Component comparison

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs RTX A500

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs RTX A500 โ€” detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.

Advantages

A GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
  • + VRAM (GB) (+2 GB)
  • + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+176 GB/s)
  • + Memory bus (bit) (+128 bit)
  • + TGP / TDP (W) (+20 W)
  • + TMUs (+32)
  • + ROPs (+16)
  • + Energy efficiency (+4.6)
  • + PassMark (overall) (+6080)
  • + Normalized score (+47.9)
B RTX A500
  • + Release year (+2)
  • + Memory clock (MHz) (+250 MHz)
  • + Lithography (nm) (-4 nm)
  • + CUDA cores (+512)
  • + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+3.15 TFLOPS)

Detailed spec comparison

Spec Component A
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
Component B
RTX A500
Release year 2019 2021 (+2)
VRAM (GB) 6 GB (+2 GB) 4 GB
Memory type GDDR6 GDDR6
Memory clock (MHz) 1500 MHz 1750 MHz (+250 MHz)
Bandwidth (GB/s) 288 GB/s (+176 GB/s) 112 GB/s
Memory bus (bit) 192 bit (+128 bit) 64 bit
TGP / TDP (W) 80 W (+20 W) 60 W
Lithography (nm) 12 nm 8 nm (-4 nm)
Transistors (M) 6,600M โ€”
Die size (mmยฒ) 284 mmยฒ โ€”
Base clock (MHz) โ€” โ€”
Boost clock (MHz) โ€” 1537 MHz
CUDA cores 1,536 2,048 (+512)
TMUs 96 (+32) 64
ROPs 48 (+16) 32
RT cores โ€” 16
Tensor cores โ€” 64
FP32 performance (TFLOPS) 4.10 TFLOPS 7.25 TFLOPS (+3.15 TFLOPS)
Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) 84.96 GPixel/s โ€”
Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) 169.90 GTexel/s โ€”
Energy efficiency 24.9 (+4.6) 20.2
PassMark (overall) 12,618 (+6080) 6,538
3DMark Time Spy 5,659 โ€”
3DMark Fire Strike 14,818 โ€”
Geekbench OpenCL 60,911 โ€”
Geekbench Vulkan 58,130 โ€”
Normalized score 63.7 (+47.9) 15.8

Only in component B

DLSS ReBAR

In both

CUDA

FPS in games (1080p)

Game GeForce GTX 1660 Ti RTX A500 Delta
CS:GO 240 FPS 240 FPS โ‰ˆ
GTA V 140 FPS 140 FPS โ‰ˆ
Overwatch 240 FPS 240 FPS โ‰ˆ
PUBG 140 FPS 140 FPS โ‰ˆ

Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.

Based on the comparison: GeForce GTX 1660 Ti wins 9 of the comparable criteria. The choice depends on your use case.

๐Ÿค” How to choose

Universal advice for any use case.

  • Reliability vs price: reliability (median 50) โ†” price (median 385.1).
  • Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 48) โ†” overall performance (median 49.8).
  • Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) โ†” battery life (median 2.8).

Reviews & specs

Your journey

based on your activity
Vague sense of need
Browse category overviews to narrow things down.
Focused on
Performance
20%
Mobility
20%
Refine your picks
An anonymous cookie on your device โ€” no account, no personal data. Viewed models, compares and picker answers shape this panel.
Delete profile? Compare list stays.