Quadro P3200 vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
Quadro P3200
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
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 Quadro P3200 is positioned at rank 86 and the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is on rank 96, so the Quadro P3200 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P3200
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
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 0.1% 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 Quadro P3200.
| Insight | Quadro P3200 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro P3200 and GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
Quadro P3200
The Quadro P3200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1328 MHz to 1543 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,578 points.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro P3200 scores 8,578 and the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design reaches 8,589 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro P3200 is built on Pascal while the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design uses Turing, both on 16 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,792 (Quadro P3200) vs 1,536 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 5.53 TFLOPS (Quadro P3200) vs 4.101 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 1543 MHz vs 1335 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,578 | 8,589 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 1792+17% | 1536 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.53 TFLOPS+35% | 4.101 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1543 MHz+16% | 1335 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+33% | 48 |
| TMUs | 112+17% | 96 |
| L1 Cache | 0.66 MB | 1.5 MB+127% |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 1.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro P3200 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design has 6 GB. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 192-bit.
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 6 GB+50% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+33% | 192-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 1.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (Quadro P3200) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (Quadro P3200) vs 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design). Decoder: NVDEC 3rd Gen vs 4th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.265,H.264 (Quadro P3200) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design).
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6th Gen | 7th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | NVDEC 3rd Gen | 4th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.265,H.264 | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro P3200 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design's 60W — a 22.2% difference. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro P3200) vs 500W (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 85°C.
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 60W-20% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 80-6% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 114.4 | 143.2+25% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2018).
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $500 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $63 | — |
| Codename | GP104 | TU116 |
| Release | February 21 2018 | April 23 2019 |
| Ranking | #304 | #299 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro P3200 and GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design
