GeForce GTX 1660 vs GTX 260M SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260M SLI with GeForce GTX 1660, including specs and performance data.

GTX 260M SLI
2009
2 GB GDDR3, 150 Watt
3.29

GTX 1660 outperforms GTX 260M SLI by a whopping 820% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking737182
Place by popularitynot in top-10052
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data48.82
Power efficiency1.5217.44
ArchitectureG9x (2007−2010)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameNB9E-GTXTU116
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date2 March 2009 (15 years ago)14 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$219

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 cores2241408
Core clock speed550 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1785 MHz
Number of transistors1508 Million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rateno data157.1
Floating-point processing powerno data5.027 TFLOPS
ROPsno data48
TMUsno data88

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed950 MHz2001 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.1 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 data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX1012 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA+7.5

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 260M SLI 3.29
GTX 1660 30.27
+820%

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 260M SLI 8959
GTX 1660 71229
+695%

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 HD9−10
−822%
83
+822%
1440p5−6
−920%
51
+920%
4K3−4
−833%
28
+833%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.64
1440pno data4.29
4Kno data7.82

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−1083%
71
+1083%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−5800%
59
+5800%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−1550%
95−100
+1550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−943%
73
+943%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−867%
58
+867%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1033%
65−70
+1033%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−756%
75−80
+756%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−871%
160−170
+871%
Hitman 3 8−9
−763%
69
+763%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−1230%
306
+1230%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−3500%
144
+3500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−1300%
112
+1300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−708%
100−110
+708%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−468%
227
+468%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−1130%
123
+1130%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−4100%
42
+4100%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−1550%
95−100
+1550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−857%
67
+857%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−683%
47
+683%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1033%
65−70
+1033%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−756%
75−80
+756%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−871%
160−170
+871%
Hitman 3 8−9
−738%
67
+738%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−1148%
287
+1148%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−2725%
113
+2725%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−888%
79
+888%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−746%
110
+746%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−357%
60−65
+357%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−435%
214
+435%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−3600%
37
+3600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−600%
49
+600%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−567%
40
+567%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1033%
65−70
+1033%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−476%
98
+476%
Hitman 3 8−9
−638%
59
+638%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−304%
93
+304%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−631%
95
+631%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−307%
57
+307%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+37.9%
29
−37.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−913%
81
+913%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−1040%
55−60
+1040%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−820%
45−50
+820%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1600%
34
+1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1100%
24
+1100%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Hitman 3 8−9
−388%
39
+388%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−738%
67
+738%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1900%
40−45
+1900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
−884%
187
+884%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−657%
53
+657%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−850%
18−20
+850%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1400%
15
+1400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−1600%
17
+1600%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1600%
16−18
+1600%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−4900%
50
+4900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−1100%
12
+1100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−550%
26
+550%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27
+0%
27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 59
+0%
59
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 67
+0%
67
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 21
+0%
21
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 63
+0%
63
+0%
Metro Exodus 44
+0%
44
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
+0%
35
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 36
+0%
36
+0%

This is how GTX 260M SLI and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 is 822% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 is 920% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 is 833% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 260M SLI is 38% faster.
  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1660 is 5800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 260M SLI is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • GTX 1660 is ahead in 61 test (85%)
  • there's a draw in 10 tests (14%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.29 30.27
Recency 2 March 2009 14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 120 Watt

GTX 1660 has a 820.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 358.3% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 260M SLI is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1660 is a desktop 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 260M SLI
GeForce GTX 260M SLI
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
GeForce GTX 1660

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.


2.7 7 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 5168 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 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.