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 $120 less on MSRP ($279 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
✅Delivers 39.9% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 45.7 vs 32.6 G3D/$ ($279 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 120W instead of 210W, a 90W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 280mm, a 51mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 6 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.

Radeon RX Vega 56

2017

Why buy it

✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 6 GB).

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌
43% HIGHER MSRP
$399 MSRPvs$279 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 32.6 vs 45.7 G3D/$ ($399 MSRP vs $279 MSRP).
❌75% higher power demand at 210W vs 120W.
❌22.3% longer card at 280mm vs 229mm.

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti

2019

Radeon RX Vega 56

2017

Why buy it

✅Costs $120 less on MSRP ($279 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
✅Delivers 39.9% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 45.7 vs 32.6 G3D/$ ($279 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 120W instead of 210W, a 90W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 280mm, a 51mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Why buy it

✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 6 GB).

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 6 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌
43% HIGHER MSRP
$399 MSRPvs$279 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 32.6 vs 45.7 G3D/$ ($399 MSRP vs $279 MSRP).
❌75% higher power demand at 210W vs 120W.
❌22.3% longer card at 280mm vs 229mm.

Quick Answers

So, is Radeon RX Vega 56 better than GeForce GTX 1660 Ti?

Yes. Radeon RX Vega 56 is clearly the better overall GPU here. You are also looking at 13,026 vs 12,747 in G3D Mark. On top of that, Radeon RX Vega 56 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, the stronger feature stack with no meaningful modern upscaling stack instead of FSR upscaling, and a 12nm process instead of 14nm. That broader feature stack should age better as more games lean on modern upscaling and frame-generation support.

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

Radeon RX Vega 56 is the smarter buy by a wide margin. Radeon RX Vega 56 is about 43.0% more expensive on MSRP at $399 MSRP versus $279 MSRP, and you are getting 2.2% 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 RX Vega 56?

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 210W), future-proofing, and staying closer to $279 MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of Radeon RX Vega 56. The trade-off is that Radeon RX Vega 56 currently gives you 2.2% 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 RX Vega 56 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon RX Vega 56
1080p
low	98 FPS	126 FPS
medium	88 FPS	108 FPS
high	76 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	63 FPS	64 FPS
1440p
low	90 FPS	102 FPS
medium	77 FPS	85 FPS
high	66 FPS	66 FPS
ultra	54 FPS	46 FPS
4K
low	45 FPS	45 FPS
medium	41 FPS	39 FPS
high	30 FPS	28 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	24 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Open Radeon RX Vega 56

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon RX Vega 56
1080p
low	269 FPS	286 FPS
medium	227 FPS	245 FPS
high	170 FPS	185 FPS
ultra	136 FPS	154 FPS
1440p
low	183 FPS	194 FPS
medium	156 FPS	168 FPS
high	124 FPS	136 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	109 FPS
4K
low	106 FPS	103 FPS
medium	89 FPS	87 FPS
high	72 FPS	72 FPS
ultra	56 FPS	56 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Open Radeon RX Vega 56

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon RX Vega 56
1080p
low	574 FPS	586 FPS
medium	459 FPS	469 FPS
high	382 FPS	391 FPS
ultra	287 FPS	293 FPS
1440p
low	430 FPS	440 FPS
medium	344 FPS	352 FPS
high	287 FPS	293 FPS
ultra	215 FPS	220 FPS
4K
low	287 FPS	293 FPS
medium	229 FPS	234 FPS
high	191 FPS	195 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	147 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Open Radeon RX Vega 56

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon RX Vega 56
1080p
low	401 FPS	271 FPS
medium	326 FPS	236 FPS
high	263 FPS	201 FPS
ultra	221 FPS	162 FPS
1440p
low	330 FPS	206 FPS
medium	268 FPS	184 FPS
high	206 FPS	157 FPS
ultra	164 FPS	126 FPS
4K
low	158 FPS	123 FPS
medium	119 FPS	108 FPS
high	107 FPS	84 FPS
ultra	85 FPS	68 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Open Radeon RX Vega 56

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1660 Ti and Radeon RX Vega 56

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 RX Vega 56

The Radeon RX Vega 56 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 14 2017. It features the GCN 5.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1156 MHz to 1471 MHz. It has 3584 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 210W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,026 points. Launch price was $399.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti scores 12,747 and the Radeon RX Vega 56 reaches 13,026 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is built on Turing while the Radeon RX Vega 56 uses GCN 5.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 3,584 (Radeon RX Vega 56). Raw compute: 5.437 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 10.54 TFLOPS (Radeon RX Vega 56). Boost clocks: 1770 MHz vs 1471 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon RX Vega 56
G3D Mark Score	12,747	13,026+2%
Architecture	Turing	GCN 5.0
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	1536	3584+133%
Compute (TFLOPS)	5.437 TFLOPS	10.54 TFLOPS+94%
Boost Clock	1770 MHz+20%	1471 MHz
ROPs	48	64+33%
TMUs	96	224+133%
L1 Cache	1.5 MB+70%	0.88 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 RX Vega 56 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon RX Vega 56
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 RX Vega 56 has 8 GB. The Radeon RX Vega 56 offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 288 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 410 GB/s (Radeon RX Vega 56) — a 42.4% advantage for the Radeon RX Vega 56. Bus width: 192-bit vs 2048-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 4 MB (Radeon RX Vega 56) — the Radeon RX Vega 56 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon RX Vega 56
VRAM Capacity	6 GB	8 GB+33%
Memory Type	GDDR6	HBM2
Memory Bandwidth	288 GB/s	410 GB/s+42%
Bus Width	192-bit	2048-bit+967%
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	4 MB+167%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 12 (12_1) (Radeon RX Vega 56). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon RX Vega 56
DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.4+8%	1.3
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 RX Vega 56). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 7.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs H.264,H.265,VP9 (Radeon RX Vega 56).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon RX Vega 56
Encoder	NVENC 7th gen	VCE 4.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	UVD 7.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,H.265,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti draws 120W versus the Radeon RX Vega 56's 210W — a 54.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 650W (Radeon RX Vega 56). Power connectors: 8-pin vs 2x 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 280mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660 Ti	Radeon RX Vega 56
TDP	120W-43%	210W
Recommended PSU	450W-31%	650W
Power Connector	8-pin	2x 8-pin
Length	229mm	280mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	75°C	75
Perf/Watt	106.2+71%	62.0

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti launched at $279 MSRP, while the Radeon RX Vega 56 launched at $399. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti costs 30.1% less ($120 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 45.7 (GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) vs 32.6 (Radeon RX Vega 56) — the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti offers 40.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).