GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q vs Radeon RX Vega M GL

Place in the ranking	454	243
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	68.60
Power efficiency	10.56	26.55
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Polaris 22	TU116
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 February 2018 (6 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	1280	1536
Core clock speed	931 MHz	1140 MHz
Boost clock speed	1011 MHz	1335 MHz
Number of transistors	5,000 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	80.88	128.2
Floating-point processing power	2.588 TFLOPS	4.101 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	48
TMUs	80	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	no data	medium sized
Interface	IGP	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	HBM2	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	1024 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	700 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	179.2 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	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.

RX Vega M GL 9.85

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 22.85
+132%

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.

RX Vega M GL 3799

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 8814
+132%

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	30−35 −157%	77 +157%
4K	14−16 −143%	34 +143%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.97
4K	no data	6.74

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
High Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

24−27

−92.3%

50−55
+92.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

24−27

−96.2%

51
+96.2%

4K
High Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

7−8

−343%

31
+343%

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	56 +0%	56 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Battlefield 5	88 +0%	88 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	70 +0%	70 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	92 +0%	92 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Metro Exodus	120 +0%	120 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	92 +0%	92 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Battlefield 5	84 +0%	84 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	66 +0%	66 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	77 +0%	77 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Metro Exodus	95 +0%	95 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	74 +0%	74 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	42 +0%	42 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50 +0%	50 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	54 +0%	54 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	79 +0%	79 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
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%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

20−22

+0%

20−22

+0%

This is how RX Vega M GL and GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 157% faster in 1080p
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 143% faster in 4K

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 343% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is ahead in 3 tests (4%)
there's a draw in 69 tests (96%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.85	22.85
Recency	1 February 2018	23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	60 Watt

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has a 132% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 8.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega M GL in performance tests.

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