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

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q and AMD Radeon R9 FURY X 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) 9 month(s) later
• Around 27% higher boost clock speed: 1335 MHz vs 1050 MHz
• 476.9x more texture fill rate: 128.2 GTexel/s vs 268.8 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 maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 4 GB
• Around 43% higher memory clock speed: 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) vs 1050 MHz
• Around 26% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 195.93 vs 155.307
• Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 14.6 vs 12.49
• Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12301 vs 8673
• Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12301 vs 8673

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 FURY X

• 2.7x more pipelines: 4096 vs 1536
• Around 16% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 10015 vs 8627
• 2.3x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 843 vs 365
• Around 79% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3431.249 vs 1919.95
• Around 61% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 153.089 vs 94.964
• Around 74% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 857.575 vs 492.867
• 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8925 vs 3718
• 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8925 vs 3718
• Around 5% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 5170 vs 4915

Compare benchmarks

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

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	8627 10015
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	365 843
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	195.93 155.307
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1919.95 3431.249
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	14.6 12.49
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	94.964 153.089
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	492.867 857.575
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12301 8673
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3718 8925
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3361
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12301 8673
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3718 8925
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3361
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	4915 5170

Compare specifications (specs)