GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design vs RTX A4500 Embedd...

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 RTX A4500 Embedded GPU is on rank 76, so the RTX A4500 Embedded GPU offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design

#28

Radeon RX 6650M XT

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

99%

#30

Radeon 8050S

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

94%

#31

Radeon RX 8050S

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

94%

#86

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

252%

#88

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

228%

#89

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

227%

#93

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

207%

#94

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

205%

#96

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#97

GeForce GTX 760M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

100%

#100

GeForce 945M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $98

98%

#103

Radeon RX 460 (móvel)

MSRP: $99|Avg: $45

96%

#105

GeForce GTX 680M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

95%

#106

Radeon HD 7470M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $12

95%

#110

GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

93%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar RTX A4500 Embedded GPU

#38

Radeon PRO W6600X

MSRP: $699|Avg: $699

88%

#41

Quadro RTX 3000 (móvel)

MSRP: $600|Avg: $600

85%

#42

Radeon Pro W5700

MSRP: $799|Avg: $300

85%

#43

Radeon Pro W5700X

MSRP: $999|Avg: $999

83%

#44

RTX A4000

MSRP: $1111|Avg: $1111

83%

#45

RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell

MSRP: $849|Avg: $748

80%

#46

Quadro RTX 4000

MSRP: $899|Avg: $220

78%

#61

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

697%

#76

RTX A4500 Embedded GPU

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#78

Radeon Pro 570

MSRP: $300|Avg: $100

100%

#80

T400

MSRP: $180|Avg: $179

95%

#86

Quadro P3200

MSRP: $500|Avg: $63

81%

#89

Quadro P2000

MSRP: $425|Avg: $190

77%

#90

Quadro T1000

MSRP: $400|Avg: $425

77%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

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 1.2% 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 RTX A4500 Embedded GPU.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design	RTX A4500 Embedded GPU
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🏆Elite Architecture (Ampere (2020−2025) / 8nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support
VRAM	🎮 High Capacity (6 GB)	🎮 High Capacity (4 GB)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 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.

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design Benchmark Check

RTX A4500 Embedded GPU Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design and RTX A4500 Embedded GPU

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.

RTX A4500 Embedded GPU

The RTX A4500 Embedded GPU is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 30 2022. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 510 MHz to 1215 MHz. It has 5888 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 80W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,485 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 8,589 and the RTX A4500 Embedded GPU reaches 8,485 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the RTX A4500 Embedded GPU uses Ampere, both on 12 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 5,888 (RTX A4500 Embedded GPU). Raw compute: 4.101 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 14.31 TFLOPS (RTX A4500 Embedded GPU). Boost clocks: 1335 MHz vs 1215 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design	RTX A4500 Embedded GPU
G3D Mark Score	8,589+1%	8,485
Architecture	Turing	Ampere
Process Node	12 nm	8 nm
Shading Units	1536	5888+283%
Compute (TFLOPS)	4.101 TFLOPS	14.31 TFLOPS+249%
Boost Clock	1335 MHz+10%	1215 MHz
ROPs	48	96+100%
TMUs	96	184+92%
L1 Cache	1.5 MB	5.8 MB+287%
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	4 MB+167%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design	RTX A4500 Embedded GPU
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	NVIDIA Reflex

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the RTX A4500 Embedded GPU 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 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 4 MB (RTX A4500 Embedded GPU) — the RTX A4500 Embedded GPU has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design	RTX A4500 Embedded GPU
VRAM Capacity	6 GB+50%	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	192-bit+50%	128-bit
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	4 MB+167%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12.2 (RTX A4500 Embedded GPU). 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	RTX A4500 Embedded GPU
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12.2+2%
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 NVENC 8.0 (RTX A4500 Embedded GPU). Decoder: 4th Gen NVDEC vs PureVideo HD VP11. 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 (RTX A4500 Embedded GPU).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design	RTX A4500 Embedded GPU
Encoder	7th Gen NVENC	NVENC 8.0
Decoder	4th Gen NVDEC	PureVideo HD VP11
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 60W versus the RTX A4500 Embedded GPU's 80W — a 28.6% 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 (RTX A4500 Embedded GPU). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.