CPU
GPU
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
Popular choices:
Radeon PRO W6400
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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is positioned at rank 96 and the Radeon PRO W6400 is on rank 33, so the Radeon PRO W6400 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
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 Radeon PRO W6400
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 1.9% 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 Radeon PRO W6400.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.9%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (6nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) | 🎮 High Capacity (4 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design and Radeon PRO W6400
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.
Radeon PRO W6400
The Radeon PRO W6400 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 19 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2331 MHz to 2331 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,428 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 8,589 and the Radeon PRO W6400 reaches 8,428 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Radeon PRO W6400 uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 768 (Radeon PRO W6400). Raw compute: 4.101 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 3.58 TFLOPS (Radeon PRO W6400). Boost clocks: 1335 MHz vs 2331 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,589+2% | 8,428 |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536+100% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.101 TFLOPS+15% | 3.58 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1335 MHz | 2331 MHz+75% |
| ROPs | 48+50% | 32 |
| TMUs | 96+100% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 1.5 MB+500% | 0.25 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+50% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon PRO W6400 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 1 MB (Radeon PRO W6400) — 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 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+50% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 192-bit | 256-bit+33% |
| 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 12.2 (Radeon PRO W6400). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12.2+2% |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4+100% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs VCN 3.0 (Radeon PRO W6400). Decoder: 4th Gen NVDEC vs VCN 3.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (Radeon PRO W6400).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | VCN 3.0 |
| Decoder | 4th Gen NVDEC | VCN 3.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 60W versus the Radeon PRO W6400's 50W — a 18.2% difference. The Radeon PRO W6400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 500W (Radeon PRO W6400). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 60W | 50W-17% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 168mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 70°C-18% |
| Perf/Watt | 143.2 | 168.6+18% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon PRO W6400 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $229 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $200 |
| Codename | TU116 | Navi 24 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | January 19 2022 |
| Ranking | #299 | #308 |
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 Radeon PRO W6400
