
GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 660
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is positioned at rank #66 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Balanced cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is significantly newer (2018 vs 2012). The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 660 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 660 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 660 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+33.3%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 660 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $15 versus $50 for the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design, it costs 70% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 243.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 660 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+243.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($50) | ✅More affordable ($15) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design and GeForce GTX 660

GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 3 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1152 MHz to 1417 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,925 points.

GeForce GTX 660
The GeForce GTX 660 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 6 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 980 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 960 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 140W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,040 points. Launch price was $229.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design scores 3,925 and the GeForce GTX 660 reaches 4,040 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is built on Pascal while the GeForce GTX 660 uses Kepler, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design) vs 960 (GeForce GTX 660). Raw compute: 2.177 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design) vs 1.981 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 660). Boost clocks: 1417 MHz vs 1033 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 660 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,925 | 4,040+3% |
| Architecture | Pascal | Kepler |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 960+25% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.177 TFLOPS+10% | 1.981 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1417 MHz+37% | 1033 MHz |
| ROPs | 32+33% | 24 |
| TMUs | 48 | 80+67% |
| L1 Cache | 288 KB+260% | 80 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+163% | 0.38 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 660 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 660 has 3 GB. The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 80 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design) vs 144.2 GB/s (GeForce GTX 660) — a 80.2% advantage for the GeForce GTX 660. Bus width: 128-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design) vs 0.38 MB (GeForce GTX 660) — the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 660 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+33% | 3 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 80 GB/s | 144.2 GB/s+80% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 192-bit+50% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+163% | 0.38 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 660). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 660 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (6th Gen) (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design) vs NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GTX 660). Decoder: NVDEC (3rd Gen) vs NVDEC 1st Gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9 (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design) vs H.264 (GeForce GTX 660).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 660 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (6th Gen) | NVENC 1st Gen |
| Decoder | NVDEC (3rd Gen) | NVDEC 1st Gen |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9 | H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 660's 140W — a 60.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design) vs 450W (GeForce GTX 660). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 660 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-46% | 140W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-22% | 450W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | — | 241mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 52.3+81% | 28.9 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 660 costs 70% less ($35 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 78.5 (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design) vs 269.3 (GeForce GTX 660) — the GeForce GTX 660 offers 243.1% better value. The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 660 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $229 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50 | $15-70% |
| Performance per Dollar | 78.5 | 269.3+243% |
| Codename | GP107 | GK106 |
| Release | January 3 2018 | September 6 2012 |
| Ranking | #429 | #490 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















