RTX A4500 vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q

Place in the ranking	248	46
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	69.15	no data
Power efficiency	26.31	19.33
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	TU116	GA102
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)	23 November 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229	no data

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 cores	1536	7168
Core clock speed	1140 MHz	1050 MHz
Boost clock speed	1335 MHz	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	200 Watt
Texture fill rate	128.2	369.6
Floating-point processing power	4.101 TFLOPS	23.65 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	96
TMUs	96	224
Tensor Cores	no data	224
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	56

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 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 type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	20 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	320 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	288.0 GB/s	640.0 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 Connectors

No outputs

4x DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	8.6

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 1660 Ti Max-Q 22.93

RTX A4500 56.15
+145%

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 1660 Ti Max-Q 8814

RTX A4500 21587
+145%

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 HD	78 −144%	190−200 +144%
4K	34 −135%	80−85 +135%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.94	no data
4K	6.74	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −138%	100−105 +138%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 −139%	110−120 +139%
Elden Ring	70−75 −143%	180−190 +143%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	70−75 −139%	170−180 +139%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −138%	100−105 +138%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 −139%	110−120 +139%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 −142%	240−250 +142%
Metro Exodus	81 −135%	190−200 +135%
Red Dead Redemption 2	92 −139%	220−230 +139%
Valorant	102 −135%	240−250 +135%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85 −135%	200−210 +135%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −138%	100−105 +138%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 −139%	110−120 +139%
Dota 2	89 −136%	210−220 +136%
Elden Ring	70−75 −143%	180−190 +143%
Far Cry 5	62 −142%	150−160 +142%
Fortnite	110−120 −139%	280−290 +139%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 −142%	240−250 +142%
Grand Theft Auto V	87 −141%	210−220 +141%
Metro Exodus	57 −128%	130−140 +128%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	172 −133%	400−450 +133%
Red Dead Redemption 2	38 −137%	90−95 +137%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	70−75 −133%	170−180 +133%
Valorant	63 −138%	150−160 +138%
World of Tanks	240−250 −142%	600−650 +142%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	70−75 −139%	170−180 +139%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −138%	100−105 +138%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 −139%	110−120 +139%
Dota 2	86 −144%	210−220 +144%
Far Cry 5	117 −139%	280−290 +139%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 −142%	240−250 +142%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 −136%	350−400 +136%
Valorant	93 −137%	220−230 +137%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	35−40 −143%	90−95 +143%
Elden Ring	35−40 −144%	95−100 +144%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −137%	90−95 +137%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −130%	400−450 +130%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −138%	50−55 +138%
World of Tanks	150−160 −129%	350−400 +129%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −139%	110−120 +139%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −131%	150−160 +131%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −133%	140−150 +133%
Metro Exodus	50−55 −131%	120−130 +131%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 −142%	80−85 +142%
Valorant	60−65 −130%	140−150 +130%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	20−22 −125%	45−50 +125%
Dota 2	35−40 −144%	95−100 +144%
Elden Ring	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −144%	95−100 +144%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −135%	40−45 +135%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 −132%	160−170 +132%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −144%	95−100 +144%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −139%	55−60 +139%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 −125%	45−50 +125%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −129%	16−18 +129%
Dota 2	35−40 −144%	95−100 +144%
Far Cry 5	30−33 −133%	70−75 +133%
Fortnite	27−30 −132%	65−70 +132%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −143%	85−90 +143%
Valorant	27−30 −141%	70−75 +141%

This is how GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q and RTX A4500 compete in popular games:

RTX A4500 is 144% faster in 1080p
RTX A4500 is 135% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	22.93	56.15
Recency	23 April 2019	23 November 2021
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	20 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	200 Watt

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has 233.3% lower power consumption.

RTX A4500, on the other hand, has a 144.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 233.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 50% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A4500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is a notebook card while RTX A4500 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.