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

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $4,780 less on MSRP ($219 MSRP vs $4,999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 2157.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 53.1 vs 2.4 G3D/$ ($219 MSRP vs $4,999 MSRP).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Quadro M6000: it remains the more sensible modern option while Quadro M6000 is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
✅Draws 120W instead of 250W, a 130W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro M6000 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 6 GB vs 12 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.

Quadro M6000

2015

Why buy it

✅14.5% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (12 GB vs 6 GB).

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 12 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌
2182.6% HIGHER MSRP
$4,999 MSRPvs$219 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.4 vs 53.1 G3D/$ ($4,999 MSRP vs $219 MSRP).
❌108.3% higher power demand at 250W vs 120W.
❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.

GeForce GTX 1660

2019

Quadro M6000

2015

Why buy it

✅Costs $4,780 less on MSRP ($219 MSRP vs $4,999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 2157.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 53.1 vs 2.4 G3D/$ ($219 MSRP vs $4,999 MSRP).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Quadro M6000: it remains the more sensible modern option while Quadro M6000 is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
✅Draws 120W instead of 250W, a 130W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Why buy it

✅14.5% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (12 GB vs 6 GB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro M6000 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 6 GB vs 12 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.

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 12 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌
2182.6% HIGHER MSRP
$4,999 MSRPvs$219 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.4 vs 53.1 G3D/$ ($4,999 MSRP vs $219 MSRP).
❌108.3% higher power demand at 250W vs 120W.
❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.

Quick Answers

So, is Quadro M6000 better than GeForce GTX 1660?

Yes, but this is not really about a huge raw performance gap. Quadro M6000 averages 14.5% more FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. The broader synthetic picture is also very close at 11,639 vs 11,769 in G3D Mark. The bigger reason to prefer Quadro M6000 is the overall package: you are getting no meaningful modern upscaling stack.

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

GeForce GTX 1660 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2019 generation instead of 2015 and a 12nm process instead of 28nm. That makes it the safer long-run choice for modern games.

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

Quadro M6000 is the smarter buy by a wide margin. Quadro M6000 is about 2182.6% more expensive on MSRP at $4,999 MSRP versus $219 MSRP, and you are getting 14.5% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 1.1% higher G3D Mark. GeForce GTX 1660 really only makes sense now as a very cheap stopgap or a used-market placeholder.

When does GeForce GTX 1660 make more sense than Quadro M6000?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1660 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 (120W vs 250W), future-proofing, and staying closer to $219 MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of Quadro M6000. The trade-off is that Quadro M6000 currently gives you 1.1% higher G3D Mark and 14.5% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. GeForce GTX 1660 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 Benchmark Check

Quadro M6000 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660	Quadro M6000
1080p
low	101 FPS	121 FPS
medium	89 FPS	103 FPS
high	78 FPS	88 FPS
ultra	64 FPS	59 FPS
1440p
low	91 FPS	98 FPS
medium	78 FPS	82 FPS
high	67 FPS	64 FPS
ultra	56 FPS	43 FPS
4K
low	47 FPS	38 FPS
medium	44 FPS	34 FPS
high	33 FPS	21 FPS
ultra	29 FPS	18 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Open Quadro M6000

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660	Quadro M6000
1080p
low	197 FPS	187 FPS
medium	168 FPS	166 FPS
high	138 FPS	135 FPS
ultra	99 FPS	104 FPS
1440p
low	130 FPS	128 FPS
medium	105 FPS	104 FPS
high	86 FPS	82 FPS
ultra	64 FPS	62 FPS
4K
low	60 FPS	60 FPS
medium	50 FPS	50 FPS
high	48 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	37 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Open Quadro M6000

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660	Quadro M6000
1080p
low	524 FPS	530 FPS
medium	419 FPS	424 FPS
high	346 FPS	353 FPS
ultra	262 FPS	265 FPS
1440p
low	393 FPS	397 FPS
medium	314 FPS	318 FPS
high	262 FPS	265 FPS
ultra	196 FPS	199 FPS
4K
low	262 FPS	265 FPS
medium	210 FPS	212 FPS
high	164 FPS	177 FPS
ultra	124 FPS	132 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Open Quadro M6000

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660	Quadro M6000
1080p
low	364 FPS	233 FPS
medium	301 FPS	200 FPS
high	251 FPS	165 FPS
ultra	216 FPS	137 FPS
1440p
low	296 FPS	179 FPS
medium	243 FPS	157 FPS
high	192 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	156 FPS	101 FPS
4K
low	150 FPS	102 FPS
medium	113 FPS	82 FPS
high	102 FPS	65 FPS
ultra	81 FPS	52 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Open Quadro M6000

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1660 and Quadro M6000

GeForce GTX 1660

The GeForce GTX 1660 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 14 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1530 MHz to 1785 MHz. It has 1408 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 120W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,639 points. Launch price was $219.

Quadro M6000

The Quadro M6000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 21 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 988 MHz to 1114 MHz. It has 3072 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,769 points. Launch price was $4,199.99.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1660 scores 11,639 and the Quadro M6000 reaches 11,769 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1660 is built on Turing while the Quadro M6000 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,408 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 3,072 (Quadro M6000). Raw compute: 5.027 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 6.844 TFLOPS (Quadro M6000). Boost clocks: 1785 MHz vs 1114 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Quadro M6000
G3D Mark Score	11,639	11,769+1%
Architecture	Turing	Maxwell 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1408	3072+118%
Compute (TFLOPS)	5.027 TFLOPS	6.844 TFLOPS+36%
Boost Clock	1785 MHz+60%	1114 MHz
ROPs	48	96+100%
TMUs	88	192+118%
L1 Cache	1.4 MB+27%	1.1 MB
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	3 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1660 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro M6000 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Quadro M6000
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 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M6000 has 12 GB. The Quadro M6000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 317 GB/s (Quadro M6000) — a 65.1% advantage for the Quadro M6000. Bus width: 192-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 3 MB (Quadro M6000) — the Quadro M6000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Quadro M6000
VRAM Capacity	6 GB	12 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	192 GB/s	317 GB/s+65%
Bus Width	192-bit	384-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	3 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.1 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 12/1 (Quadro M6000). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Quadro M6000
DirectX	12.1	12/1
Vulkan	1.3+18%	1.1
OpenGL	4.6+2%	4.5
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1660) vs NVENC 4.0 (Quadro M6000). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Quadro M6000).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Quadro M6000
Encoder	7th Gen NVENC	NVENC 4.0
Decoder	5th Gen NVDEC	PureVideo HD VP6
Codecs	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1660 draws 120W versus the Quadro M6000's 250W — a 70.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1660 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 500W (Quadro M6000). Power connectors: 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 80°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Quadro M6000
TDP	120W-52%	250W
Recommended PSU	450W-10%	500W
Power Connector	8-pin	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	112mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	75°C-6%	80°C
Perf/Watt	97.0+106%	47.1

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1660 launched at $219 MSRP, while the Quadro M6000 launched at $4999. The GeForce GTX 1660 costs 95.6% less ($4780 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 53.1 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 2.4 (Quadro M6000) — the GeForce GTX 1660 offers 2112.5% better value. The GeForce GTX 1660 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).