GeForce GTX 1660 Super vs GTX 980 Ti

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980 Ti and GeForce GTX 1660 Super, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 980 Ti
2015
6 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
35.78
+8.3%

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GTX 1660 Super by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking133159
Place by popularitynot in top-1008
Cost-effectiveness evaluation14.2759.28
Power efficiency9.9118.30
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGM200TU116
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date2 June 2015 (9 years ago)29 October 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 $229

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 Super has 315% better value for money than GTX 980 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 cores28161408
Core clock speed1000 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speed1075 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors8,000 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt125 Watt
Texture fill rate189.4157.1
Floating-point processing power6.06 TFLOPS5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs9648
TMUs17688

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm229 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)600 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x 8-pin
SLI options+-

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 GB6 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth336.5 GB/s336.0 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.21x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI++
HDCP++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support++
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-
NVENCno data+
Anselno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
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 980 Ti 35.78
+8.3%
GTX 1660 Super 33.04

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 980 Ti 13808
+8.3%
GTX 1660 Super 12751

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 980 Ti 23057
+4.9%
GTX 1660 Super 21981

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 980 Ti 48631
GTX 1660 Super 76654
+57.6%

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 980 Ti 16961
+6%
GTX 1660 Super 15995

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 980 Ti 98958
+3.7%
GTX 1660 Super 95473

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 980 Ti 42847
GTX 1660 Super 62665
+46.3%

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 980 Ti 443119
GTX 1660 Super 477037
+7.7%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

GTX 980 Ti 52856
GTX 1660 Super 60402
+14.3%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

GTX 980 Ti 35714
GTX 1660 Super 65044
+82.1%

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

GTX 980 Ti 90
+9.2%
GTX 1660 Super 83

SPECviewperf 12 - Maya

This part of SPECviewperf 12 workstation benchmark uses Autodesk Maya 13 engine to render a superhero energy plant static scene consisting of more than 700 thousand polygons, in six different modes.

GTX 980 Ti 139
+8.5%
GTX 1660 Super 128

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 HD99
+6.5%
93
−6.5%
1440p49
−14.3%
56
+14.3%
4K53
+76.7%
30
−76.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.562.46
1440p13.244.09
4K12.257.63

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
−22.6%
76
+22.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 75−80
−15.8%
88
+15.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
−6.5%
66
+6.5%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+8.4%
100−110
−8.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
−9.6%
80
+9.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
−1.6%
63
+1.6%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+6.8%
70−75
−6.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 90−95
−34.4%
121
+34.4%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+4%
170−180
−4%
Hitman 3 75−80
−1.3%
77
+1.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
−111%
321
+111%
Metro Exodus 110−120
−23.1%
144
+23.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+7.5%
80
−7.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 120−130
+10.3%
110−120
−10.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
−76.4%
217
+76.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 75−80
−77.6%
135
+77.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+29.2%
48
−29.2%
Battlefield 5 47
−128%
100−110
+128%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
+1.4%
72
−1.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+19.2%
52
−19.2%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+6.8%
70−75
−6.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 36
−139%
86
+139%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+4%
170−180
−4%
Hitman 3 75−80
+1.3%
75
−1.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
−90.8%
290
+90.8%
Metro Exodus 49
−141%
118
+141%
Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
−3.5%
89
+3.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 120−130
+0%
129
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 155
+125%
65−70
−125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
−69.1%
208
+69.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 46
−10.9%
51
+10.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+40.9%
44
−40.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
+32.7%
55
−32.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+26.5%
49
−26.5%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+6.8%
70−75
−6.8%
Forza Horizon 4 72
−48.6%
107
+48.6%
Hitman 3 75−80
+16.9%
65
−16.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
+53.5%
99
−53.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 120−130
+15.2%
112
−15.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 59
−3.4%
61
+3.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+297%
31
−297%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+50.9%
57
−50.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+7.9%
60−65
−7.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
−3.6%
57
+3.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
−5.3%
40
+5.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+14.7%
34
−14.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+10.5%
38
−10.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+3.8%
26
−3.8%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+7.9%
35−40
−7.9%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+7.4%
190−200
−7.4%
Hitman 3 45−50
+4.7%
43
−4.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+8.5%
71
−8.5%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+0%
67
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+6.3%
80
−6.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 180−190
−7.7%
196
+7.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+8.9%
56
−8.9%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30
−10%
30−35
+10%
Far Cry New Dawn 29
−6.9%
31
+6.9%
Hitman 3 27−30
+16%
25
−16%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+159%
66
−159%
Metro Exodus 35
−25.7%
44
+25.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44
+10%
40
−10%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18
−33.3%
24
+33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+22.2%
18
−22.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+15.8%
19
−15.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+10.5%
18−20
−10.5%
Forza Horizon 4 42
−28.6%
54
+28.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+9.1%
44
−9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+50%
12
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+10.7%
28
−10.7%

This is how GTX 980 Ti and GTX 1660 Super compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980 Ti is 6% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Super is 14% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 980 Ti is 77% 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 980 Ti is 297% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 Super is 141% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 980 Ti is ahead in 41 test (57%)
  • GTX 1660 Super is ahead in 28 tests (39%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 35.78 33.04
Recency 2 June 2015 29 October 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 125 Watt

GTX 980 Ti has a 8.3% higher aggregate performance score.

GTX 1660 Super, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 980 Ti and GeForce GTX 1660 Super.


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 980 Ti
GeForce GTX 980 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super
GeForce GTX 1660 Super

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.


4.3 1497 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 19556 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 Super 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.