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

✅8.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Costs $231 less on MSRP ($219 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅Delivers 112.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 53.1 vs 25.0 G3D/$ ($219 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs Unknown).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon Pro Vega 48: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon Pro Vega 48 is already obsolete for modern gaming.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 6 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌300% higher power demand at 120W vs 30W.

Radeon Pro Vega 48

2019

Why buy it

✅Draws 30W instead of 120W, a 90W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1660 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2019-era hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
105.5% HIGHER MSRP
$450 MSRPvs$219 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 25.0 vs 53.1 G3D/$ ($450 MSRP vs $219 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1660

2019

Radeon Pro Vega 48

2019

Why buy it

✅8.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Costs $231 less on MSRP ($219 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅Delivers 112.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 53.1 vs 25.0 G3D/$ ($219 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs Unknown).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon Pro Vega 48: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon Pro Vega 48 is already obsolete for modern gaming.

Why buy it

✅Draws 30W instead of 120W, a 90W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 6 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌300% higher power demand at 120W vs 30W.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1660 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2019-era hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
105.5% HIGHER MSRP
$450 MSRPvs$219 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 25.0 vs 53.1 G3D/$ ($450 MSRP vs $219 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1660 better than Radeon Pro Vega 48?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1660 is clearly the better overall GPU here. GeForce GTX 1660 averages 8.3% more FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. You are also looking at 11,639 vs 11,270 in G3D Mark. On top of that, GeForce GTX 1660 is a 2019 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while Radeon Pro Vega 48 is a 2019 model from an older generation with FSR upscaling. 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 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 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?

GeForce GTX 1660 is the smarter buy today, but it is not as lopsided as a simple winner label makes it sound. GeForce GTX 1660 is about $231 cheaper on MSRP at $219 MSRP versus $450 MSRP, and you are getting 8.3% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 3.3% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 112.2%. That is why the better overall card still comes out as the smarter buy today, not just the faster one.

Is Radeon Pro Vega 48 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. Radeon Pro Vega 48 is still a strong modern gaming GPU: it is still fine for 1080p, but 1440p and especially 4K require more compromise. It remains a good buy when you can get it meaningfully cheaper than the alternative around $450 MSRP, even if GeForce GTX 1660 is still the cleaner recommendation on overall value today.

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

Radeon Pro Vega 48 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660	Radeon Pro Vega 48
1080p
low	101 FPS	94 FPS
medium	89 FPS	82 FPS
high	78 FPS	70 FPS
ultra	64 FPS	48 FPS
1440p
low	91 FPS	78 FPS
medium	78 FPS	68 FPS
high	67 FPS	52 FPS
ultra	56 FPS	36 FPS
4K
low	47 FPS	31 FPS
medium	44 FPS	28 FPS
high	33 FPS	22 FPS
ultra	29 FPS	19 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Open Radeon Pro Vega 48

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660	Radeon Pro Vega 48
1080p
low	197 FPS	226 FPS
medium	168 FPS	192 FPS
high	138 FPS	152 FPS
ultra	99 FPS	122 FPS
1440p
low	130 FPS	162 FPS
medium	105 FPS	138 FPS
high	86 FPS	113 FPS
ultra	64 FPS	90 FPS
4K
low	60 FPS	96 FPS
medium	50 FPS	79 FPS
high	48 FPS	67 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	51 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Open Radeon Pro Vega 48

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660	Radeon Pro Vega 48
1080p
low	524 FPS	453 FPS
medium	419 FPS	392 FPS
high	346 FPS	331 FPS
ultra	262 FPS	254 FPS
1440p
low	393 FPS	323 FPS
medium	314 FPS	281 FPS
high	262 FPS	244 FPS
ultra	196 FPS	190 FPS
4K
low	262 FPS	217 FPS
medium	210 FPS	181 FPS
high	164 FPS	140 FPS
ultra	124 FPS	104 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Open Radeon Pro Vega 48

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1660	Radeon Pro Vega 48
1080p
low	364 FPS	176 FPS
medium	301 FPS	142 FPS
high	251 FPS	120 FPS
ultra	216 FPS	102 FPS
1440p
low	296 FPS	126 FPS
medium	243 FPS	105 FPS
high	192 FPS	90 FPS
ultra	156 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	150 FPS	72 FPS
medium	113 FPS	60 FPS
high	102 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	81 FPS	37 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1660 Open Radeon Pro Vega 48

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1660 and Radeon Pro Vega 48

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.

Radeon Pro Vega 48

The Radeon Pro Vega 48 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 19 2019. It features the GCN 5.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1200 MHz to 1300 MHz. It has 3072 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,270 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1660 scores 11,639 and the Radeon Pro Vega 48 reaches 11,270 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1660 is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro Vega 48 uses GCN 5.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,408 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 3,072 (Radeon Pro Vega 48). Raw compute: 5.027 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 7.987 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro Vega 48). Boost clocks: 1785 MHz vs 1300 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Radeon Pro Vega 48
G3D Mark Score	11,639+3%	11,270
Architecture	Turing	GCN 5.0
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	1408	3072+118%
Compute (TFLOPS)	5.027 TFLOPS	7.987 TFLOPS+59%
Boost Clock	1785 MHz+37%	1300 MHz
ROPs	48	64+33%
TMUs	88	192+118%
L1 Cache	1.4 MB+87%	0.75 MB
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	4 MB+167%

✨

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 Radeon Pro Vega 48 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Radeon Pro Vega 48
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 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro Vega 48 has 0 MB. The GeForce GTX 1660 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) vs 4 MB (Radeon Pro Vega 48) — the Radeon Pro Vega 48 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Radeon Pro Vega 48
VRAM Capacity	6 GB	Shared System RAM
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	192-bit+50%	128-bit
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	4 MB+167%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.1 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 12.1 (Radeon Pro Vega 48). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Radeon Pro Vega 48
DirectX	12.1	12.1
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1660) vs VCE 4.0 (Radeon Pro Vega 48). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs UVD 7.0. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon Pro Vega 48).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Radeon Pro Vega 48
Encoder	7th Gen NVENC	VCE 4.0
Decoder	5th Gen NVDEC	UVD 7.0
Codecs	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1660 draws 120W versus the Radeon Pro Vega 48's 30W — a 120% difference. The Radeon Pro Vega 48 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 1W (Radeon Pro Vega 48). Power connectors: 8-pin vs Integrated. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 85°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1660	Radeon Pro Vega 48
TDP	120W	30W-75%
Recommended PSU	450W	1W-100%
Power Connector	8-pin	Integrated
Length	229mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	75°C-12%	85°C
Perf/Watt	97.0	375.7+287%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1660 launched at $219 MSRP, while the Radeon Pro Vega 48 launched at $450. The GeForce GTX 1660 costs 51.3% less ($231 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 53.1 (GeForce GTX 1660) vs 25.0 (Radeon Pro Vega 48) — the GeForce GTX 1660 offers 112.4% better value.