GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q vs 810M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
800M 810A 810M 820A 820M 830M 840A 840M 845M 920M 920MX 940MX
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 1050 Mobile GTX 1060 Mobile GTX 1650 Mobile GTX 1650 Max-Q GTX 1650 Mobile Refresh GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 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 GeForce 810M and GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce 810M
2014
1 GB DDR3, 15 Watt
1.07

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q outperforms 810M by a whopping 2036% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
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 ranking1086243
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data68.60
Power efficiency4.9726.55
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGF117TU116
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date24 March 2014 (10 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$229

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 cores481536
Core clock speed738 MHz1140 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHz1335 MHz
Number of transistors585 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate5.904128.2
Floating-point processing power0.1417 TFLOPS4.101 TFLOPS
ROPs848
TMUs896

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 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB6 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s288.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.17.5

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.

GeForce 810M 1.07
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 22.85
+2036%

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.

GeForce 810M 411
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 8814
+2045%

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 HD3−4
−2467%
77
+2467%
4K1−2
−3300%
34
+3300%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.97
4Kno data6.74

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 56
+0%
56
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Battlefield 5 88
+0%
88
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70
+0%
70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 92
+0%
92
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Hitman 3 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Metro Exodus 120
+0%
120
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 92
+0%
92
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Battlefield 5 84
+0%
84
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 66
+0%
66
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 77
+0%
77
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Hitman 3 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Metro Exodus 95
+0%
95
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 74
+0%
74
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 42
+0%
42
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50
+0%
50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 54
+0%
54
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Hitman 3 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 79
+0%
79
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+0%
51
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 72
+0%
72
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

This is how GeForce 810M and GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 2467% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 3300% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 1.07 22.85
Recency 24 March 2014 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 60 Watt

GeForce 810M has 300% lower power consumption.

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 2035.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 810M in performance tests.

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.

NVIDIA GeForce 810M
GeForce 810M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
Like
Like

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
R5 M230 Radeon R5 M230
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
vs
RX 5600M Radeon RX 5600M
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
HD 8550G Radeon HD 8550G
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
RTX 6000 Quadro RTX 6000
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
R3 Mobile Graphics Radeon R3 Mobile Graphics
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
R8 M535DX Radeon R8 M535DX
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
GeForce G102M GeForce G102M
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
7025 + nForce 630a GeForce 7025 + nForce 630a
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
Pro 5300M Radeon Pro 5300M
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
GTX 1650 GDDR6 GeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
GTX 750 GM206 GeForce GTX 750 GM206
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
Graphics 320SP Radeon Graphics 320SP
GeForce 810M GeForce 810M
vs
RTX 3080 Ti GeForce RTX 3080 Ti

Community ratings

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

3.3 504 votes

Rate GeForce 810M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 536 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 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.