AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti and AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 occupy a shared percentile rank at 41, meaning both sit in the same overall performance tier among all GPUs, yet their benchmark profiles diverge sharply. The GTX 1660 Ti holds a slim 1.9% lead in average benchmark score (7723 vs 7580), but the head-to-head results reveal a split personality: one card dominates compute-style workloads while the other takes the Vulkan API crown. This is not a simple "which is faster" comparison — it is a question of which workload patterns you prioritize, and the data suggests the answer depends heavily on the rendering API and the nature of the task.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the clear winner in OpenCL compute workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 51029 absolutely dwarfs the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100's 7333, a staggering 595.9% advantage. This is not a marginal victory; it is an order-of-magnitude gap that points to fundamental differences in raw compute throughput. The GTX 1660 Ti's 5.437 TFLOPS FP32 performance versus the WX 3100's 1,248.3 GFLOPS explains much of this — the NVIDIA card delivers over four times the floating-point throughput. For any OpenCL-based application — scientific simulation, video encoding, or GPU-accelerated analytics — the data indicates the GTX 1660 Ti is in a completely different league.

However, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 wins decisively in the Vulkan API benchmark. The WX 3100 scores 7827 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the GTX 1660 Ti's 5827, a 25.6% advantage for AMD. This is notable because Vulkan is increasingly important for modern game engines and professional visualization tools. The WX 3100's GCN 4.0 architecture, despite being older and smaller, appears to handle Vulkan's low-level command processing more efficiently relative to its hardware resources. The NVIDIA card's Turing architecture supports Vulkan 1.4 while AMD's card supports Vulkan 1.3, so the API version difference does not explain the result — this is an execution efficiency difference, not a feature-set gap.

The broader benchmark suite reinforces the GTX 1660 Ti's overall dominance. In PassMark G3D, the NVIDIA card scores 12871 while the WX 3100 has no comparable entry, but the GTX 1660 Ti's other PassMark scores (DirectX 9: 190, DirectX 11: 103, DirectX 12: 51, G2D: 804, GPU Compute: 5226) all reflect a hardware design with substantially more shading units (1536 vs 512), TMUs (96 vs 32), and ROPs (48 vs 16). The WX 3100's only benchmark entries are the two Geekbench tests, which means its overall average of 7580 is drawn from just two data points — a limitation worth noting when interpreting its standing.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: choose the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti if your work involves OpenCL compute, general DirectX gaming, or any workload that benefits from high FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth. Its 288.0 GB/s bandwidth versus the WX 3100's 96.00 GB/s is a 3x advantage that directly impacts texture streaming and large data transfers. The GTX 1660 Ti also offers 6 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 4 GB of GDDR5, which matters for larger datasets and higher-resolution textures.

Choose the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 if Vulkan performance is your priority. The 25.6% lead in Geekbench Vulkan is substantial, and for applications built around Vulkan — certain CAD tools, game engines, or Vulkan-native renderers — the WX 3100 will deliver better frame pacing and lower latency despite its smaller hardware footprint. The WX 3100 also consumes less power (65 W TDP vs 120 W TDP) and requires no external power connector, which makes it a viable option for compact or legacy systems with limited power delivery.

That said, the GTX 1660 Ti's 1.9% average score lead is modest, but its OpenCL dominance is so extreme that it skews the overall picture. If your workload is OpenCL-heavy, the GTX 1660 Ti is not just better — it is in a different performance class. If your workload is Vulkan-centric, the WX 3100's efficiency advantage makes it the rational pick. For mixed workloads, the GTX 1660 Ti's broader benchmark coverage (10 tests vs 2) and higher absolute scores in every non-Vulkan category suggest it is the more versatile card.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains only two tests, but they could not be more lopsided in opposite directions. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti scores 51029 against the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100's 7333. The delta of 595.9% means the NVIDIA card is roughly seven times faster — a gap that aligns with the hardware specifications: 1536 shading units versus 512, 96 TMUs versus 32, and 5.437 TFLOPS versus 1,248.3 GFLOPS. The memory subsystem amplifies this: 288.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, and 6 GB GDDR6 versus 4 GB GDDR5. OpenCL workloads that are memory-bound or compute-bound will see the GTX 1660 Ti finish tasks in a fraction of the time.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the roles reverse. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7827 against the GTX 1660 Ti's 5827, a 25.6% margin for AMD. This is particularly surprising given the GTX 1660 Ti's higher clocks (boost 1770 MHz vs 1219 MHz), larger die (284 mm² vs 103 mm²), and newer architecture (Turing vs GCN 4.0). The WX 3100's GCN architecture, with its 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio (1,248.3 GFLOPS for both), may handle Vulkan's asynchronous compute queues more efficiently than the GTX 1660 Ti's 2:1 FP16 implementation (10.87 TFLOPS FP16). The result suggests that raw hardware specifications do not always predict API-level performance — driver optimization and architecture-level scheduling play a decisive role.

The wins are evenly split at 1-1, but the magnitude of the OpenCL win (595.9%) far exceeds the Vulkan win (25.6%). If you weight by absolute performance difference, the GTX 1660 Ti is the stronger card overall. However, if your application only uses Vulkan, the WX 3100's advantage is real and consistent.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti has an average benchmark score of 7723, which is 1.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100's 7580.

Q: Why is the GTX 1660 Ti so much faster in OpenCL?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has 1536 shading units versus 512, 96 TMUs versus 32, and 5.437 TFLOPS FP32 versus 1,248.3 GFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s is 3x the WX 3100's 96.00 GB/s, and it uses 6 GB GDDR6 versus 4 GB GDDR5.

Q: Does the WX 3100 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with 7827 points, a 25.6% advantage over the GTX 1660 Ti's 5827 points.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has a TDP of 120 W with a suggested PSU of 300 W and requires a single 8-pin power connector. The WX 3100 has a TDP of 65 W with a suggested PSU of 250 W and requires no external power connector.

Q: Which card has a smaller physical footprint?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is significantly smaller: 168 mm length and 69 mm height versus the GTX 1660 Ti's 229 mm length and 111 mm height. The WX 3100 is also single-slot versus the GTX 1660 Ti's dual-slot design.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The GTX 1660 Ti supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the GTX 1660 Ti supports Vulkan 1.4 versus the WX 3100's Vulkan 1.3.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti uses the TU116 chip built on TSMC's 12 nm process, packing 6,600 million transistors into a 284 mm² die. The architecture is Turing, which brings a transistor density of 23.2M per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 uses the Lexa chip built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 2,200 million transistors in a 103 mm² die — a transistor density of 21.4M per mm². The GTX 1660 Ti has three times the transistors and nearly three times the die area, which explains its massive compute advantage.

The GTX 1660 Ti's Turing architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the WX 3100's GCN 4.0 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) — the 12_1 feature level adds tiered shader resources and other modern DX12 features. For Vulkan, the GTX 1660 Ti supports version 1.4 versus 1.3 on the WX 3100. The GTX 1660 Ti has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, while the WX 3100 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs — all at roughly 3x fewer. The pixel rate of 84.96 GPixel/s on the GTX 1660 Ti versus 19.50 GPixel/s on the WX 3100 confirms a massive rasterization gap.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally: the GTX 1660 Ti uses GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the WX 3100 uses GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s. The GTX 1660 Ti's memory clock is 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) versus the WX 3100's 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) — same base clock, double the data rate. FP16 performance also differs: the GTX 1660 Ti delivers 10.87 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio versus FP32, while the WX 3100 delivers 1,248.3 GFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. The GTX 1660 Ti has a base clock of 1500 MHz and boost of 1770 MHz, versus the WX 3100's 925 MHz base and 1219 MHz boost. Memory capacity is 6 GB GDDR6 versus 4 GB GDDR5, with bus widths of 192-bit versus 128-bit. Bandwidth is 288.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s.

The GTX 1660 Ti has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs; the WX 3100 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rate is 84.96 GPixel/s versus 19.50 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 169.9 GTexel/s versus 39.01 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 5.437 TFLOPS versus 1,248.3 GFLOPS, and FP16 is 10.87 TFLOPS versus 1,248.3 GFLOPS.

Power requirements diverge substantially: 120 W TDP versus 65 W TDP, suggested PSU of 300 W versus 250 W, and 1x 8-pin power connector versus none. Physical dimensions are 229 mm x 111 mm x 35 mm for the GTX 1660 Ti versus 168 mm x 69 mm for the WX 3100 (no width specified). The GTX 1660 Ti is dual-slot; the WX 3100 is single-slot. Bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a on the GTX 1660 Ti versus 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a on the WX 3100. The GTX 1660 Ti launched at 279 USD MSRP on 2019-02-21; the WX 3100 launched at 199 USD MSRP on 2017-06-11.