NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop) vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop) and AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL, 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop)
- Videocard is newer: launch date 8 month(s) later
- Around 21% higher core clock speed: 1455 MHz vs 1200 MHz
- Around 4% higher boost clock speed: 1590 MHz vs 1530 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 14 nm
- 6x more memory clock speed: 12000 MHz vs 2000 MHz
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 15109 vs 7164
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 15109 vs 7164
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 16828 vs 13044
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 16828 vs 13044
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 23 April 2019 vs 13 August 2018 |
Core clock speed | 1455 MHz vs 1200 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1590 MHz vs 1530 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 14 nm |
Memory clock speed | 12000 MHz vs 2000 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 15109 vs 7164 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 15109 vs 7164 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16828 vs 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 16828 vs 13044 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
- Around 63% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 783 vs 479
- Around 30% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 13225 vs 10164
- 3.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 30936 vs 8054
- 3.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 30936 vs 8054
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 783 vs 479 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 13225 vs 10164 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 30936 vs 8054 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 30936 vs 8054 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop)
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop) | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G2D Mark | 479 | 783 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 10164 | 13225 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 5572 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 15109 | 7164 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 15109 | 7164 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16828 | 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 16828 | 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8054 | 30936 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8054 | 30936 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 69537 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 171.616 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4031.404 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.925 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 247.788 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1195.863 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop) | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Turing | GCN 5.0 |
Code name | N18E-G0 | Vega 10 |
Launch date | 23 April 2019 | 13 August 2018 |
Place in performance rating | 123 | 122 |
Type | Laptop | Workstation |
Launch price (MSRP) | $999 | |
Price now | $999 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 13.37 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1590 MHz | 1530 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1455 MHz | 1200 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 14 nm |
Pipelines | 1536 | |
Transistor count | 6600 million | 12,500 million |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 230 Watt | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Laptop size | medium sized | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
Length | 267 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 6144 MB | |
Memory bus width | 192 bit | |
Memory clock speed | 12000 MHz | 2000 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR6 |