GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q vs Radeon R9 M375

Place in the ranking	831	246
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	69.00
Power efficiency	no data	26.17
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Tropo	TU116
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	5 May 2015 (9 years ago)	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$229

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 cores	640	1536
Compute units	10	no data
Core clock speed	1000 MHz	1140 MHz
Boost clock speed	1015 MHz	1335 MHz
Number of transistors	1,500 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	40.60	128.2
Floating-point processing power	1.299 TFLOPS	4.101 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	48
TMUs	40	96

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 size	medium sized	medium sized
Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	DDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	1100 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.8 GB/s	288.0 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	No outputs	No outputs
Eyefinity	+	-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration	+	-
FreeSync	+	-
HD3D	+	-
PowerTune	+	-
DualGraphics	+	-
ZeroCore	+	-
Switchable graphics	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.4	4.6
OpenCL	Not Listed	1.2
Vulkan	-	1.2.131
Mantle	+	-
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.

R9 M375 2.52

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 22.88
+808%

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.

R9 M375 969

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 8814
+810%

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.

R9 M375 3314

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 17439
+426%

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.

R9 M375 8275

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 31845
+285%

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.

R9 M375 1667

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 13355
+701%

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.

R9 M375 8466

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 63086
+645%

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	23 −239%	78 +239%
4K	3−4 −933%	31 +933%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.94
4K	no data	7.39

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

−640%

35−40
+640%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −600%	56 +600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	35−40
Battlefield 5	3−4 −2833%	88 +2833%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −1067%	70 +1067%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −640%	35−40 +640%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −2200%	92 +2200%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −757%	60−65 +757%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −1042%	130−140 +1042%
Hitman 3	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 −435%	100−110 +435%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −5900%	120 +5900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −1433%	92 +1433%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	20 −285%	75−80 +285%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −165%	95−100 +165%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −525%	50−55 +525%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	35−40
Battlefield 5	3−4 −2700%	84 +2700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −1000%	66 +1000%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −640%	35−40 +640%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1825%	77 +1825%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −757%	60−65 +757%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −1042%	130−140 +1042%
Hitman 3	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 −435%	100−110 +435%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −4650%	95 +4650%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −1133%	74 +1133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −600%	75−80 +600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	25 −100%	50−55 +100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −165%	95−100 +165%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −425%	42 +425%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	35−40
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −733%	50 +733%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −640%	35−40 +640%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1250%	54 +1250%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −1042%	130−140 +1042%
Hitman 3	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 −295%	79 +295%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −600%	75−80 +600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −292%	51 +292%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −165%	95−100 +165%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−1100%

72
+1100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −975%	40−45 +975%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −775%	35−40 +775%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −2500%	24−27 +2500%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −767%	24−27 +767%
Hitman 3	8−9 −238%	27−30 +238%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −571%	45−50 +571%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 −836%	130−140 +836%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−533%

35−40
+533%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −2100%	21−24 +2100%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −600%	14−16 +600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −1200%	12−14 +1200%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1200%	12−14 +1200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	10−11

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−400%

20−22
+400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	31 +0%	31 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

This is how R9 M375 and GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 239% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 933% faster in 4K

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 5900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is ahead in 57 tests (84%)
there's a draw in 11 tests (16%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.52	22.88
Recency	5 May 2015	23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has a 807.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M375 in performance tests.

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