AMD Radeon 780M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon 780M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon 780M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 10 year(s) 4 month(s) later
- Around 64% higher core clock speed: 1500 MHz vs 915 MHz
- 3x more boost clock speed: 2900 MHz vs 980 MHz
- 1358x more texture fill rate: 139.2 GTexel/s vs 102.5 billion / sec
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 4 nm vs 28 nm
- 10x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 150 Watt
- Around 81% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 27793 vs 15375
- Around 88% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 879 vs 468
- Around 59% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6998 vs 4413
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 4 Jan 2023 vs 16 August 2012 |
| Core clock speed | 1500 MHz vs 915 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2900 MHz vs 980 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 139.2 GTexel/s vs 102.5 billion / sec |
| Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 150 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 27793 vs 15375 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 879 vs 468 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6998 vs 4413 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti
- Around 75% higher pipelines: 1344 vs 768
- 3.4x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1615 vs 480
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Pipelines | 1344 vs 768 |
| Benchmarks | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1615 vs 480 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon 780M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon 780M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 27793 | 15375 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 879 | 468 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6998 | 4413 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 480 | 1615 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 36.256 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1029.267 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.037 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 45.894 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 82.191 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3285 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3684 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3285 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3684 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon 780M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Kepler |
| Code name | Phoenix | GK104 |
| Launch date | 4 Jan 2023 | 16 August 2012 |
| Place in performance rating | 240 | 701 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $299 | |
| Price now | $321.99 | |
| Type | Desktop | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 17.34 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 2900 MHz | 980 MHz |
| Compute units | 12 | |
| Core clock speed | 1500 MHz | 915 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 1344 |
| Pixel fill rate | 92.80 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 139.2 GTexel/s | 102.5 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 150 Watt |
| CUDA cores | 1344 | |
| Floating-point performance | 2,459.5 gflops | |
| Transistor count | 3,540 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort, One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI... |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
| G-SYNC support | ||
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Form factor | IGP | |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | Two 6-pin |
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Length | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | |
| SLI options | 3-way | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.3 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | System Dependent | 144.2 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 192-bit GDDR5 |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 6.0 GB/s |
| Memory type | System Shared | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| CUDA | ||
| FXAA | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| SLI | ||
| TXAA | ||
