GeForce GTX 1660 SUPERVSRadeon RX 6800M
Performance, specifications and real-world gaming comparison
🎮 Przetestowano w 0 grach▣ 3 resolutions: 1080p / 1440p / 4K↗ Aktualne dane katalogu♢ Testing methodology
♜ ZWYCIĘZCAGeForce GTX 1660 SUPER+1%Lepsza wydajność ogólna
NVIDIA
GTX 1660 SUPER
VSZWYCIĘZCAGTX 1660 SUPER0%Ogólny indeks H2H
AMD
Radeon RX 6800M
Wydajność3951
Efektywność100100
Data confidence6045
Fixed-scale H2H model. Missing metrics are omitted instead of estimated from the overall score.
SUMMARY PROFILE
Verified-metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAAMDPerformance
Efficiency
3951
100100
SPOŁECZNOŚĆ · ZWERYFIKOWANE DANE
Otwórz konfiguracje streamerów→Sprzęt używany przez streamerów
Prawdziwe publiczne konfiguracje powiązane z każdym urządzeniem.
NVIDIAGTX 1660 SUPER0Brak jeszcze zweryfikowanej publicznej konfiguracji
AMDRadeon RX 6800M0Brak jeszcze zweryfikowanej publicznej konfiguracji
WYNIK PORÓWNANIA
The devices received the same overall score
GTX 1660 SUPER leads in combined gaming performance. GTX 1660 SUPER offers the better price per frame, while the final choice depends on the required features, memory, and games.
Performance is nearly identical
Radeon RX 6800M costs less
CATALOG POSITION
Full ranking →Graphics card ranking
Positions 78–83of 723
COMPARISON VERDICT
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER
0 polubieńHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER
100/100 · Price $229The choice is based on the price-to-performance index and launch price.
OCENA OGÓLNA
Przegląd
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
39
51Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
34
43Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
32
41Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
62
62
PEŁNE PORÓWNANIE
Specyfikacja
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
HDMI1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a—
DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a—
USB Type-C——
DirectX12.112.2
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
TFLOPS5.02712.24Better
TDP125 WBetter145 W
Memory typeGDDR6GDDR6
Clock speed1530 - 1785 MHz2116–2390 MHzBetter
Base clock1530 MHz2116 MHzBetter
Boost clock1785 MHz2390 MHzBetter
Video memory6 GB GDDR612 GB GDDR6Better
Power connector8 pinNone
Release date20192021-05-31
ArchitectureTuringRDNA 2
Memory clock14 GHz2000 MHzBetter
Memory bus192 bit192 bit
Bandwidth336 GB/s384 GB/sBetter
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Power consumption125 WBetter145 W
Process node12 nm7 nmBetter
Recommended PSU300 W—
Length229 mm—
ThicknessDual-slotIGP
Max monitors——
Max resolution——
Upscaling——
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5OpenCL 2.1
Launch price$229—
Shader units / Cores14082560Better
Die size284 mm²Better335 mm²
Memory cacheL1 64 KB, L2 1.5 MBL1 128 KB, L2 3 MB
Transistor count6600 million17200 millionBetter
FPS w grach
Loading test-rig results…
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100395127%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100435626%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100395127%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100000%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from 3DMark, Geekbench, Cinebench, PassMark, Blender, or another third-party benchmark.
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100395127%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100395127%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100395127%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100395127%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100395127%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from 3DMark, Geekbench, Cinebench, PassMark, Blender, or another third-party benchmark.
API and SDK compatibility
DirectX12.112.2
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
Upscaling——
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5OpenCL 2.1
Basic information
ArchitectureTuringRDNA 2
Process node12 nm7 nmBetter
Release date20192021-05-31
Detailed specifications
Transistor count6600 million17200 millionBetter
Die size284 mm²Better335 mm²
Shader units / Cores14082560Better
Base clock1530 MHz2116 MHzBetter
Boost clock1785 MHz2390 MHzBetter
Form factor and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length229 mm—
ThicknessDual-slotIGP
Recommended PSU300 W—
Power connector8 pinNone
Connectivity and outputs
HDMI1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a—
DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a—
USB Type-C——
Max monitors——
Max resolution——
VRAM capacity and type
Video memory6 GB GDDR612 GB GDDR6Better
Memory typeGDDR6GDDR6
Memory bus192 bit192 bit
TFLOPS5.02712.24Better
HEAD TO HEAD · DISCOVER
6Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
WYJAŚNIENIE AI · HEAD TO HEAD
Wyjaśnij to porównanie
Nie tylko procenty: przyczyny, istotne specyfikacje i praktyczny wpływ każdego wykresu.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
PRAWDZIWE KONFIGURACJE
Doświadczenia właścicieli
Prawdziwe zestawy, wyniki i opinie społeczności.
♢Moderator reviewed☆Helpful to the community🏅Expert badges
Najczęstsze pytania o porównanie
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GTX 1660 SUPER or Radeon RX 6800M?+
GTX 1660 SUPER has the higher overall gaming score, while GTX 1660 SUPER offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTX 1660 SUPER 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 SUPER 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 SUPER offers more overall performance, while GTX 1660 SUPER offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTX 1660 SUPER 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 SUPER is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GTX 1660 SUPER leads in combined 1440p performance. GTX 1660 SUPER can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GTX 1660 SUPER is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GTX 1660 SUPER 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 1660 SUPER 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 SUPER 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.