CPU
GPU
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
Popular choices:
Radeon RX 5600M
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 RX 5600M is on rank 32, so the Radeon RX 5600M 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 RX 5600M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon RX 5600M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon RX 5600M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.1%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) (7nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon RX 5600M 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 RX 5600M
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 RX 5600M
The Radeon RX 5600M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in July 7 2020. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1035 MHz to 1265 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,857 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 8,589 and the Radeon RX 5600M reaches 8,857 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 5600M uses RDNA 1.0, both on 12 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 2,304 (Radeon RX 5600M). Raw compute: 4.101 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 5.829 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 5600M). Boost clocks: 1335 MHz vs 1265 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon RX 5600M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,589 | 8,857+3% |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 1.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536 | 2304+50% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.101 TFLOPS | 5.829 TFLOPS+42% |
| Boost Clock | 1335 MHz+6% | 1265 MHz |
| ROPs | 48 | 64+33% |
| TMUs | 96 | 144+50% |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 3 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon RX 5600M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 2.1 |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 6 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 192-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 3 MB (Radeon RX 5600M) — the Radeon RX 5600M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon RX 5600M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 288 GB/s | 288 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 192-bit | 192-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 3 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12.1 (Radeon RX 5600M). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon RX 5600M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs VCN 2.0 (Radeon RX 5600M). Decoder: 4th Gen NVDEC vs VCN 2.0. 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 (Radeon RX 5600M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon RX 5600M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | VCN 2.0 |
| Decoder | 4th Gen NVDEC | VCN 2.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 60W versus the Radeon RX 5600M's 150W — a 85.7% 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 500W (Radeon RX 5600M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 90°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon RX 5600M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 60W-60% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C-6% | 90°C |
| Perf/Watt | 143.2+143% | 59.0 |
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 RX 5600M
