NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER represent two distinct eras of graphics hardware, separated by nearly a decade of architectural evolution. The data shows a decisive generational shift, with the newer card dominating the single available head-to-head benchmark while the older card holds its ground only in a narrow historical context. This comparison highlights how far GPU design has progressed, not just in raw performance, but in efficiency and feature support.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is a landslide. The GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER scores 52,490, while the GeForce GTX 480 manages just 13,300. This translates to a delta of -74.7% for the GTX 480, meaning the newer card is nearly four times faster in this compute workload. Such a massive gap underscores the fundamental architectural advantages of the Turing-based card over the Fermi-based one.

In practical terms, a score of 52,490 places the GTX 1660 SUPER in a completely different performance tier. Its nearest rivals, according to the data, are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12,940 average score, 0.4% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12,928 average score, 0.4% delta). This indicates that the GTX 1660 SUPER’s OpenCL result is not merely an incremental improvement; it is a generational leap that puts it in competition with much more modern hardware.

Conversely, the GTX 480’s score of 13,300 puts it in the company of significantly older mobile and mid-range parts. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (13,321 average score, -0.2% delta) and the AMD FirePro M6100 (13,354 average score, -0.4% delta). The fact that a flagship card from 2010 is trading blows with these later, lower-tier offerings shows that its raw compute capabilities have been completely overtaken by time and subsequent innovation.

The win count is a clean sweep: the GTX 1660 SUPER takes 1 win, while the GTX 480 has 0 wins. This is not a close contest. The performance delta is so large that it effectively categorizes the GTX 480 as obsolete for any modern compute task, while the GTX 1660 SUPER remains a viable, if entry-level, performer. The benchmark results indicate that the GTX 480’s once-impressive 1,345.0 GFLOPS of FP32 performance is dwarfed by the GTX 1660 SUPER’s 5.027 TFLOPS, a gap that no amount of driver optimization could close.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1660 SUPER is the clear winner in every measurable category in this comparison. Its strengths lie in raw compute performance, memory bandwidth, and modern feature support. The data shows it delivers 336.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth compared to the GTX 480’s 177.4 GB/s, a direct result of its faster GDDR6 memory and more efficient memory architecture. This makes it substantially better suited for modern game textures, high-resolution assets, and general-purpose GPU compute tasks like video encoding or machine learning inference.

The GTX 1660 SUPER also excels in pixel and texture throughput. Its pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s and texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s are dramatically higher than the GTX 480’s 21.03 GPixel/s and 42.06 GTexel/s. In real-world terms, this means the newer card can fill the screen with detailed pixels and apply complex textures far more quickly, which is essential for maintaining high frame rates at modern resolutions and detail settings.

The GTX 480, on the other hand, has no benchmark wins to speak of. Its only potential advantage is historical or archival in nature. For a user specifically interested in retro computing or testing legacy software from the early 2010s, the GTX 480’s support for DirectX 11_0 and its 1,536 MB of memory might be sufficient. However, even in this niche, the GTX 1660 SUPER’s superior hardware is likely to provide compatibility through its DirectX 12_1 support, making the older card’s only advantage its status as a period-correct component.

The data suggests that the GTX 480’s 48 ROPs match the GTX 1660 SUPER’s 48 ROPs, but this parity is meaningless given the massive difference in clock speeds and memory bandwidth. The GTX 480’s higher TDP of 250 W versus the GTX 1660 SUPER’s 125 W also means it generates more heat and requires a more substantial power supply (600 W suggested vs 300 W), making it a worse choice for any modern system build focused on efficiency.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two cards is vast. The GTX 480 is built on the Fermi architecture using a 40 nm process node at TSMC, while the GTX 1660 SUPER uses the Turing architecture on a 12 nm node, also at TSMC. This process shrink is fundamental: it allows the GTX 1660 SUPER to pack 6,600 million transistors onto a 284 mm² die, compared to the GTX 480’s 3,100 million transistors on a much larger 529 mm² die. The resulting transistor density tells the story—23.2M per mm² for the Turing chip versus just 5.9M per mm² for the Fermi chip.

This density advantage translates directly into more compute resources. The GTX 1660 SUPER features 1,408 shading units and 88 texture mapping units (TMUs), while the GTX 480 has just 480 shading units and 60 TMUs. The newer card also operates at much higher clock speeds, with a base clock of 1,530 MHz and a boost clock of 1,785 MHz, whereas the GTX 480’s clocks are not listed in the data but its performance metrics suggest significantly lower frequencies.

Memory is another major differentiator. The GTX 1660 SUPER uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, achieving 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 480 uses 1,536 MB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, achieving only 177.4 GB/s. The newer card’s memory is not only larger but also more efficient, using a narrower bus with much faster effective speeds (14 Gbps effective versus 3.7 Gbps effective). This makes the GTX 1660 SUPER far more capable of handling large data sets and modern game engines.

Feature support is also a clear generational divide. The GTX 1660 SUPER supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 480 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and has no listed Vulkan support. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6. The newer card also features modern display outputs, including HDMI 2.0 and DisplayPort 1.4a, whereas the GTX 480 is limited to 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a. The GTX 1660 SUPER also uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the GTX 480 uses the older PCIe 2.0 x16 standard. The power delivery also reflects the efficiency gains, with the GTX 1660 SUPER requiring a single 8-pin connector and a 300 W PSU, versus the GTX 480’s 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin setup and a 600 W PSU recommendation.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the GTX 1660 SUPER in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER scores 52,490, while the GTX 480 scores 13,300. This represents a performance delta of -74.7% for the GTX 480, making the GTX 1660 SUPER nearly four times faster.

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

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 480 has 1,536 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 177.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which card has better DirectX support?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 480 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The newer card also supports Vulkan 1.4, which the GTX 480 does not list.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER has a TDP of 125 W and requires a 300 W power supply with a single 8-pin connector. The GTX 480 has a TDP of 250 W and requires a 600 W power supply with a 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin connector setup.

Q: How do the transistor counts compare?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, while the GTX 480 contains 3,100 million transistors on a much larger 529 mm² die.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both cards are listed as end-of-life in the data. The GTX 480 was released on March 25, 2010, and the GTX 1660 SUPER was released on October 28, 2019.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by a margin of nearly 75%, and its architectural advantages in process node, transistor density, memory bandwidth, and feature support make it the logical choice for any modern workload. The GTX 480’s 53rd percentile standing among all GPUs is matched by the GTX 1660 SUPER, but this is misleading; the newer card’s average benchmark score of 12,986 is lower than its OpenCL result suggests, yet still comfortably ahead of the GTX 480’s 13,300 average.

For any user building a system today or upgrading from a legacy card, the GTX 1660 SUPER is the only sensible pick. Its lower TDP, smaller physical footprint (229 mm vs 267 mm length), and superior API support make it easier to integrate into a modern PC. The GTX 480’s only conceivable use case is as a collector’s item or a period-specific test bed for early 2010s software, where its Fermi architecture and 1,536 MB of memory might be relevant. However, from a pure performance and efficiency standpoint, the GTX 1660 SUPER is the definitive winner. The benchmark results indicate that the GTX 480 has been thoroughly outclassed, and the data supports a clear verdict: choose the GTX 1660 SUPER for any practical purpose.