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

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $320 less on MSRP ($279 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
✅Delivers 112.3% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 45.7 vs 21.5 G3D/$ ($279 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs Unknown).
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 120W instead of 250W, a 130W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.

Radeon Pro Vega 64

2017

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
114.7% HIGHER MSRP
$599 MSRPvs$279 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 21.5 vs 45.7 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $279 MSRP).
❌108.3% higher power demand at 250W vs 120W.

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti

2019

Radeon Pro Vega 64

2017

Why buy it

✅Costs $320 less on MSRP ($279 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
✅Delivers 112.3% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 45.7 vs 21.5 G3D/$ ($279 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs Unknown).
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 120W instead of 250W, a 130W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
114.7% HIGHER MSRP
$599 MSRPvs$279 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 21.5 vs 45.7 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $279 MSRP).
❌108.3% higher power demand at 250W vs 120W.

Quick Answers

So, is Radeon Pro Vega 64 better than GeForce GTX 1660 Ti?

Yes. Radeon Pro Vega 64 is clearly the better overall GPU here. You are also looking at 12,891 vs 12,747 in G3D Mark. On top of that, Radeon Pro Vega 64 is a 2017 card with FSR upscaling, while GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is a 2019 model from an older generation with no meaningful modern upscaling stack. So this is not really a tight same-tier comparison. It is more a modern card against an older, weaker alternative.

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

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2019 generation instead of 2017, more VRAM at 6 GB instead of Unknown, the stronger feature stack with no meaningful modern upscaling stack instead of FSR upscaling, and a 12nm process instead of 14nm. That extra memory headroom makes it the safer pick for newer games, heavier textures, and higher settings over time.

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

Radeon Pro Vega 64 is the smarter buy by a wide margin. Radeon Pro Vega 64 is about 114.7% more expensive on MSRP at $599 MSRP versus $279 MSRP, and you are getting 1.1% higher G3D Mark. GeForce GTX 1660 Ti really only makes sense now as a very cheap stopgap or a used-market placeholder.

When does GeForce GTX 1660 Ti make more sense than Radeon Pro Vega 64?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is very strong for 1080p, good for 1440p, and more limited at 4K. It makes more sense if your priority is newer architecture, lower power draw (120W vs 250W), future-proofing, and staying closer to $279 MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of Radeon Pro Vega 64. The trade-off is that Radeon Pro Vega 64 currently gives you 1.1% higher G3D Mark. GeForce GTX 1660 Ti still holds the G3D-per-dollar lead, so the performance win comes with a real value premium.

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 Benchmark Check

Radeon Pro Vega 64 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon Pro Vega 64
1080p
low	98 FPS	106 FPS
medium	88 FPS	96 FPS
high	76 FPS	81 FPS
ultra	63 FPS	67 FPS
1440p
low	90 FPS	94 FPS
medium	77 FPS	81 FPS
high	66 FPS	65 FPS
ultra	54 FPS	55 FPS
4K
low	45 FPS	47 FPS
medium	41 FPS	42 FPS
high	30 FPS	32 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	29 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Open Radeon Pro Vega 64

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon Pro Vega 64
1080p
low	269 FPS	301 FPS
medium	227 FPS	262 FPS
high	170 FPS	203 FPS
ultra	136 FPS	164 FPS
1440p
low	183 FPS	204 FPS
medium	156 FPS	175 FPS
high	124 FPS	144 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	114 FPS
4K
low	106 FPS	100 FPS
medium	89 FPS	84 FPS
high	72 FPS	71 FPS
ultra	56 FPS	56 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Open Radeon Pro Vega 64

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon Pro Vega 64
1080p
low	532 FPS	580 FPS
medium	443 FPS	464 FPS
high	347 FPS	387 FPS
ultra	287 FPS	290 FPS
1440p
low	430 FPS	435 FPS
medium	344 FPS	348 FPS
high	287 FPS	290 FPS
ultra	215 FPS	218 FPS
4K
low	287 FPS	290 FPS
medium	229 FPS	232 FPS
high	166 FPS	193 FPS
ultra	126 FPS	145 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Open Radeon Pro Vega 64

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon Pro Vega 64
1080p
low	401 FPS	258 FPS
medium	326 FPS	213 FPS
high	263 FPS	180 FPS
ultra	221 FPS	151 FPS
1440p
low	330 FPS	196 FPS
medium	268 FPS	162 FPS
high	206 FPS	133 FPS
ultra	164 FPS	112 FPS
4K
low	158 FPS	118 FPS
medium	119 FPS	105 FPS
high	107 FPS	85 FPS
ultra	85 FPS	70 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Open Radeon Pro Vega 64

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1660 Ti and Radeon Pro Vega 64

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 22 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1500 MHz to 1770 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 120W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,747 points. Launch price was $279.

Radeon Pro Vega 64

The Radeon Pro Vega 64 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 27 2017. It features the GCN 5.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1250 MHz to 1350 MHz. It has 4096 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,891 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti scores 12,747 and the Radeon Pro Vega 64 reaches 12,891 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro Vega 64 uses GCN 5.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 4,096 (Radeon Pro Vega 64). Raw compute: 5.437 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 11.06 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro Vega 64). Boost clocks: 1770 MHz vs 1350 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon Pro Vega 64
G3D Mark Score	12,747	12,891+1%
Architecture	Turing	GCN 5.0
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	1536	4096+167%
Compute (TFLOPS)	5.437 TFLOPS	11.06 TFLOPS+103%
Boost Clock	1770 MHz+31%	1350 MHz
ROPs	48	64+33%
TMUs	96	256+167%
L1 Cache	1.5 MB+50%	1 MB
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	4 MB+167%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon Pro Vega 64 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon Pro Vega 64
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro Vega 64 has 0 MB. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 4 MB (Radeon Pro Vega 64) — the Radeon Pro Vega 64 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon Pro Vega 64
VRAM Capacity	6 GB	Shared System RAM
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	192-bit+50%	128-bit
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	4 MB+167%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 12.1 (Radeon Pro Vega 64). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon Pro Vega 64
DirectX	12	12.1
Vulkan	1.4+27%	1.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 7th gen (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs VCE 4.0 (Radeon Pro Vega 64). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 7.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon Pro Vega 64).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon Pro Vega 64
Encoder	NVENC 7th gen	VCE 4.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	UVD 7.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti draws 120W versus the Radeon Pro Vega 64's 250W — a 70.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 1W (Radeon Pro Vega 64). Power connectors: 8-pin vs Integrated. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 85°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon Pro Vega 64
TDP	120W-52%	250W
Recommended PSU	450W	1W-100%
Power Connector	8-pin	Integrated
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	75°C-12%	85°C
Perf/Watt	106.2+106%	51.6

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti launched at $279 MSRP, while the Radeon Pro Vega 64 launched at $599. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti costs 53.4% less ($320 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 45.7 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 21.5 (Radeon Pro Vega 64) — the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti offers 112.6% better value. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).