G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)

2020

Why buy it

✅Draws 50W instead of 100W, a 50W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro P4200 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 6 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 6 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 8.6 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $1,200 MSRP).

Quadro P4200

2018

Why buy it

✅20.2% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 8.6 vs 0 G3D/$ ($1,200 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 6 GB).

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 8 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌100% higher power demand at 100W vs 50W.

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)

2020

Quadro P4200

2018

Why buy it

✅Draws 50W instead of 100W, a 50W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Why buy it

✅20.2% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 8.6 vs 0 G3D/$ ($1,200 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 6 GB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro P4200 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 6 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 6 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 8.6 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $1,200 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 8 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌100% higher power demand at 100W vs 50W.

Quick Answers

So, is Quadro P4200 better than GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)?

Yes. Quadro P4200 is the better GPU overall here. You are getting 20.2% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data, 2.5% higher PassMark G3D performance, and 8 GB vs 6 GB of VRAM. It also comes from 2018 instead of 2020, which helps its case as the more complete modern gaming card.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2020 generation instead of 2018 and a 12nm process instead of 16nm. That makes it the safer long-run choice for modern games.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

Quadro P4200 is the smarter buy today, but it is not as lopsided as a simple winner label makes it sound. Quadro P4200 is priced in an unclear MSRP range at $1,200 MSRP versus an unclear MSRP, and you are getting 20.2% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 2.5% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%. GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) is the newer 2020 card, so it still has a real case if you care more about newer architecture, lower power draw (50W vs 100W), and future-proofing than about squeezing out the strongest gaming value today.

When does GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) make more sense than Quadro P4200?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It makes more sense if your priority is newer architecture, lower power draw (50W vs 100W), future-proofing, and staying closer to an unclear MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of Quadro P4200. The trade-off is that Quadro P4200 currently gives you 2.5% higher G3D Mark and 20.2% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%.

Games Benchmarks

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) Benchmark Check

Quadro P4200 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)	Quadro P4200
1080p
low	90 FPS	127 FPS
medium	81 FPS	108 FPS
high	67 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	55 FPS	64 FPS
1440p
low	84 FPS	103 FPS
medium	72 FPS	85 FPS
high	57 FPS	67 FPS
ultra	47 FPS	47 FPS
4K
low	40 FPS	44 FPS
medium	37 FPS	38 FPS
high	25 FPS	28 FPS
ultra	22 FPS	24 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)Open Quadro P4200

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)	Quadro P4200
1080p
low	201 FPS	230 FPS
medium	177 FPS	196 FPS
high	141 FPS	151 FPS
ultra	105 FPS	121 FPS
1440p
low	142 FPS	165 FPS
medium	119 FPS	139 FPS
high	96 FPS	112 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	89 FPS
4K
low	86 FPS	97 FPS
medium	73 FPS	80 FPS
high	58 FPS	67 FPS
ultra	44 FPS	51 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)Open Quadro P4200

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)	Quadro P4200
1080p
low	455 FPS	467 FPS
medium	364 FPS	374 FPS
high	286 FPS	311 FPS
ultra	228 FPS	233 FPS
1440p
low	341 FPS	350 FPS
medium	273 FPS	280 FPS
high	218 FPS	233 FPS
ultra	171 FPS	175 FPS
4K
low	222 FPS	233 FPS
medium	182 FPS	187 FPS
high	131 FPS	156 FPS
ultra	88 FPS	117 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)Open Quadro P4200

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)	Quadro P4200
1080p
low	388 FPS	257 FPS
medium	317 FPS	226 FPS
high	258 FPS	182 FPS
ultra	218 FPS	152 FPS
1440p
low	314 FPS	193 FPS
medium	255 FPS	169 FPS
high	191 FPS	131 FPS
ultra	154 FPS	108 FPS
4K
low	152 FPS	105 FPS
medium	114 FPS	87 FPS
high	101 FPS	69 FPS
ultra	80 FPS	55 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)Open Quadro P4200

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) and Quadro P4200

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1350 MHz to 1485 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,119 points.

Quadro P4200

The Quadro P4200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1227 MHz to 1647 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,376 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) scores 10,119 and the Quadro P4200 reaches 10,376 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) is built on Turing while the Quadro P4200 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)) vs 2,304 (Quadro P4200). Raw compute: 3.041 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)) vs 7.589 TFLOPS (Quadro P4200). Boost clocks: 1485 MHz vs 1647 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)	Quadro P4200
G3D Mark Score	10,119	10,376+3%
Architecture	Turing	Pascal
Process Node	12 nm	16 nm
Shading Units	1024	2304+125%
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.041 TFLOPS	7.589 TFLOPS+150%
Boost Clock	1485 MHz	1647 MHz+11%
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	64	144+125%
L1 Cache	1 MB+19%	0.84 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro P4200 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)	Quadro P4200
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro P4200 has 8 GB. The Quadro P4200 offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)) vs 2 MB (Quadro P4200) — the Quadro P4200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)	Quadro P4200
VRAM Capacity	6 GB	8 GB+33%
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	192-bit	256-bit+33%
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)) vs 12 (Quadro P4200). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)	Quadro P4200
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12
Vulkan	1.2	1.3+8%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)) vs NVENC 6th Gen (Quadro P4200). Decoder: NVDEC 4th Gen vs NVDEC 3rd Gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)) vs H.265,H.264,VP9 (Quadro P4200).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)	Quadro P4200
Encoder	NVENC 6th Gen	NVENC 6th Gen
Decoder	NVDEC 4th Gen	NVDEC 3rd Gen
Codecs	H.264,H.265,VP9	H.265,H.264,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) draws 50W versus the Quadro P4200's 100W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile) is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)) vs 500W (Quadro P4200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 80.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Mobile)	Quadro P4200
TDP	50W-50%	100W
Recommended PSU	500W	500W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	—	105mm
Height	—	82mm
Slots	0	0
Temp (Load)	75-6%	80
Perf/Watt	202.4+95%	103.8