6 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed945 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth483.8 GB/s288.0 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.1.1251.2.131
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.

Vega Frontier Edition 30.88
+47.7%
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 20.91

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.

Vega Frontier Edition 13013
+47.6%
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 8814

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 HD110−120
+39.2%
79
−39.2%
4K45−50
+36.4%
33
−36.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.08
−213%
2.90
+213%
4K22.20
−220%
6.94
+220%
  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has 213% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has 220% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 83
+0%
83
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Fortnite 92
+0%
92
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 78
+0%
78
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 94
+0%
94
+0%
Far Cry 5 66
+0%
66
+0%
Fortnite 90
+0%
90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 87
+0%
87
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 48
+0%
48
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 92
+0%
92
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 73
+0%
73
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 86
+0%
86
+0%
Far Cry 5 62
+0%
62
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+0%
51
+0%
Valorant 93
+0%
93
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 79
+0%
79
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how Vega Frontier Edition and GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • Vega Frontier Edition is 39% faster in 1080p
  • Vega Frontier Edition is 36% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 30.88 20.91
Recency 27 June 2017 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 300 Watt 60 Watt

Vega Frontier Edition has a 47.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is a notebook one.

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 Vega Frontier Edition
Radeon Vega Frontier Edition
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Vega Frontier Edition Radeon Vega Frontier Edition
vs
Pro VII Radeon Pro VII
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
vs
RX 5600M Radeon RX 5600M
Vega Frontier Edition Radeon Vega Frontier Edition
vs
Pro WX 8200 Radeon Pro WX 8200
NVS 280 PCI NVIDIA Quadro NVS 280 PCI
vs
RTX A4000 RTX A4000
FX 3000 NVIDIA Quadro FX 3000
vs
RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation
FX 2000 NVIDIA Quadro FX 2000
vs
RTX 3000 Mobile RTX 3000 Mobile
Quadro K100M NVIDIA Quadro K100M
vs
RTX 4060 Ti Mobile RTX 4060 Ti Mobile
GeForce MX150 NVIDIA GeForce MX150
vs
HD 6750M HD 6750M
P3000 Mobile NVIDIA Quadro P3000 Mobile
vs
RX 7800 XT RX 7800 XT
PRO WX 9100 AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100
vs
GTX 1060 6 GB 9Gbps GTX 1060 6 GB 9Gbps
PRO WX 9100 AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100
vs
GTX 1060 6 GB GDDR5X GTX 1060 6 GB GDDR5X
RX 6550M AMD RX 6550M
vs
RX Vega 64 RX Vega 64
P3000 Max-Q NVIDIA Quadro P3000 Max-Q
vs
RTX 4050 RTX 4050

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.4 29 votes

Rate Radeon Vega Frontier Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 570 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Vega Frontier Edition or GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.