GeForce GTX 1660 vs GTX 560 Ti

Place in the ranking	519	186
Place by popularity	not in top-100	38
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.83	48.18
Power efficiency	3.20	17.30
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GF114	TU116
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	25 January 2011 (13 years ago)	14 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$249	$219

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 has 2533% better value for money than GTX 560 Ti.

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	384	1408
Core clock speed	823 MHz	1530 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	1,950 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	170 Watt	120 Watt
Texture fill rate	52.67	157.1
Floating-point processing power	1.263 TFLOPS	5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	48
TMUs	64	88

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 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	229 mm	229 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	1002 MHz	2001 MHz
Memory bandwidth	128.3 GB/s	192.1 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 Connectors	2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	+	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	2.1	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 560 Ti 7.94

GTX 1660 30.29
+281%

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 560 Ti 3058

GTX 1660 11668
+282%

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 560 Ti 4013

GTX 1660 21064
+425%

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 560 Ti 15494

GTX 1660 71229
+360%

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 560 Ti 3470

GTX 1660 14164
+308%

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 560 Ti 10727

GTX 1660 57967
+440%

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:

900p	63 −281%	240−250 +281%
Full HD	66 −25.8%	83 +25.8%
1440p	12−14 −308%	49 +308%
4K	6−7 −333%	26 +333%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.77	2.64
1440p	20.75	4.47
4K	41.50	8.42

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14

−492%

71
+492%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −225%	65−70 +225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12 −436%	59 +436%
Battlefield 5	24−27 −313%	95−100 +313%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 −356%	73 +356%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −383%	58 +383%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −278%	65−70 +278%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −250%	75−80 +250%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −217%	160−170 +217%
Hitman 3	14−16 −360%	69 +360%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −580%	306 +580%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −526%	144 +526%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −409%	112 +409%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 −304%	100−110 +304%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −305%	227 +305%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −515%	123 +515%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12 −282%	42 +282%
Battlefield 5	24−27 −313%	95−100 +313%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 −319%	67 +319%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −292%	47 +292%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −278%	65−70 +278%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −250%	75−80 +250%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −217%	160−170 +217%
Hitman 3	14−16 −347%	67 +347%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −538%	287 +538%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −391%	113 +391%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −259%	79 +259%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 −323%	110 +323%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −178%	60−65 +178%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −282%	214 +282%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −225%	65−70 +225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12 −236%	37 +236%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 −206%	49 +206%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −233%	40 +233%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −278%	65−70 +278%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −88.5%	98 +88.5%
Hitman 3	14−16 −293%	59 +293%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −107%	93 +107%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 −265%	95 +265%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −148%	57 +148%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +93.1%	29 −93.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

21−24

−268%

81
+268%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −280%	55−60 +280%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −283%	45−50 +283%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −300%	30−35 +300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −800%	27 +800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −325%	34 +325%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −500%	24 +500%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 −480%	170−180 +480%
Hitman 3	10−12 −255%	39 +255%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −294%	67 +294%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −490%	59 +490%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −857%	67 +857%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −471%	40−45 +471%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 −274%	187 +274%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

−308%

53
+308%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −329%	30−33 +329%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −380%	24−27 +380%
Hitman 3	4−5 −425%	21 +425%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −125%	63 +125%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −780%	44 +780%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −600%	35 +600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −280%	18−20 +280%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −400%	15 +400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −467%	17 +467%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −900%	10 +900%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −325%	16−18 +325%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −456%	50 +456%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4 −1100%	36 +1100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 −300%	12 +300%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9

−225%

26
+225%

This is how GTX 560 Ti and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 is 281% faster in 900p
GTX 1660 is 26% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 is 308% faster in 1440p
GTX 1660 is 333% 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 560 Ti is 93% faster.
in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1660 is 1100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 560 Ti is ahead in 1 test (1%)
GTX 1660 is ahead in 71 test (99%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.94	30.29
Recency	25 January 2011	14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	170 Watt	120 Watt

GTX 1660 has a 281.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 41.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 560 Ti in performance tests.

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