NVIDIA
GeForce GTX 1660 vs GeForce GTX 1630
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GTX 1630
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗GTX 1660 outperforms GTX 1630 by 19% based on our aggregate benchmark results.+19%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better.GeForce GTX 1660 vs GeForce GTX 1630: key takeaway
The comparison of GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 shows a 19% advantage for GTX 1660 in gaming performance, while GTX 1630 may still be stronger in efficiency and feature set. Use the sections below to check whether that lead comes from real FPS, specifications, efficiency, price or platform features.
SUMMARY PROFILE
Verified-metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3832
100100
100100
6060
COMPARISON RESULT
GTX 1660 is the best overall choice
GTX 1660 leads in combined game performance. GTX 1660 offers the better price per frame, while the final choice depends on the required features, memory, and games.
GTX 1660 leads in the combined performance index
GTX 1660 costs less
CATALOG POSITION
Full ranking →Graphics card ranking
Positions 105–110of 317
COMPARISON VERDICT
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTX 1660
75 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
GeForce GTX 1630
100/100 · Price $119The choice is based on the price-to-performance index and launch price.
OVERALL SCORE
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
The Summary score section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
38Better
32
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
34Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
31Better
27
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
62Better
58
FULL COMPARISON
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
The Specifications section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4aDisplayPort 1.4a
HDMIHDMI 2.0HDMI 2.0
Device classDesktopDesktop
USB Type-CNoNo
DirectX12.112.1
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
TFLOPS5.027Better1.828
Power consumption120 W75 WBetter
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Clock speed1530 - 1785 MHz1740 - 1785 MHzBetter
Base clock1530 MHz1740 MHzBetter
Max monitors33
Max resolution7680 × 43207680 × 4320
Boost clock1785 MHz1785 MHz
VRAM6 GB GDDR5Better4 GB GDDR6
Power connector8 pinNone
Release date20192022
ArchitectureTuringTuring
ThicknessDual-slotSingle-slot
Memory frequency8 GHz12 GHzBetter
Memory bus192 bitBetter64 bit
Memory bandwidth192 GB/sBetter96 GB/s
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 3x8
Power consumption120 W75 WBetter
Process node12 nm12 nm
Recommended PSU300 W250 WBetter
Length229 mm145 mmBetter
Upscaling——
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5
Launch price$229$119Better
Shader units / cores1408Better512
Die size284 mm²200 mm²Better
Memory cacheL1 64 KB, L2 1.5 MBL1 64 KB, L2 1 MB
Transistor count6600 millionBetter4700 million
GAME TEST BENCH
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GTX 1660GTX 1630
Verified H2HCommunity VerifiedEstimatedPredicted
Black Myth: Wukong
1080p High
22 FPSEstimated 66%
19 FPSEstimated 64%
1080p Ultra
19 FPSEstimated 66%
16 FPSEstimated 64%
1440p Ultra
11 FPSEstimated 60%
9 FPSEstimated 58%
4K Ultra
5 FPSEstimated 55%
5 FPSEstimated 55%
Black Myth: WukongGTX 166022 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163019 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166019 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163016 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166011 FPSEstimated 60%GTX 16309 FPSEstimated 58%GTX 16605 FPSEstimated 55%GTX 16305 FPSEstimated 55%
Call of Duty: WarzoneGTX 166022 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163019 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166019 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163016 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166011 FPSEstimated 60%GTX 16309 FPSEstimated 58%GTX 16605 FPSEstimated 55%GTX 16305 FPSEstimated 55%
Counter-Strike 2GTX 1660189 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 1630162 FPSEstimated 72%GTX 1660133 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 1630114 FPSEstimated 72%GTX 166077 FPSEstimated 68%GTX 163062 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 166024 FPSEstimated 62%GTX 163022 FPSEstimated 62%
Cyberpunk 2077GTX 1660122 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 1630105 FPSEstimated 72%GTX 1660105 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 163090 FPSEstimated 72%GTX 166056 FPSEstimated 68%GTX 163045 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 166016 FPSEstimated 62%GTX 163015 FPSEstimated 62%
Forza Horizon 5GTX 1660154 FPSEstimated 80%GTX 1630132 FPSEstimated 78%GTX 166099 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 163086 FPSEstimated 72%GTX 166069 FPSEstimated 68%GTX 163055 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 166036 FPSEstimated 62%GTX 163032 FPSEstimated 62%
God of War RagnarökGTX 166022 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163019 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166019 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163016 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166011 FPSEstimated 60%GTX 16309 FPSEstimated 58%GTX 16605 FPSEstimated 55%GTX 16305 FPSEstimated 55%
Hogwarts LegacyGTX 166099 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 163086 FPSEstimated 72%GTX 166083 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 163072 FPSEstimated 72%GTX 166050 FPSEstimated 68%GTX 163040 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 166017 FPSEstimated 62%GTX 163015 FPSEstimated 62%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024GTX 166022 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163019 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166019 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163016 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166011 FPSEstimated 60%GTX 16309 FPSEstimated 58%GTX 16605 FPSEstimated 55%GTX 16305 FPSEstimated 55%
Monster Hunter WildsGTX 166022 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163019 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166019 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163016 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166011 FPSEstimated 60%GTX 16309 FPSEstimated 58%GTX 16605 FPSEstimated 55%GTX 16305 FPSEstimated 55%
StarfieldGTX 166022 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163019 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166019 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 163016 FPSEstimated 64%GTX 166011 FPSEstimated 60%GTX 16309 FPSEstimated 58%GTX 16605 FPSEstimated 55%GTX 16305 FPSEstimated 55%
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
The Benchmarks section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100383217%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100454012%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100444010%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10060600%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
The Detailed comparison section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10048456%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10047439%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100444010%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10050484%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10045419%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
The Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
DirectX12.112.1
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
Upscaling——
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5
Architecture and release
The Architecture and release section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
ArchitectureTuringTuring
Process node12 nm12 nm
Release date20192022
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
The Core layout and clocks section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
Transistor count6600 millionBetter4700 million
Die size284 mm²200 mm²Better
Shader units / cores1408Better512
Base clock1530 MHz1740 MHzBetter
Boost clock1785 MHz1785 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
The Form factor and compatibility section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 3x8
Length229 mm145 mmBetter
ThicknessDual-slotSingle-slot
Recommended PSU300 W250 WBetter
Power connector8 pinNone
Display outputs and limits
The Display outputs section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
HDMIHDMI 2.0HDMI 2.0
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4aDisplayPort 1.4a
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors33
Max resolution7680 × 43207680 × 4320
Memory and compute throughput
The VRAM capacity and bandwidth section compares GTX 1660 and GTX 1630 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
VRAM6 GB GDDR5Better4 GB GDDR6
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Memory bus192 bitBetter64 bit
TFLOPS5.027Better1.828
HEAD TO HEAD · DISCOVER
6Other comparisons
Arc A310Intel
Navi II 2CU 7xxx/9xxxAMDReviews and questions
AI EXPLAIN · HEAD TO HEAD
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
REAL CONFIGURATIONS
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
♢Moderator reviewed☆Helpful to the community🏅Expert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GTX 1660 or GTX 1630?+
GTX 1660 has the higher overall gaming score, while GTX 1660 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTX 1660 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GTX 1660 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GTX 1660 offers more overall performance, while GTX 1660 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTX 1660 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTX 1660 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GTX 1660 leads in combined 1440p performance. GTX 1660 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GTX 1660 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GTX 1630 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GTX 1630 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GTX 1660 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.