CPU
GPU
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1650
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 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is positioned at rank #96 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 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 9.1% higher G3D Mark score and 50% more VRAM (6 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+9.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-9.1%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design and GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1140 MHz to 1335 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 60W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,589 points. Launch price was $229.
GeForce GTX 1650
The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 8,589 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design leads by 9.1%. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on a 12 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 4.101 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 1335 MHz vs 1665 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,589+9% | 7,869 |
| Architecture | Turing | Turing |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536+71% | 896 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.101 TFLOPS+37% | 2.984 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1335 MHz | 1665 MHz+25% |
| ROPs | 48+50% | 32 |
| TMUs | 96+71% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 1.5 MB+70% | 0.88 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+50% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 288 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) — a 125% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design. Bus width: 192-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+50% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 288 GB/s+125% | 128 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 192-bit+50% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+50% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: 4th Gen NVDEC vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) |
| Decoder | 4th Gen NVDEC | NVDEC 4th gen |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 60W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 22.2% difference. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 60W-20% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 300W-40% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | — | 229mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 70°C-18% |
| Perf/Watt | 143.2+37% | 104.9 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design and GeForce GTX 1650
