NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q vs AMD Radeon R9 M470
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q and AMD Radeon R9 M470 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 2 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 27% higher core clock speed: 1140 MHz vs 900 MHz
- Around 34% higher boost clock speed: 1335 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- 2670.8x more texture fill rate: 128.2 GTexel/s vs 48 GTexel / s
- 2x more pipelines: 1536 vs 768
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 4 GB
- 3.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8652 vs 2331
- Around 19% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 365 vs 307
- Around 12% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 53834 vs 47924
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3718 vs 1804
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 1674
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3718 vs 1804
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 1674
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 23 April 2019 vs 15 May 2016 |
Core clock speed | 1140 MHz vs 900 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1335 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 128.2 GTexel/s vs 48 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1536 vs 768 |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 28 nm |
Maximum memory size | 6 GB vs 4 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 8652 vs 2331 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 365 vs 307 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 53834 vs 47924 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 vs 1804 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 1674 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 vs 1804 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 1674 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M470
- 4x more memory clock speed: 6000 MHz vs 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective)
Memory clock speed | 6000 MHz vs 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 M470
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q | AMD Radeon R9 M470 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 8652 | 2331 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 365 | 307 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 53834 | 47924 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 195.93 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1919.95 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 14.6 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.964 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 492.867 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12301 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 | 1804 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 1674 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12301 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 | 1804 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 1674 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 4927 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q | AMD Radeon R9 M470 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Turing | GCN 2.0 |
Code name | TU116 | Strato |
Launch date | 23 April 2019 | 15 May 2016 |
Place in performance rating | 334 | 768 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1335 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1140 MHz | 900 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 28 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 128.2 GFLOPS | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 8.202 TFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 4.101 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 1536 | 768 |
Pixel fill rate | 64.08 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 128.2 GTexel/s | 48 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | |
Transistor count | 6600 million | 2,080 million |
Floating-point performance | 1,536 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Laptop size | medium sized | large |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_0) |
OpenCL | 1.2 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 96 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 192 bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) | 6000 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
DirectCompute 5.0 |