GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
Radeon R9 290
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon R9 290 Performance Spectrum
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.
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon R9 290 FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon R9 290: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
2019Why buy it
- ✅14.0% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅Radeon R9 290 is already legacy-tier future-proofing, so GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is the less risky modern option long term.
- ✅Draws 60W instead of 275W, a 215W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Older hardware, 6 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 20.5 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
Radeon R9 290
2013Why buy it
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 20.5 vs 0 G3D/$ ($399 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌2013 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
- ❌358.3% higher power demand at 275W vs 60W.
Quick Answers
Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon R9 290 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
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 R9 290
The Radeon R9 290 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 5 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 947 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,184 points. Launch price was $399.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 8,589 and the Radeon R9 290 reaches 8,184 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Radeon R9 290 uses GCN 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 2,560 (Radeon R9 290). Raw compute: 4.101 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 4.849 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 290).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon R9 290 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,589+5% | 8,184 |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536 | 2560+67% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.101 TFLOPS | 4.849 TFLOPS+18% |
| ROPs | 48 | 64+33% |
| TMUs | 96 | 160+67% |
| L1 Cache | 1.5 MB+138% | 0.63 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+50% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R9 290 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon R9 290 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design has 6 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 290 carries 4 GB. GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design gives you 50% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bandwidth: 288 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 320 GB/s (Radeon R9 290) — a 11.1% advantage for the Radeon R9 290. Memory bus width is 192-bit on the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design and 512-bit on the Radeon R9 290. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 1 MB (Radeon R9 290) — 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 R9 290 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+50% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 288 GB/s | 320 GB/s+11% |
| Bus Width | 192-bit | 512-bit+167% |
| 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 12.0 (Radeon R9 290). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon R9 290 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 6+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 290). Decoder: 4th Gen NVDEC vs UVD 4.2. 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,VC-1 (Radeon R9 290).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon R9 290 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | 4th Gen NVDEC | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 60W versus the Radeon R9 290's 275W — a 128.4% 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 750W (Radeon R9 290). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 6-pin + 8-pin. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 95°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon R9 290 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 60W-78% | 275W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W-33% | 750W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 6-pin + 8-pin |
| Length | — | 275mm |
| Height | — | 109mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C-11% | 95°C |
| Perf/Watt | 143.2+381% | 29.8 |
Value Analysis
The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design (2019 vs 2013).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon R9 290 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $399 |
| Codename | TU116 | Hawaii |
| Release | April 23 2019 | November 5 2013 |
| Ranking | #299 | #316 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
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 R9 290
