AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 are two end-of-life graphics cards that occupy a similar performance tier, yet they achieve their results through very different architectural approaches. The data shows a split decision across the benchmark suite, with the GTX 1660 taking six of ten head-to-head tests while the RX 6500 XT claims four. The overall average benchmark scores are remarkably close, with the RX 6500 XT posting 11,842 against the GTX 1660's 11,680, a difference of just 1.4 percent in AMD's favor. Both cards sit at the 51st percentile among all GPUs, confirming that they are direct contemporaries in overall capability despite their different strengths and weaknesses.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic gap in the entire comparison appears in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where the GTX 1660 utterly dominates. The NVIDIA card scores 1,065 compared to the RX 6500 XT's 235, a massive 77.9 percent advantage. This is not a marginal win; it is a category-level difference in raw DX12 throughput that suggests the GTX 1660's larger memory bus and higher ROP count matter enormously in this specific workload. If your primary interest is modern DX12 gaming performance, the data here is unambiguous.

The RX 6500 XT fights back in the compute and API-specific tests. In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD card scores 54,724 against 50,137 for the GTX 1660, a 9.1 percent lead. The Geekbench OpenCL result is closer, with the RX 6500 XT at 48,289 and the GTX 1660 at 47,850, a slim 0.9 percent margin. These results indicate that the RDNA 2.0 architecture handles Vulkan and general compute workloads more efficiently than the older Turing design.

The Passmark suite reveals a clear pattern of API-dependent performance. The RX 6500 XT wins DirectX 11 by a solid margin, scoring 90 versus 79, a 13.9 percent advantage. It also edges out the GTX 1660 in DirectX 10, with 60 versus 61, a negligible 1.6 percent difference in NVIDIA's favor. However, the GTX 1660 takes DirectX 9 decisively, scoring 177 against 108, a 39 percent lead. The DirectX 12 result also favors NVIDIA, with 49 versus 38, a 22.4 percent gap.

In the more general gaming and compute metrics, the GTX 1660 maintains its lead. The Passmark G3D score shows the NVIDIA card at 11,646 versus 9,608 for the RX 6500 XT, a 17.5 percent advantage. The GPU compute test also goes to NVIDIA, with 4,963 versus 4,456, a 10.2 percent lead. The only other AMD win comes in Passmark G2D, where the RX 6500 XT scores 815 against 776, a 5 percent margin that reflects its faster pixel fill rate.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split recommendation based on workload. The GTX 1660 is the better choice for traditional rasterized gaming, particularly in DirectX 9, DirectX 10, and DirectX 12 titles, where its advantages range from 1.6 percent to 39 percent. Its 17.5 percent lead in Passmark G3D and 10.2 percent lead in GPU compute make it the more versatile card for general-purpose graphics work.

The RX 6500 XT is the pick for Vulkan-based applications and DirectX 11 workloads, where it holds leads of 9.1 percent and 13.9 percent respectively. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 48,289 also edges out the GTX 1660, though by less than one percent. For users running specific software stacks built around Vulkan or older DirectX 11 titles, the AMD card delivers measurable performance advantages.

The overall average benchmark scores tell the final story: the RX 6500 XT is 1.4 percent ahead of the GTX 1660 in aggregate, but this margin is within the noise of real-world variation. Neither card is a clear winner across the board. The GTX 1660 has the stronger raw gaming performance in most legacy and current API tests, while the RX 6500 XT demonstrates superior efficiency in compute-oriented benchmarks and newer API implementations.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT uses the Navi 24 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 1660 uses the TU116 chip based on Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. The manufacturing process difference is stark: the RX 6500 XT packs 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5 million per square millimeter. The GTX 1660 has 6,600 million transistors spread across a 284 mm² die, with a density of just 23.2 million per square millimeter.

Memory configurations diverge significantly. The RX 6500 XT comes with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 143.9 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 1660 offers 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 192.1 GB/s of bandwidth. This 33 percent bandwidth advantage for NVIDIA is likely a major factor in its DirectX 12 and G3D wins, as those workloads often scale with memory throughput.

The compute resources also differ. The RX 6500 XT has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, along with 16 dedicated ray tracing cores. The GTX 1660 has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, but no ray tracing hardware. Despite fewer shading units, the AMD card achieves higher clock speeds: a 2,310 MHz base and 2,815 MHz boost versus 1,530 MHz base and 1,785 MHz boost for NVIDIA. This clock advantage pushes the RX 6500 XT to 5.765 TFLOPS of FP32 performance against 5.027 TFLOPS for the GTX 1660.

Power and connectivity also differ. The RX 6500 XT has a 107 W TDP with a single 6-pin power connector, while the GTX 1660 has a 120 W TDP with a single 8-pin connector. Both suggest a 300 W power supply. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x4, whereas the GTX 1660 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs differ as well: the RX 6500 XT offers one HDMI 2.1 and one DisplayPort 1.4a, while the GTX 1660 provides one DVI, one HDMI 2.0, and one DisplayPort 1.4a. The RX 6500 XT also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, while the GTX 1660 is limited to DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher overall benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT has an average benchmark score of 11,842, which is 1.4 percent higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660's average of 11,680.

Q: How large is the performance gap in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12?

A: The GTX 1660 scores 1,065 versus 235 for the RX 6500 XT, giving NVIDIA a 77.9 percent advantage in this specific DX12 test.

Q: Does the RX 6500 XT support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RX 6500 XT includes 16 ray tracing cores, while the GTX 1660 has no ray tracing hardware at all.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 1660 provides 192.1 GB/s of bandwidth via its 192-bit GDDR5 memory bus, compared to 143.9 GB/s for the RX 6500 XT's 64-bit GDDR6 bus.

Q: What is the difference in launch MSRP?

A: The RX 6500 XT had a launch MSRP of 199 USD, while the GTX 1660 launched at 219 USD.

Q: How do the cards compare in DirectX 11 performance?

A: The RX 6500 XT wins DirectX 11 with a score of 90 versus 79 for the GTX 1660, a 13.9 percent advantage for AMD.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is the clear winner for DirectX 12 gaming, as demonstrated by its 22.4 percent lead in the Passmark DX12 test and its overwhelming 77.9 percent advantage in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. It also dominates legacy DirectX 9 titles with a 39 percent margin, making it the better choice for older game libraries. The GTX 1660's 17.5 percent lead in Passmark G3D and 10.2 percent lead in GPU compute indicate it handles general graphics workloads and compute tasks more effectively, likely due to its higher ROP count and memory bandwidth.

The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT wins in Vulkan-based applications, with a 9.1 percent advantage in Geekbench Vulkan. It also takes DirectX 11 by 13.9 percent, which covers a substantial portion of the current gaming library. The RX 6500 XT's wins in Geekbench OpenCL and Passmark G2D, though smaller at 0.9 percent and 5 percent respectively, show it has strengths in compute and 2D rendering tasks. Its smaller 107 mm² die and lower 107 W TDP make it a more power-efficient option for compact builds, though the data does not quantify the thermal implications.

For users prioritizing maximum frame rates in modern DirectX 12 titles, the GTX 1660 is the data-backed choice. For those running Vulkan-native applications or older DirectX 11 games, the RX 6500 XT offers measurable advantages. The GTX 1660's 6 GB memory capacity also gives it more headroom for texture-heavy workloads, while the RX 6500 XT's 4 GB may be a limiting factor in high-resolution scenarios, though the benchmark data does not directly test this limitation.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. The RX 6500 XT uses a 6 nm process, while the GTX 1660 uses 12 nm. Transistor counts are 5,400 million versus 6,600 million, and die sizes are 107 mm² versus 284 mm². Clock speeds show the AMD card running at 2,310 MHz base and 2,815 MHz boost, compared to 1,530 MHz base and 1,785 MHz boost for NVIDIA. The RX 6500 XT also lists a game clock of 2,610 MHz, which the GTX 1660 does not have.

Memory specifications diverge completely: the RX 6500 XT has 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 143.9 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 1660 has 6 GB GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 192.1 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6500 XT has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the GTX 1660 has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The RX 6500 XT includes 16 ray tracing cores, a feature absent from the GTX 1660.

Power and physical specifications also differ. The RX 6500 XT draws 107 W and uses a 1x 6-pin connector, while the GTX 1660 draws 120 W and uses a 1x 8-pin connector. Both recommend a 300 W power supply. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x4 for AMD versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are one HDMI 2.1 and one DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 6500 XT, versus one DVI, one HDMI 2.0, and one DisplayPort 1.4a for the GTX 1660. The GTX 1660 has listed dimensions of 229 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 35 mm in width, while the RX 6500 XT has no dimension data.