AMD Radeon HD 8850M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti and AMD Radeon HD 8850M represent two very different eras of mobile and desktop graphics, with the former being a modern desktop part and the latter an older mobile chip. Benchmark data shows a stark performance gap, with the GTX 1660 Ti dominating in the single available head-to-head test, while the HD 8850M holds its own only in terms of its position within the overall GPU landscape. This analysis relies strictly on the provided data to break down their comparative performance, architectural differences, and ideal use cases.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are decisively one-sided. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti scores 51,029 points, while the AMD Radeon HD 8850M manages 7,447 points. This translates to a massive 585.2% advantage for the GTX 1660 Ti, making it over six times faster in this compute-oriented workload. This is not a marginal win; it is a generational gap made visible in a single metric.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the picture remains consistent. The GTX 1660 Ti holds an average benchmark score of 7,723 across all its tested workloads, which includes DirectX 10, 11, 12, and 9 tests, as well as compute and 2D tests. The HD 8850M, with only the Geekbench OpenCL result to its name, has an average score of 7,447. While the averages are close, this is misleading because the GTX 1660 Ti’s average is pulled down by its low scores in legacy DirectX tests (e.g., 66 in Passmark DirectX 10, 51 in DirectX 12, and 190 in DirectX 9), whereas its modern compute and Vulkan scores are far higher. The HD 8850M’s single score is its only data point, so it does not face the same penalty.

The GTX 1660 Ti’s nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon 540 (average score 7,673, a delta of 0.7%), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7,580, delta 1.9%), and the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7,557, delta 2.2%). This places it in a cluster of low-end cards, despite its massive OpenCL lead over the HD 8850M, because its average is dragged down by the older API tests. Conversely, the HD 8850M’s nearest rivals include the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7,441, delta 0.1%), the AMD Radeon R7 350 (7,425, delta 0.3%), and even the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7,472, delta -0.3%). The data shows that while the GTX 1660 Ti crushes the HD 8850M in OpenCL, their overall average scores place them in similar percentiles (41st vs 40th), highlighting that the GTX 1660 Ti’s average is heavily skewed by its poor legacy DirectX performance.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process technologies. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti uses the TU116 chip based on the Turing architecture, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It packs 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 23.2 million per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon HD 8850M uses the Venus chip based on the older GCN 1.0 architecture, also built by TSMC but on a 28 nm process. It contains only 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, with a density of 12.2 million per mm². This means the GTX 1660 Ti has over four times the transistor count in a die that is more than twice the size, reflecting the generational leap in manufacturing and design.

Clock speeds tell a similar story of divergence. The GTX 1660 Ti runs at a base clock of 1500 MHz and boosts to 1770 MHz, while the HD 8850M operates at a much lower 575 MHz base and 625 MHz boost. This clock advantage, combined with the architectural improvements, contributes to the GTX 1660 Ti’s massive performance lead. Memory also differs significantly: the GTX 1660 Ti uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas the HD 8850M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing only 64.00 GB/s. The GTX 1660 Ti’s memory clock is listed as 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed, while the HD 8850M’s is 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective.

Feature-wise, both cards support DirectX 12, but the GTX 1660 Ti supports version 12_1 while the HD 8850M only supports 12 (11_1). Both offer OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan support differs: the GTX 1660 Ti supports Vulkan 1.4, while the HD 8850M supports Vulkan 1.2.170. Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores, so ray tracing and AI acceleration are absent from both. The GTX 1660 Ti also has a defined pixel rate of 84.96 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 169.9 GTexel/s, compared to the HD 8850M’s 10.00 GPixel/s and 25.00 GTexel/s.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1660 Ti wins decisively in compute performance, as shown by the 585.2% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. This makes it the clear choice for any workload that leverages OpenCL, such as general-purpose GPU computing, video encoding, or physics simulations. Its FP32 performance of 5.437 TFLOPS versus the HD 8850M’s 800.0 GFLOPS further reinforces this, though that specific metric is not in the head-to-head table. The GTX 1660 Ti also has a higher FP16 performance of 10.87 TFLOPS (2:1), which the HD 8850M lacks entirely (listed as null), suggesting better support for mixed-precision workloads.

The HD 8850M, with its single benchmark score, does not have a clear winning category in the data. Its average score of 7,447 is close to the GTX 1660 Ti’s average of 7,723, but this is due to the GTX 1660 Ti’s poor legacy DirectX scores, not because the HD 8850M is competitive in modern workloads. In fact, the HD 8850M’s nearest rival list includes the GTX 1650 with a delta of -0.3%, meaning the HD 8850M actually scores slightly higher on average than that card, but this is again an artifact of the limited test set. The HD 8850M’s advantage lies in its lower power profile, though no TDP is listed for it, and its smaller die size, which historically suggests it was designed for mobility. The data does not provide a single benchmark where the HD 8850M outperforms the GTX 1660 Ti.

For real-world gaming, the GTX 1660 Ti’s higher pixel rate (84.96 GPixel/s vs 10.00 GPixel/s) and texture rate (169.9 GTexel/s vs 25.00 GTexel/s) would translate to better fill-rate-bound scenarios, though these numbers are not directly compared in the head-to-head table. The GTX 1660 Ti also has more shading units (1536 vs 640), TMUs (96 vs 40), and ROPs (48 vs 16), giving it a structural advantage in every parallel processing stage.

The Verdict

From the data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the superior performer in every measurable way. The 585.2% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is the only direct comparison, and it is overwhelming. For anyone choosing between these two, the GTX 1660 Ti is the only sensible option for modern applications, gaming, or compute tasks. Its higher average benchmark score, despite being dragged down by legacy DirectX tests, still edges out the HD 8850M’s average. The GTX 1660 Ti’s 41st percentile ranking versus the HD 8850M’s 40th percentile shows they are statistically close in the overall database, but that is a function of the GTX 1660 Ti’s weak legacy DirectX scores, not a reflection of real-world capability.

The HD 8850M, released in 2013, is an end-of-life product with no modern driver support for the latest APIs beyond Vulkan 1.2.170. Its only advantage is its smaller footprint, but with no TDP, dimensions, or power connector data listed, that cannot be quantified. The GTX 1660 Ti, despite being end-of-life itself, offers 6 GB of GDDR6 memory, a modern PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, and a full suite of display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a), making it usable in a modern desktop system. The HD 8850M, with no display outputs listed, appears to be a mobile-only part.

Strictly from the data, the verdict is clear: pick the GTX 1660 Ti for any scenario. It is faster, more capable, and better supported. The HD 8850M is only relevant for historical interest or legacy systems where its lower power draw (though unquantified) might be a consideration, but no data supports that claim.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M in OpenCL?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti scores 51,029 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the HD 8850M scores 7,447, giving the GTX 1660 Ti a 585.2% lead.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each GPU?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has an average benchmark score of 7,723, while the HD 8850M has an average of 7,447.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has 6,600 million transistors, compared to the HD 8850M’s 1,500 million.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the HD 8850M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, but the GTX 1660 Ti supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the HD 8850M supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti boosts to 1770 MHz, while the HD 8850M boosts to 625 MHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti | AMD Radeon HD 8850M |

|---------------|----------------------------|----------------------|

| Architecture | Turing | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 6,600 million | 1,500 million |

| Die Size | 284 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1500 MHz | 575 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1770 MHz | 625 MHz |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 64.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 640 |

| TMUs | 96 | 40 |

| ROPs | 48 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 84.96 GPixel/s | 10.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 169.9 GTexel/s | 25.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.437 TFLOPS | 800.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 10.87 TFLOPS (2:1) | null |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_1) |

| TDP | 120 W | null |

| Launch MSRP | 279 USD | null |

| Release Date | 2019-02-21 | 2013-03-31 |