RTX 6000 Ada Generation vs GeForce GTX 1660

Place in the ranking	188	16
Place by popularity	40	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	46.96	7.19
Power efficiency	17.40	16.75
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	TU116	AD102
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	14 March 2019 (5 years ago)	3 December 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$219	$6,799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 has 553% better value for money than RTX 6000 Ada Generation.

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	1408	18176
Core clock speed	1530 MHz	915 MHz
Boost clock speed	1785 MHz	2505 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	76,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	300 Watt
Texture fill rate	157.1	1,423
Floating-point processing power	5.027 TFLOPS	91.06 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	192
TMUs	88	568
Tensor Cores	no data	568
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	142

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	229 mm	267 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	1x 16-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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	48 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	2001 MHz	2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.1 GB/s	960.0 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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	4x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	+	-

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	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	8.9

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 30.33

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 73.00
+141%

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 11662

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 28066
+141%

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 1660 21064

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 70850
+236%

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 1660 71229

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 126448
+77.5%

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 1660 14164

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 36679
+159%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 1660 57923

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 323913
+459%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

GTX 1660 56067

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 248571
+343%

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	84 −125%	189 +125%
1440p	51 −210%	158 +210%
4K	27 −337%	118 +337%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.61 +1280%	35.97 −1280%
1440p	4.29 +902%	43.03 −902%
4K	8.11 +610%	57.62 −610%

GTX 1660 has 1280% lower cost per frame in 1080p
GTX 1660 has 902% lower cost per frame in 1440p
GTX 1660 has 610% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	72 −128%	164 +128%
Cyberpunk 2077	71 −139%	170−180 +139%
Elden Ring	84 −238%	280−290 +238%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −31.5%	110−120 +31.5%
Counter-Strike 2	56 −191%	163 +191%
Cyberpunk 2077	55 −136%	130−140 +136%
Forza Horizon 4	132 −213%	400−450 +213%
Metro Exodus	95 −18.9%	113 +18.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	112 −19.6%	130−140 +19.6%
Valorant	138 −177%	350−400 +177%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −31.5%	110−120 +31.5%
Counter-Strike 2	48 −223%	155 +223%
Cyberpunk 2077	45 −122%	100−105 +122%
Dota 2	150 −12.7%	160−170 +12.7%
Elden Ring	90 −216%	280−290 +216%
Far Cry 5	145 +17.9%	123 −17.9%
Fortnite	140−150 −101%	290−300 +101%
Forza Horizon 4	110 −275%	400−450 +275%
Grand Theft Auto V	115 −47%	160−170 +47%
Metro Exodus	66 −60.6%	106 +60.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	216 +0.5%	210−220 −0.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40 −235%	130−140 +235%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 −70.6%	170−180 +70.6%
Valorant	65 −488%	350−400 +488%
World of Tanks	270−280 −1.8%	270−280 +1.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −31.5%	110−120 +31.5%
Counter-Strike 2	43 −242%	147 +242%
Cyberpunk 2077	38 −137%	90−95 +137%
Dota 2	197 −128%	450−500 +128%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −61.2%	130−140 +61.2%
Forza Horizon 4	95 −335%	400−450 +335%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −21.5%	210−220 +21.5%
Valorant	115 −232%	350−400 +232%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	52 −171%	140−150 +171%
Elden Ring	47 −319%	190−200 +319%
Grand Theft Auto V	52 −171%	140−150 +171%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	129 −35.7%	170−180 +35.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	25 −272%	90−95 +272%
World of Tanks	190−200 −163%	500−550 +163%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 −45%	85−90 +45%
Counter-Strike 2	26 −404%	131 +404%
Cyberpunk 2077	23 −139%	55−60 +139%
Far Cry 5	90−95 −70.2%	160−170 +70.2%
Forza Horizon 4	67 −307%	270−280 +307%
Metro Exodus	59 −67.8%	99 +67.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 −356%	219 +356%
Valorant	72 −356%	300−350 +356%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16 −150%	40 +150%
Dota 2	49 −235%	160−170 +235%
Elden Ring	21 −405%	100−110 +405%
Grand Theft Auto V	49 −235%	160−170 +235%
Metro Exodus	20 −350%	90 +350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	81 −158%	200−210 +158%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −237%	60−65 +237%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	49 −235%	160−170 +235%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −176%	90−95 +176%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −217%	90−95 +217%
Cyberpunk 2077	10 −140%	24−27 +140%
Dota 2	87 −130%	200−210 +130%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −150%	100−110 +150%
Fortnite	40−45 −140%	95−100 +140%
Forza Horizon 4	36 −314%	140−150 +314%
Valorant	38 −400%	190−200 +400%

This is how GTX 1660 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 125% faster in 1080p
RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 210% faster in 1440p
RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 337% faster in 4K

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

in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 is 18% faster.
in Valorant, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 488% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1660 is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
RTX 6000 Ada Generation is ahead in 53 tests (96%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	30.33	73.00
Recency	14 March 2019	3 December 2022
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	48 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	300 Watt

GTX 1660 has 150% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 140.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 140% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 6000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1660 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1660 is a desktop card while RTX 6000 Ada Generation is a workstation one.

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