GeForce 8600 GS vs GTX 1660 Ti Mobile

Place in the ranking	197	1369
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	100.00	no data
Power efficiency	24.87	0.35
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	TU116	G84
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)	17 April 2007 (17 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	16
Core clock speed	1455 MHz	540 MHz
Boost clock speed	1590 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	6,600 million	289 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	47 Watt
Texture fill rate	152.6	4.320
Floating-point processing power	4.884 TFLOPS	0.03808 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	8
TMUs	96	8

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 1.0 x16
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	288.0 GB/s	12.8 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no 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 Connectors

No outputs

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.5	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	7.5	1.1

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	89	0−1
1440p	57	-0−1
4K	36	-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.57	no data
1440p	4.02	no data
4K	6.36	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	63	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	86	0−1
Elden Ring	95−100	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	89	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	54	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	63	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	147 +14600%	1−2 −14600%
Metro Exodus	88	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	99	0−1
Valorant	148 +14700%	1−2 −14700%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	112	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	49	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	50	0−1
Dota 2	111	0−1
Elden Ring	102	0−1
Far Cry 5	75	0−1
Fortnite	130−140 +13800%	1−2 −13800%
Forza Horizon 4	118	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	105	0−1
Metro Exodus	63	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	232 +23100%	1−2 −23100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	41	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	95−100	0−1
Valorant	71	0−1
World of Tanks	270−280 +13450%	2−3 −13450%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	78	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	55−60	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	45	0−1
Dota 2	116	0−1
Far Cry 5	119	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	101	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +17100%	1−2 −17100%
Valorant	125 +12400%	1−2 −12400%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	50−55	0−1
Elden Ring	54	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	50−55	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +17400%	1−2 −17400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	26	0−1
World of Tanks	180−190 +18700%	1−2 −18700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	55	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	24−27	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	25	0−1
Far Cry 5	85−90	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	75−80	0−1
Metro Exodus	60	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45	0−1
Valorant	81	0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30	0−1
Dota 2	50−55	0−1
Elden Ring	26	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	50−55	0−1
Metro Exodus	19	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	90	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	17	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	27−30	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	10	0−1
Dota 2	85	0−1
Far Cry 5	35−40	0−1
Fortnite	37	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	45−50	0−1
Valorant	39	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	28.90	0.24
Recency	23 April 2019	17 April 2007
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	12 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	47 Watt

GTX 1660 Ti Mobile has a 11941.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

8600 GS, on the other hand, has 70.2% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8600 GS in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile is a notebook card while GeForce 8600 GS is a desktop one.

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