GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q vs GTX 1080 Max-Q

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q and GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1080 Max-Q
2017
8 GB GDDR5X, 150 Watt
26.46
+15.8%

GTX 1080 Max-Q outperforms GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking205243
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data68.65
Power efficiency12.3026.56
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP104TU116
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date27 June 2017 (7 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 cores25601536
Core clock speed1290 MHz1140 MHz
Boost clock speed1468 MHz1335 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate234.9128.2
Floating-point processing power7.516 TFLOPS4.101 TFLOPS
ROPs6448
TMUs16096

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5XGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1251 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth320.3 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Ready+no data

API 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
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA6.17.5

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.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 26.46
+15.8%
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 22.85

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.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 10207
+15.8%
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 8814

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 23540
+35%
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 17439

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 39562
+24.2%
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 31845

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 18192
+36.2%
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 13355

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 114542
+81.6%
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 63086

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 387951
+26.4%
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 306910

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

GTX 1080 Max-Q 5869
+15.4%
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 5085

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 HD99
+28.6%
77
−28.6%
1440p61
+22%
50−55
−22%
4K49
+44.1%
34
−44.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.97
1440pno data4.58
4Kno data6.74

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+16.2%
35−40
−16.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 78
+39.3%
56
−39.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+15.4%
35−40
−15.4%
Battlefield 5 116
+31.8%
88
−31.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−29.6%
70
+29.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+16.2%
35−40
−16.2%
Far Cry 5 95
+3.3%
92
−3.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 118
+96.7%
60−65
−96.7%
Forza Horizon 4 260
+89.8%
130−140
−89.8%
Hitman 3 50−55
+20%
45−50
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+12.1%
100−110
−12.1%
Metro Exodus 133
+10.8%
120
−10.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−35.3%
92
+35.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 173
+125%
75−80
−125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+8.2%
95−100
−8.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 122
+144%
50−55
−144%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+15.4%
35−40
−15.4%
Battlefield 5 104
+23.8%
84
−23.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−22.2%
66
+22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+16.2%
35−40
−16.2%
Far Cry 5 77
+0%
77
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 89
+48.3%
60−65
−48.3%
Forza Horizon 4 240
+75.2%
130−140
−75.2%
Hitman 3 50−55
+20%
45−50
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 203
+89.7%
100−110
−89.7%
Metro Exodus 110
+15.8%
95
−15.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−8.8%
74
+8.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 132
+71.4%
75−80
−71.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+14%
50−55
−14%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+8.2%
95−100
−8.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 54
+28.6%
42
−28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+15.4%
35−40
−15.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+8%
50
−8%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+16.2%
35−40
−16.2%
Far Cry 5 62
+14.8%
54
−14.8%
Forza Horizon 4 106
−29.2%
130−140
+29.2%
Hitman 3 50−55
+20%
45−50
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 107
+35.4%
79
−35.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 112
+45.5%
75−80
−45.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 64
+25.5%
51
−25.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 48
−104%
95−100
+104%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−5.9%
72
+5.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 72
+67.4%
40−45
−67.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 58
+65.7%
35−40
−65.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 43
+79.2%
24−27
−79.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+18.2%
21−24
−18.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
+15.4%
24−27
−15.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Far Cry 5 42
+61.5%
24−27
−61.5%
Forza Horizon 4 238
+83.1%
130−140
−83.1%
Hitman 3 30−35
+18.5%
27−30
−18.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 76
+61.7%
45−50
−61.7%
Metro Exodus 67
+55.8%
40−45
−55.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 81
+65.3%
45−50
−65.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+22.2%
27−30
−22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+12.2%
130−140
−12.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+15.8%
35−40
−15.8%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35
+59.1%
21−24
−59.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 32
+77.8%
18−20
−77.8%
Hitman 3 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 93
−26.9%
110−120
+26.9%
Metro Exodus 37
+48%
24−27
−48%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45
+45.2%
31
−45.2%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 26
+85.7%
14−16
−85.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Far Cry 5 20
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Forza Horizon 4 55
+77.4%
30−35
−77.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 46
+70.4%
27−30
−70.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+15%
20−22
−15%

This is how GTX 1080 Max-Q and GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1080 Max-Q is 29% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1080 Max-Q is 22% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1080 Max-Q is 44% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1080 Max-Q is 144% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 104% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1080 Max-Q is ahead in 63 tests (88%)
  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is ahead in 8 tests (11%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.46 22.85
Recency 27 June 2017 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 60 Watt

GTX 1080 Max-Q has a 15.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 33.3% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 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 GTX 1080 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.2 35 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q 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.