NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 vs NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 and NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB 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 - 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
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 55% higher core clock speed: 1530 MHz vs 988 MHz
- Around 60% higher boost clock speed: 1785 MHz vs 1114 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 28 nm
- 2.1x lower typical power consumption: 120 Watt vs 250 Watt
- Around 21% higher memory clock speed: 8004 MHz vs 6612 MHz
- Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 777 vs 687
- Around 45% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 57928 vs 40088
- Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 14998 vs 13107
- Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 14998 vs 13107
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 14 March 2019 vs 5 March 2016 |
| Core clock speed | 1530 MHz vs 988 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz vs 1114 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt vs 250 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 8004 MHz vs 6612 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 777 vs 687 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 57928 vs 40088 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14998 vs 13107 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 vs 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 vs 3354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14998 vs 13107 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 vs 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 vs 3354 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB
- Around 1% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 11823 vs 11661
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 11823 vs 11661 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 | NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 11661 | 11823 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 777 | 687 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 57928 | 40088 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 189.842 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1902.867 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 13.408 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 116.183 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 875.838 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14998 | 13107 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 3354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14998 | 13107 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 3354 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 5414 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 | NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Code name | TU116 | GM200 |
| Launch date | 14 March 2019 | 5 March 2016 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $219 | $4,999 |
| Place in performance rating | 248 | 245 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz | 1114 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1530 MHz | 988 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Transistor count | 6,600 million | 8,000 million |
| Floating-point performance | 6,844 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 3072 | |
| Texture fill rate | 285.2 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort count | 1 | |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| HDMI | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 229 mm | 267 mm |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Memory clock speed | 8004 MHz | 6612 MHz |
| Maximum RAM amount | 24 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 317.4 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M6000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 vs
AMDRadeon R7 M380
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M6000 24 GB
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 vs
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 3000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 2070 Super Mobile
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 vs
AMDRadeon Pro 5700
