GeForce GTX 1660 vs Quadro M6000 24GB
GeForce GTX 1660
Popular choices:
Quadro M6000 24GB
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M6000 24GB
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1660 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1660 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro M6000 24GB lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1660 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M6000 24GB offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1660 | Quadro M6000 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1660 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $180 versus $600 for the Quadro M6000 24GB, it costs 70% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 233.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1660 | Quadro M6000 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+233.7%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($180) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($600) |
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 and Quadro M6000 24GB
GeForce GTX 1660
The GeForce GTX 1660 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 14 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1530 MHz to 1785 MHz. It has 1408 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 120W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,639 points. Launch price was $219.
Quadro M6000 24GB
The Quadro M6000 24GB is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 5 2016. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 988 MHz to 1114 MHz. It has 3072 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,625 points. Launch price was $4,999.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1660 scores 11,639 and the Quadro M6000 24GB reaches 11,625 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1660 is built on Turing while the Quadro M6000 24GB uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,408 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 3,072 (Quadro M6000 24GB). Raw compute: 5.027 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 6.844 TFLOPS (Quadro M6000 24GB). Boost clocks: 1785 MHz vs 1114 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 | Quadro M6000 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 11,639 | 11,625 |
| Architecture | Turing | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1408 | 3072+118% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.027 TFLOPS | 6.844 TFLOPS+36% |
| Boost Clock | 1785 MHz+60% | 1114 MHz |
| ROPs | 48 | 96+100% |
| TMUs | 88 | 256+191% |
| L1 Cache | 1.4 MB+27% | 1.1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 3 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 | Quadro M6000 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1660 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M6000 24GB has 24 GB. The Quadro M6000 24GB offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 317 GB/s (Quadro M6000 24GB) — a 65.1% advantage for the Quadro M6000 24GB. Bus width: 192-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 3 MB (Quadro M6000 24GB) — the Quadro M6000 24GB has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 | Quadro M6000 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB | 24 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 192 GB/s | 317 GB/s+65% |
| Bus Width | 192-bit | 384-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 3 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 12/1 (Quadro M6000 24GB). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 | Quadro M6000 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12/1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+18% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1660) vs NVENC 4.0 (Quadro M6000 24GB). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Quadro M6000 24GB).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 | Quadro M6000 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | NVENC 4.0 |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1660 draws 120W versus the Quadro M6000 24GB's 250W — a 70.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1660 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 500W (Quadro M6000 24GB). Power connectors: 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 | Quadro M6000 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 120W-52% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 450W-10% | 500W |
| Power Connector | 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 112mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-6% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 97.0+109% | 46.5 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1660 launched at $219 MSRP and currently averages $180, while the Quadro M6000 24GB launched at $4999 and now averages $600. The GeForce GTX 1660 costs 70% less ($420 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 64.7 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 19.4 (Quadro M6000 24GB) — the GeForce GTX 1660 offers 233.5% better value. The GeForce GTX 1660 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2016).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1660 | Quadro M6000 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $219-96% | $4999 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $180-70% | $600 |
| Performance per Dollar | 64.7+234% | 19.4 |
| Codename | TU116 | GM200 |
| Release | March 14 2019 | March 5 2016 |
| Ranking | #231 | #233 |
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 and Quadro M6000 24GB
