Radeon RX 6600M vs GeForce GTX 1660

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1660 with Radeon RX 6600M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1660
2019
6 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
30.28

RX 6600M outperforms GTX 1660 by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking186136
Place by popularity39not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation48.17no data
Power efficiency17.3024.58
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTU116Navi 23
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date14 March 2019 (5 years ago)31 May 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$219 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 cores14081792
Core clock speed1530 MHz2068 MHz
Boost clock speed1785 MHz2416 MHz
Number of transistors6,600 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate157.1270.6
Floating-point processing power5.027 TFLOPS8.659 TFLOPS
ROPs4864
TMUs88112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount6 GB8 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2001 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.1 GB/s224.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.5-

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 1660 30.28
RX 6600M 35.86
+18.4%

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 11669
RX 6600M 13819
+18.4%

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
RX 6600M 31868
+51.3%

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
RX 6600M 72686
+2%

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
RX 6600M 23525
+66.1%

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 1660 81755
RX 6600M 144612
+76.9%

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 1660 570753
+19.1%
RX 6600M 479404

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

GTX 1660 120
RX 6600M 159
+32.5%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

GTX 1660 49
RX 6600M 180
+265%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

GTX 1660 9
RX 6600M 164
+1807%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

GTX 1660 60
RX 6600M 207
+248%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

GTX 1660 40
RX 6600M 102
+152%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

GTX 1660 27
RX 6600M 96
+255%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

GTX 1660 63
RX 6600M 120
+89.9%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

GTX 1660 6
RX 6600M 30
+409%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 3dsmax-05

GTX 1660 134
RX 6600M 172
+28.4%

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 HD83
−19.3%
99
+19.3%
1440p49
−8.2%
53
+8.2%
4K26
−19.2%
31
+19.2%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.64no data
1440p4.47no data
4K8.42no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 71
−54.9%
110
+54.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
−66.2%
108
+66.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 59
−61%
95
+61%
Battlefield 5 95−100
−16.2%
110−120
+16.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 73
+1.4%
70−75
−1.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
−55.2%
90
+55.2%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−14.7%
75−80
+14.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 75−80
−15.6%
85−90
+15.6%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
−10.3%
180−190
+10.3%
Hitman 3 69
−8.7%
75−80
+8.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 306
+103%
150−160
−103%
Metro Exodus 144
+24.1%
110−120
−24.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 112
+31.8%
85−90
−31.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−110
−21%
120−130
+21%
Watch Dogs: Legion 227
+84.6%
120−130
−84.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 123
−61.8%
199
+61.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 42
−88.1%
79
+88.1%
Battlefield 5 95−100
−16.2%
110−120
+16.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 67
−7.5%
70−75
+7.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 47
−53.2%
72
+53.2%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−14.7%
75−80
+14.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 75−80
−15.6%
85−90
+15.6%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
−10.3%
180−190
+10.3%
Hitman 3 67
−11.9%
75−80
+11.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 287
+90.1%
150−160
−90.1%
Metro Exodus 113
−2.7%
110−120
+2.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 79
−7.6%
85−90
+7.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110
−57.3%
173
+57.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
−15.6%
70−75
+15.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 214
+74%
120−130
−74%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
−21.5%
79
+21.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 37
−86.5%
69
+86.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 49
−46.9%
70−75
+46.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
−52.5%
61
+52.5%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−14.7%
75−80
+14.7%
Forza Horizon 4 98
−71.4%
168
+71.4%
Hitman 3 59
−27.1%
75−80
+27.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 93
−44.1%
134
+44.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 95
−61.1%
153
+61.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
−49.1%
85
+49.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 29
−103%
59
+103%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 81
−4.9%
85−90
+4.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
−19.3%
65−70
+19.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
−17.4%
50−55
+17.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−59.4%
51
+59.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27
−92.6%
52
+92.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34
−20.6%
40−45
+20.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
−50%
36
+50%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−17.1%
40−45
+17.1%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
−16.1%
200−210
+16.1%
Hitman 3 39
−15.4%
45−50
+15.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 67
−46.3%
98
+46.3%
Metro Exodus 59
−44.1%
85
+44.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 67
−49.3%
100
+49.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
−55%
62
+55%
Watch Dogs: Legion 187
+3.3%
180−190
−3.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 53
−15.1%
60−65
+15.1%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
−16.7%
35−40
+16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−20.8%
27−30
+20.8%
Hitman 3 21
−38.1%
27−30
+38.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 63
−170%
170−180
+170%
Metro Exodus 44
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
−25.7%
44
+25.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−52.6%
29
+52.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 15
−80%
27
+80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 17
−29.4%
21−24
+29.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
−40%
14
+40%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−17.6%
20−22
+17.6%
Forza Horizon 4 50
−48%
74
+48%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 36
−44.4%
52
+44.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12
−75%
21
+75%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 26
−19.2%
30−35
+19.2%

This is how GTX 1660 and RX 6600M compete in popular games:

  • RX 6600M is 19% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6600M is 8% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6600M is 19% faster in 4K

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1660 is 103% faster.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6600M is 170% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 is ahead in 8 tests (11%)
  • RX 6600M is ahead in 63 tests (88%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 30.28 35.86
Recency 14 March 2019 31 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 100 Watt

RX 6600M has a 18.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 71.4% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6600M 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 Radeon RX 6600M is a notebook one.


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 1660
GeForce GTX 1660
AMD Radeon RX 6600M
Radeon RX 6600M

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.


4.1 5335 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 1002 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6600M 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.