AMD Radeon Pro 450 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 and AMD Radeon Pro 450 occupy entirely different tiers of the GPU spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects a wide chasm in performance. The GTX 1660 is the clear winner for anyone needing substantial compute or gaming horsepower, while the Radeon Pro 450 serves a niche role as a low-power mobile solution. The data shows the GTX 1660 leads by 431.5% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 376.7% in Geekbench Vulkan, making it the only sensible choice for demanding tasks. The Radeon Pro 450, however, consumes only 35 W, making it suitable for ultra-portable systems where efficiency trumps raw speed. No gamer or heavy workstation user should consider the Radeon Pro 450 based on these results; it is strictly for legacy Mac Pro applications.

The Verdict

The verdict is straightforward: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is the superior product in almost every measurable way. The head-to-head data shows it winning both shared benchmarks decisively, with a 431.5% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL (47850 vs 9002) and a 376.7% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan (50137 vs 10518). The GTX 1660 also holds a higher average benchmark score of 11680 compared to the Radeon Pro 450’s 10804, and it sits at the 51st percentile of all GPUs versus the Radeon’s 49th percentile. For any user prioritizing performance—whether for gaming, 3D rendering, or compute workloads—the GTX 1660 is the only rational pick.

The Radeon Pro 450, by contrast, is a low-power part with a 35 W TDP, designed for compact systems. Its 640 shading units and 16 ROPs are dwarfed by the GTX 1660’s 1408 shading units and 48 ROPs. The data suggests it is competitive only with older or lower-end parts; its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K2200, is just 0.4% behind it, while the GTX 1660’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT, is only 0.5% behind the NVIDIA card. This means the GTX 1660 is positioned in a performance class several steps above the Radeon Pro 450. If you need a discrete GPU for a Mac Pro or a low-profile mobile workstation, the Radeon Pro 450 might suffice, but for anything else, the GTX 1660 wins outright.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 uses the TU116 chip, based on the Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It packs 6,600 million transistors into a 284 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.2M per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro 450 uses the Baffin chip, based on the older GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 3,000 million transistors on a much smaller 123 mm² die, with a slightly higher transistor density of 24.4M per mm².

Core configurations diverge sharply. The GTX 1660 features 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 48 raster output units (ROPs). The Radeon Pro 450 is significantly leaner, with 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and just 16 ROPs. Neither card supports ray tracing or tensor cores, as both lack RT and tensor core counts. The GTX 1660’s compute throughput is listed at 5.027 TFLOPS for FP32 and 10.05 TFLOPS for FP16 (at a 2:1 ratio), while the Radeon Pro 450 manages only 1,024.0 GFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (at a 1:1 ratio). This makes the GTX 1660 roughly five times faster in raw FP32 compute.

Memory architectures also tell a story of generational difference. The GTX 1660 comes with 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 192.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 450 has just 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 81.28 GB/s. The NVIDIA card’s memory clock is 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective), whereas the AMD part’s memory runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective). Additionally, the GTX 1660 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon Pro 450 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, indicating a slightly lower feature level for the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 has an average benchmark score of 11680, while the AMD Radeon Pro 450 scores 10804. The GTX 1660 also sits at the 51st percentile of all GPUs, compared to the Radeon Pro 450’s 49th percentile.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in Geekbench Vulkan performance?

A: The GTX 1660 scores 50137 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 376.7% higher than the Radeon Pro 450’s score of 10518. This indicates a massive advantage for the NVIDIA card in Vulkan-based workloads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The GTX 1660 offers 192.1 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the Radeon Pro 450 provides only 81.28 GB/s. The GTX 1660 also has a wider 192-bit memory bus compared to the Radeon’s 128-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 has 6,600 million transistors, more than double the 3,000 million found in the AMD Radeon Pro 450. The NVIDIA chip is also larger, at 284 mm² versus 123 mm².

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the AMD Radeon Pro 450 wins?

A: No. In the two head-to-head benchmarks conducted—Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan—the GTX 1660 wins both. The Radeon Pro 450 has no wins in the shared tests.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Radeon Pro 450 has a TDP of 35 W, whereas the GTX 1660 has a TDP of 120 W. This makes the AMD part far more power-efficient, but at the cost of significant performance.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification, with the GTX 1660 generally offering higher numbers. Key differences include:

• Process Node: The GTX 1660 uses a 12 nm process, while the Radeon Pro 450 uses a 14 nm process.
• Die Size: The GTX 1660 has a 284 mm² die, while the Radeon Pro 450 has a 123 mm² die.
• Transistors: The GTX 1660 contains 6,600 million transistors, versus 3,000 million for the Radeon Pro 450.
• Memory Size: The GTX 1660 has 6 GB of GDDR5, while the Radeon Pro 450 has 2 GB.
• Memory Bus Width: The GTX 1660 uses a 192-bit bus, while the Radeon Pro 450 uses a 128-bit bus.
• Memory Bandwidth: The GTX 1660 achieves 192.1 GB/s, while the Radeon Pro 450 achieves 81.28 GB/s.
• Shading Units: The GTX 1660 has 1408 shading units, versus 640 for the Radeon Pro 450.
• TMUs: The GTX 1660 has 88 TMUs, while the Radeon Pro 450 has 40.
• ROPs: The GTX 1660 has 48 ROPs, while the Radeon Pro 450 has 16.
• Pixel Rate: The GTX 1660 hits 85.68 GPixel/s, while the Radeon Pro 450 hits 12.80 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: The GTX 1660 reaches 157.1 GTexel/s, versus 32.00 GTexel/s for the Radeon Pro 450.
• FP32 Performance: The GTX 1660 delivers 5.027 TFLOPS, while the Radeon Pro 450 delivers 1,024.0 GFLOPS.
• FP16 Performance: The GTX 1660 delivers 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1), while the Radeon Pro 450 delivers 1,024.0 GFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: The GTX 1660 has a 120 W TDP, while the Radeon Pro 450 has a 35 W TDP.
• Bus Interface: The GTX 1660 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Radeon Pro 450 uses PCIe 3.0 x8.
• Slot Width: The GTX 1660 is dual-slot, while the Radeon Pro 450 is an MXM module.
• Power Connectors: The GTX 1660 requires a single 8-pin connector, while the Radeon Pro 450 has none.
• Display Outputs: The GTX 1660 has DVI, HDMI 2.0, and DisplayPort 1.4a outputs; the Radeon Pro 450’s outputs are portable device dependent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are lopsided, with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 winning both available tests by enormous margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1660 scores 47850, while the Radeon Pro 450 scores a mere 9002. This translates to a 431.5% advantage for the NVIDIA card. To put that in context, the GTX 1660’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT, is only 0.5% ahead of it, while the Radeon Pro 450’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K2200, is just 0.4% behind it. The gap between the two reviewed cards is far wider than the gaps between each card and its own competitive set, highlighting the generational and performance class divide.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the story is similar. The GTX 1660 achieves 50137, versus 10518 for the Radeon Pro 450, a delta of 376.7%. This test reinforces the GTX 1660’s dominance in modern graphics APIs. The Vulkan result for the GTX 1660 is actually higher than its OpenCL score, suggesting efficient compute utilization, while the Radeon Pro 450’s Vulkan score is only modestly above its OpenCL result. There are no other shared benchmarks in the dataset, so these two tests define the head-to-head comparison. The GTX 1660 wins both, giving it a 2-0 record in wins, while the Radeon Pro 450 has zero wins. For any application relying on OpenCL or Vulkan, the GTX 1660 is categorically faster, making the Radeon Pro 450 viable only in scenarios where its 35 W power draw and small footprint are paramount.