AMD Radeon 740M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 740M is an integrated graphics processor built on TSMC's 4 nm process, part of the Phoenix2 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is a discrete, dual-slot card from the GeForce 16 series, fabricated at 12 nm. The two GPUs occupy completely different segments of the market, one designed for power-efficient mobile integration and the other for desktop performance. Benchmark data reveals a stark performance gap, with the GTX 1660 winning both head-to-head tests by substantial margins, yet the 740M's architectural advantages in process node and feature support make it a fascinating study in how integrated graphics have evolved.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 740M compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 in Geekbench OpenCL performance?

A: The GTX 1660 scores 47,850 points in Geekbench OpenCL, while the 740M scores 10,172 points. This means the GTX 1660 outperforms the 740M by 78.7% in this test, representing a massive lead in raw compute workloads.

Q: What is the difference in Vulkan benchmark scores between the two cards?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 1660 achieves 50,137 points compared to the 740M's 15,568 points. The delta is -68.9% from the perspective of the AMD card, indicating the NVIDIA card is more than three times faster in this API.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score and how do their percentiles compare?

A: The 740M has an average benchmark score of 12,870, placing it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 1660 has an average score of 11,680, placing it in the 51st percentile. Despite losing head-to-head, the 740M actually has a higher average score and percentile ranking.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to each card according to the data?

A: The 740M's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro W5100 (12847 avg score, 0.2% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12928 avg score, -0.4% delta). The GTX 1660's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (11627 avg score, 0.5% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT (11842 avg score, -1.4% delta).

Q: What are the manufacturing process nodes for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 740M is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 uses a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. This represents a significant generational advantage for the AMD chip in terms of manufacturing efficiency.

Q: How do the transistor counts and die sizes differ between the two cards?

A: The 740M contains 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die, yielding a density of 152.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The GTX 1660 has 6,600 million transistors on a much larger 284 mm² die, with a density of only 23.2 million per square millimeter.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is fundamental. The AMD Radeon 740M utilizes the RDNA 3.0 architecture, specifically the Phoenix2 chip, and is classified under the Navi III IGP generation. This is a 4 nm design from TSMC, which allows for an extraordinarily high transistor density of 152.6 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 uses the Turing architecture with the TU116 chip, belonging to the GeForce 16 generation, fabricated on a 12 nm process with a much lower density of 23.2 million transistors per square millimeter.

The memory architecture could not be more different. The 740M uses system-shared memory, meaning its memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all dependent on the host system. The GTX 1660 features dedicated 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 192.1 GB/s of bandwidth. This dedicated memory setup gives the NVIDIA card a significant advantage in memory-intensive workloads, as it does not have to compete with the CPU for system memory bandwidth.

Feature support is another differentiator. The 740M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GTX 1660 only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). This means the AMD card has access to more advanced DirectX 12 features. The 740M also includes 4 ray tracing cores, whereas the GTX 1660 has no ray tracing cores at all. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the NVIDIA card's lack of RT cores limits its ability to handle hardware-accelerated ray tracing workloads.

The bus interface differs as well. The 740M connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the GTX 1660 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The newer PCIe 4.0 standard offers higher bandwidth per lane, but the x8 configuration may limit throughput compared to the full x16 interface of the older standard. The 740M is an IGP with no power connectors and a 45 W TDP, while the GTX 1660 is a dual-slot card requiring a single 8-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested power supply.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results tell a one-sided story. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1660 scores 47,850 points against the 740M's 10,172 points. The delta of -78.7% means the AMD card is less than a quarter as fast as the NVIDIA card in this compute-oriented test. This is a crushing defeat for the integrated GPU, highlighting the raw compute horsepower advantage of a discrete card with 1,408 shading units versus 256.

The Vulkan benchmark shows a similar pattern, though slightly less extreme. The GTX 1660 achieves 50,137 points while the 740M manages 15,568 points, resulting in a delta of -68.9%. While still a commanding lead for NVIDIA, the smaller gap in Vulkan suggests the RDNA 3.0 architecture handles this API relatively better than OpenCL, perhaps due to its modern design and driver optimizations for lower-overhead APIs.

The wins column is clear: NVIDIA takes 2 wins, AMD takes 0. However, the aggregate benchmark data offers a more nuanced picture. The 740M has an average benchmark score of 12,870 across all its tested workloads, while the GTX 1660 averages 11,680. This seems contradictory until you consider that the head-to-head tests are only two specific workloads, while the average includes a broader set of benchmarks. The 740M's percentile ranking of 53 versus the GTX 1660's 51 confirms that in the broader GPU landscape, the integrated chip holds its own surprisingly well.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal stark contrasts across every major category. The 740M operates at a base clock of 800 MHz with a boost clock of 2800 MHz, while the GTX 1660 runs at 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost. The AMD chip's higher boost clock partially compensates for its lower shader count, but the NVIDIA card's sheer number of execution units overwhelms this advantage.

Shading units number 256 on the 740M versus 1,408 on the GTX 1660. Texture mapping units are 16 versus 88, and render output units are 8 versus 48. These differences translate directly to throughput rates: the 740M achieves 22.40 GPixel/s and 44.80 GTexel/s, while the GTX 1660 reaches 85.68 GPixel/s and 157.1 GTexel/s. Floating point performance shows the GTX 1660 delivering 5.027 TFLOPS against the 740M's 2.867 TFLOPS, with the NVIDIA card also offering 10.05 TFLOPS FP16 versus the AMD card's 2.867 TFLOPS FP16.

Power consumption differs dramatically: 45 W TDP for the integrated 740M against 120 W for the discrete GTX 1660. Physical specifications show the 740M as an IGP with no slot width or power connectors, while the GTX 1660 measures 229 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 35 mm in width. The GTX 1660 has a launch MSRP of 219 USD, while the 740M has no listed launch MSRP. Production status also differs, with the 740M listed as Active and the GTX 1660 as End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 740M wins in efficiency and modern features. Its 4 nm process node is generations ahead of the 12 nm process used by the GTX 1660, enabling vastly superior transistor density. The chip supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with ray tracing cores, a feature completely absent from the GTX 1660. The 740M's 45 W TDP makes it suitable for systems without discrete graphics, drawing less than half the power of the GTX 1660. Its higher average benchmark score and 53rd percentile ranking suggest it performs better than the GTX 1660's 51st percentile across a wider range of workloads.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 wins decisively in raw performance. Its 78.7% lead in OpenCL and 68.9% lead in Vulkan are massive margins. The dedicated 6 GB GDDR5 memory with 192.1 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent, high-speed memory access that system-shared memory cannot match. The GTX 1660's higher pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput make it clearly superior for gaming and GPU compute tasks. Its 1,408 shading units deliver nearly five times the parallel processing capability of the 740M's 256 units.

For use cases, the 740M is suited for lightweight computing, media playback, and casual gaming on thin-and-light laptops where power efficiency is paramount. The GTX 1660 is for desktop gaming rigs and workstations requiring reliable, high-performance graphics for demanding applications. The GTX 1660's end-of-life status means it is a legacy product, while the 740M represents current-generation technology.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split decision. For users needing maximum graphics performance, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is the overwhelming choice. Its benchmark victories are decisive, and its dedicated memory and high throughput rates make it suitable for gaming and compute work. The 78.7% and 68.9% deltas in head-to-head tests are not close to being competitive, and any workload requiring serious GPU power would favor the NVIDIA card.

For users prioritizing efficiency and modern features, the AMD Radeon 740M is the forward-looking option. Its 4 nm process, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and ray tracing cores represent architectural advancements the GTX 1660 cannot match. The 740M's higher average benchmark score and percentile ranking indicate it performs competitively in a broader context. Its 45 W TDP allows integration into systems where a discrete GPU would be impractical.

The GTX 1660 is for those who need performance now and have the power budget and physical space for a dual-slot card. The 740M is for those who value efficiency and are willing to sacrifice raw performance for a more modern, integrated solution. Given the GTX 1660's end-of-life status, the 740M represents the future direction of GPU technology, while the GTX 1660 remains a capable but aging workhorse. The choice ultimately depends on whether raw benchmark scores or architectural modernity matter more for the intended use case.