NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q vs AMD Radeon R9 390

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q and AMD Radeon R9 390 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: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 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), 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 10 month(s) later
• Around 34% higher boost clock speed: 1335 MHz vs 1000 MHz
• 801.3x more texture fill rate: 128.2 GTexel/s vs 160.0 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 28 nm
• 4.6x lower typical power consumption: 60 Watt vs 275 Watt
• Around 50% higher memory clock speed: 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) vs 1000 MHz
• Around 19% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 52263 vs 43778
• Around 63% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 195.93 vs 120.267
• Around 32% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 14.6 vs 11.097
• Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12301 vs 10445
• Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12301 vs 10445
• 5.1x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 4903 vs 955

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 390

• Around 67% higher pipelines: 2560 vs 1536
• Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 6 GB
• Around 3% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8876 vs 8609
• 2.2x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 791 vs 360
• Around 65% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3164.164 vs 1919.95
• Around 23% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 116.473 vs 94.964
• Around 23% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 607.381 vs 492.867

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 390

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	8609 8876
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	360 791
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	52263 43778
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	195.93 120.267
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1919.95 3164.164
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	14.6 11.097
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	94.964 116.473
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	492.867 607.381
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12301 10445
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3718 3708
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3353
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12301 10445
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3718 3708
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3353
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	4903 955

Compare specifications (specs)