GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mega Benchmark: vs. RX 590, Vega 56, GTX 1060 and RTX 2060

[Julio Franco]

We're following up to our GeForce GTX 1660 Ti review with an even more ample 33 game benchmark test. The day-one review looked at more recent games such as Resident Evil 2, Metro Exodus, Apex Legends, and many others. Now we're keen to see how the 1660 Ti stacks up in a much wider range of games.

Read the full article here.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1799-geforce-gtx-1660-mega-benchmark/

 

[tomkaten]

Steve, this is why we love TS and your YT channel. Just... exhaustive and awesome stuff, as usual. Thanks !

 

[VitalyT]

If you throw in power consumption and support for DP1.4a, then RTX 2060 offers better value for your money in the long run, not to mention it performs way better.

 

[Paul Dougherty]

I'd love to see Dragon Quest 11 benchmarks. It's UE4.

 

[Nobina]

If I was to upgrade my GPU this would most likely be it. It's not as expensive as I thought it would be and it offers good performance for 1080p and 1440p.

 

[Tantor]

Good article which clearly highlights AMD's predicament.

As a happy Radeon VII owner, I have to admit that AMD's video card lineup is in shambles. It's one thing to see the fairly decent Vega 56, 64, and VII rankings. It's another entirely to find a Vega for sale at a reasonable price. Sure, they were selling the Vega 64 with a great bundle for only $399 for the longest time, but that's dried up and the Radeon VII has become unobtanium.

The success of Ryzen created lots of new AMD fans who would love to build an all-AMD rig, but lack of reasonably priced Vega cards is making it very difficult.

You can't compete if you don't have any product to sell.

 

[Tantor]

Interesting comment: "Only the Radeon VII saw a significant change in the 33 game sample, and here it stacks up much better than on the previous 12-game comparison."

What happened with the Radeon VII?

 

[QuantumPhysics]

#1 I'd never buy one of these entry-level cards based on "budget".

Save up and buy something better.

My 2080Ti is pretty good considering how much more expensive the RTX Titan is and how unnecessary the RTX Titan would actually be for my uses. But if I needed a lower priced card I'd save another $50 - $60 for the 2060 or more for the 2070.

 

[poohbear]

Thank you for the detailed review! Looks like Nvidia is finally getting things right after the RTX 2080-2060 debacle. They realized they were pricing those waaaayyy too high and finally responded to the market.

 

[codgerface]

No GTA V results? Literally unreadable.

Exceptional mega benchmark, Steve.

In all seriousness, I know you said (maybe in the Radeon VII video) that you were killing GTA V and not bringing it back regardless of the <insert Anchorman "loud noises" meme>… but it still has value and should be resuscitated. Not because a lot of people still play GTA V (although that's valid), but because of the copious amount of legacy data that is available across many cards for a title that still scales pretty well. Thus, the game is useful as a metric for those of us who have been voluntold they are the default upgrade consultants for friends, family, family friends, colleagues, acquaintances, enemies, etc. (And I see you 'snuck' it in the 2060 review, so maybe there's still a pulse).

Brick Tamland liked this | Today

 

[illusio12]

@Steven Walton Excellent Re-review / Summary! Thanks.

Have RX 580 and not seeing any compelling reason to go V56; my next natural upgrade.......

If AMD want my money; then relatively................; the price needs to drop Otherwise would give up Radeon benefits, and have a Frankenstein-System LOL

Keep up excellent work guys........; watched video just posted and; enjoyed that too..!

Edit : sparkling hotness going on over @ HARDOCP ( " Radeon V Undervolting + Chill article + feedback ) Heresey........; I hear you say ... NO dudes, good for ALL of us

 

[billjones]

Why didn't you include the 580 in your comparison? It sticks out since you included the 1060, where you noted the 1660Ti was 34% faster and only 12% more expensive...

Well the 580 is generally faster than the 1060 6GB, and currently Newegg has an 8GB 580 for $169. Even if the normal 580 price is a bit higher, there are several models available for 189. Why ignore this just because the 1060 is wildly overpriced? The 1660Ti wouldn't looks so good of a value vs the 580...even using the 190 RX 580 price, the 1660Ti would be something less than 34% faster for 47% more cost at minimum (using 190 vs 280 pricing).

I dont think this invalidates the 1660Ti as you cant really step up to that performance class for less. The 590 is somewhere in between (also unduly hot and power hungry) and then you have to go to 1070, GTX 2060, Vega 56, and many others to get in that performance class all at much greater cost. But still, it did seem odd to compare flatteringly to 1060 and ignore much less flattering comparison to 580.

IMO the 580 and 570 are stupid good deals, I got an 8GB(!) 570 for 129 after rebate on a good sale recently, at that price I couldn't even get a 4GB 1050Ti. AMD's upmarket cards may not look so great, but they are currently IMO the only choice around the 570-580 price range.

 

[Babbel13]

I'm occasional gamer (mostly RTS) and I don't know if the results apply directly to computation apps. I would like to see a test included using AI Gigapixel by Topaz labs for up-sizing photos. The test would give time in seconds with the lower times being better. Presently I have a RX580 video card which I think has very good performance for the price. For games I use an XBox One X.

 

[Goamist]

Excellent review, as expected from TS!
Here in Germany, the price for Vega 56 is now around 290-320 eur, while the cheapest 1660 Ti goes for ~260 eur. AMD recently dropped the price for the Vega 56, which should be mentioned in the article.

 

[makewavesnotwar]

The GTX 1660 Ti is optimized for 1080p gaming yet all of your benchmarks are at 1440p where it's known to be less performant. The article is a complete waste of time to scroll through. It's comparative, sure... but useless. Calling it a mega benchmark when there are no real world performance benchmarks is clickbait nonsense.

 

[Sausagemeat]

Why didn't you include the 580 in your comparison? It sticks out since you included the 1060, where you noted the 1660Ti was 34% faster and only 12% more expensive...

Well the 580 is generally faster than the 1060 6GB, and currently Newegg has an 8GB 580 for $169. Even if the normal 580 price is a bit higher, there are several models available for 189. Why ignore this just because the 1060 is wildly overpriced? The 1660Ti wouldn't looks so good of a value vs the 580...even using the 190 RX 580 price, the 1660Ti would be something less than 34% faster for 47% more cost at minimum (using 190 vs 280 pricing).

I dont think this invalidates the 1660Ti as you cant really step up to that performance class for less. The 590 is somewhere in between (also unduly hot and power hungry) and then you have to go to 1070, GTX 2060, Vega 56, and many others to get in that performance class all at much greater cost. But still, it did seem odd to compare flatteringly to 1060 and ignore much less flattering comparison to 580.

IMO the 580 and 570 are stupid good deals, I got an 8GB(!) 570 for 129 after rebate on a good sale recently, at that price I couldn't even get a 4GB 1050Ti. AMD's upmarket cards may not look so great, but they are currently IMO the only choice around the 570-580 price range.

Actually a 580 isn’t generally faster than a 1060, they are practically identical with the 1060 being faster in the more popular games like fortnight, pubg, gtav etc. Just use the 1060 numbers to get an idea of the 580 comparison.

 

[RobStow]

I'd like to see some benchmarks that have nothing to do with gaming. How do these cards stack up against each other for things like video encoding, BOINC, Folding@home, statistical analysis of large data sets, simulations, encoding/decoding data, processing LARGE images, etc

Not all of us can afford to have super duper expensive workstations and servers to do things like that for us: we have to make do with what we have at home or in the office. If there is money in the budget to upgrade a video card so that it helps with useful things it would be nice to know how these video cards stack up against each other.

It is easy to find benchmarks that give some indication of how processors, motherboards, RAM, and SSDs - but not video cards - do on real-world tasks instead of just gaming.

 

[Drew Valadez]

I'd like to see some benchmarks that have nothing to do with gaming. How do these cards stack up against each other for things like video encoding, BOINC, Folding@home, statistical analysis of large data sets, simulations, encoding/decoding data, processing LARGE images, etc

I completely agree. I do more than game on a my PC, LR and some light PS stuff but recently at work I was tasked to find out how the 2400G compared to a i5-8500 because they are going to go that route and they wanted to make sure if the 2400G was adequate. Needless to say, gaming benchmarks don't really look too professional when showing comparisons of a CPU when making a purchasing decision and the sites I did find with Excel benchmarks were sites I normally skip right past.

 

[TripGun]

Great article, lots of good information.

 

[billjones]

Actually a 580 isn’t generally faster than a 1060, they are practically identical with the 1060 being faster in the more popular games like fortnight, pubg, gtav etc. Just use the 1060 numbers to get an idea of the 580 comparison.

well, actually it is based on most any benchmark suite. start here on this site... or this review. count up how many games each leads between 580 and 1060.

ok I did it for you, 580 beats 1060 6gb in 11 of 12 games in this suite we're commenting on. 11-1.

I didn't say a lot, many times they are essentially equal but yeah it's faster. moreso when you account it's 2 gee bee ram advantage too.

I mean if 1660ti is 34% faster than 1060 it'd probably be I dunno, 30 or 32 % faster than 580. just guessing.

 

[Sausagemeat]

well, actually it is based on most any benchmark suite. start here on this site... or this review. count up how many games each leads between 580 and 1060.

ok I did it for you, 580 beats 1060 6gb in 11 of 12 games in this suite we're commenting on. 11-1.

I didn't say a lot, many times they are essentially equal but yeah it's faster. moreso when you account it's 2 gee bee ram advantage too.

I mean if 1660ti is 34% faster than 1060 it'd probably be I dunno, 30 or 32 % faster than 580. just guessing.

You are incorrect. I would suggest checking reviews from other sites. The 1060 and the 580 are equally matched in general. Although the 1060 is the better part really as it uses less power and makes less noise and heat. It’s also stronger in more popular games like PubG, fortnite etc.

 

[RXSpam]

well, actually it is based on most any benchmark suite. start here on this site... or this review. count up how many games each leads between 580 and 1060.

ok I did it for you, 580 beats 1060 6gb in 11 of 12 games in this suite we're commenting on. 11-1.

I didn't say a lot, many times they are essentially equal but yeah it's faster. moreso when you account it's 2 gee bee ram advantage too.

I mean if 1660ti is 34% faster than 1060 it'd probably be I dunno, 30 or 32 % faster than 580. just guessing.

You are incorrect. I would suggest checking reviews from other sites. The 1060 and the 580 are equally matched in general. Although the 1060 is the better part really as it uses less power and makes less noise and heat. It’s also stronger in more popular games like PubG, fortnite etc.

580 in average of the last titles is better, 1060 only more powerful in games sponsored by nvidia, consumption and old games DX11, https://www.techspot.com/review/1780-geforce-1060-vs-radeon-580- vs-radeon-570 / , you can also see it in other reviews with the latest updated drivers

 

[Sausagemeat]

580 in average of the last titles is better, 1060 only more powerful in games sponsored by nvidia, consumption and old games DX11, https://www.techspot.com/review/1780-geforce-1060-vs-radeon-580- vs-radeon-570 / , you can also see it in other reviews with the latest updated drivers

Techspot appears to be a very mild anomaly. Almost every other reviewer show the 1060 to either match or beat the 580, even with updated drivers. Although there is so little in it that it’s not worth noting. However I would say it’s inacurrate to state the 580 is faster as even in TechSpot it’s practically within margin of error.

For me though, the difference in performance isn’t worth bothering with but the fact that the 1060 is a lot cooler and quieter whilst using less power to achieve practically the same performance as a 580 make it the superior card. Not to mention that it supports both freesync and gsync.

 

[DanDar]

GTX 1660 TI against a GTX 1070 over 33 games. The GTX 1660 Ti was faster in 15 games by a combined total of 86 frames per second, the GTX 1070 was faster in 15 games by a combined total of 76 frames per second, they were equal in 3 games...call it a draw.

Vega 56 vs GTX 1070 again over 33 games. The GTX 1070 was faster in 4 games by a combined total of 8 frames per second. The Vega 56 was faster in 29 games by a combined total of 282 frames per second..how is the GTX 1660 Ti only 8% slower?