NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER vs NVIDIA Quadro M2000 Comparison

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER dominates the NVIDIA Quadro M2000 in every recorded benchmark. The Quadro M2000 wins zero head-to-head tests, while the GTX 1660 SUPER wins both. If you are deciding between these two, the GTX 1660 SUPER is the faster card by a wide margin, and there is no workload category in the recorded data where the Quadro M2000 pulls ahead.

The Quadro M2000 is an older Maxwell-based professional card from 2016, and the GTX 1660 SUPER is a Turing-based consumer card from 2019. The average benchmark score tells the story: the GTX 1660 SUPER averages 12986 across all recorded tests, while the Quadro M2000 averages 14532. However, that comparison is misleading because the two cards were tested in different suites. The head-to-head results, which use identical tests, show the GTX 1660 SUPER scoring 52490 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 14588 for the Quadro M2000, a 72.2% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap is even larger: 57102 versus 14475, a 74.7% lead.

For a builder choosing today, the GTX 1660 SUPER is the obvious pick for raw performance. The Quadro M2000 only makes sense if you specifically need its professional feature set, its 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, or its single-slot, power-connector-free design. Note that the GTX 1660 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 229 USD. The Quadro M2000 has no recorded launch MSRP, so no direct price comparison is possible from the data.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent completely different generations of NVIDIA GPU design. The Quadro M2000 uses the GM206 chip built on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 2,940 million transistors into a 228 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.9 million per square millimeter. The GTX 1660 SUPER uses the TU116 chip on Turing architecture, built on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, with a density of 23.2 million per square millimeter. That is more than double the transistor count and nearly double the density.

The memory subsystems are equally different. The Quadro M2000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 105.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 1660 SUPER has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s. That is over three times the bandwidth. The GTX 1660 SUPER also runs its memory at 14 Gbps effective, versus 6.6 Gbps for the Quadro M2000.

Shader resources favor the GTX 1660 SUPER heavily. The Quadro M2000 has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The GTX 1660 SUPER has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The GTX 1660 SUPER also has a substantial clock advantage: 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost, versus 796 MHz base and 1163 MHz boost for the Quadro. The GTX 1660 SUPER doubles the FP32 throughput at 5.027 TFLOPS versus 1.786 TFLOPS, and it additionally supports FP16 at 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1), which the Quadro does not list. Pixel rate is 85.68 GPixel/s versus 37.22 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 157.1 GTexel/s versus 55.82 GTexel/s.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores. The Quadro M2000 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, while the GTX 1660 SUPER is dual-slot with a single 8-pin connector. The Quadro has a 75 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU, while the GTX 1660 SUPER has a 125 W TDP and a 300 W suggested PSU.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1660 SUPER wins everywhere in the recorded data. There are no benchmark categories where the Quadro M2000 takes a victory. In OpenCL compute, the GTX 1660 SUPER is 72.2% ahead. In Vulkan, it is 74.7% ahead. These are not narrow margins; they are decisive across the board.

The Quadro M2000 does have physical attributes that could matter in specific deployments. It is single-slot, which means it can fit in dense chassis where the dual-slot GTX 1660 SUPER cannot. It requires no external power connectors, drawing its power entirely from the PCIe slot, with a 75 W TDP. The GTX 1660 SUPER needs an 8-pin connector and has a 125 W TDP. The suggested PSU also differs: 250 W for the Quadro versus 300 W for the GTX 1660 SUPER.

Display outputs also differ. The Quadro M2000 offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2, which is useful for multi-monitor professional setups. The GTX 1660 SUPER offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. If you need four DisplayPort outputs from a single card, the Quadro is the only one of the two that provides that. If you need raw compute performance, the GTX 1660 SUPER is the only choice.

The Quadro M2000 sits at the 56th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the GTX 1660 SUPER sits at the 53rd percentile. This is notable: despite the GTX 1660 SUPER winning every head-to-head test, the Quadro M2000 has a higher overall percentile ranking. That reflects the different benchmark suites each card was subjected to, not a reversal of performance. The nearest rivals for the Quadro M2000 include the GeForce GTX 965M (0.9% slower), the Radeon RX Vega 11 (1% slower), the GeForce GTX TITAN (1.1% slower), and the Radeon RX 5500 XT (1.1% faster). For the GTX 1660 SUPER, the nearest rivals include the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (0.4% faster), the Radeon RX 580 (0.4% faster), the Tesla M2090 (0.7% faster), and the Radeon 740M (0.9% slower).

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in raw compute performance?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER. In Geekbench OpenCL it scores 52490 versus 14588 for the Quadro M2000, a 72.2% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan it scores 57102 versus 14475, a 74.7% lead.

Q: Does the Quadro M2000 win any benchmark?

A: No. The recorded head-to-head data shows zero wins for the Quadro M2000 and two wins for the GTX 1660 SUPER.

Q: Can the Quadro M2000 run in a system with a small power supply?

A: Yes. It has a 75 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU, with no external power connectors. The GTX 1660 SUPER needs a 300 W suggested PSU and a single 8-pin connector.

Q: Which card supports more display outputs?

A: The Quadro M2000 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2. The GTX 1660 SUPER has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Q: Are both cards end-of-life?

A: Yes. The Quadro M2000 is listed as end-of-life, and the GTX 1660 SUPER is also listed as end-of-life.

Q: Do these cards support modern graphics APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains exactly two tests, and the GTX 1660 SUPER wins both by landslide margins. The first is Geekbench OpenCL. The Quadro M2000 scores 14588, while the GTX 1660 SUPER scores 52490. The delta is 72.2% in favor of the GTX 1660 SUPER. That is not a marginal improvement; it is a fundamental performance tier difference. The Quadro M2000's nearest rivals in the database score around 14400, which places it in the same league as mobile GPUs and integrated graphics. The GTX 1660 SUPER competes with cards like the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and the Radeon RX 580, which score around 12940 to 12928 on average.

The second test is Geekbench Vulkan. The Quadro M2000 scores 14475, and the GTX 1660 SUPER scores 57102. The delta is 74.7%. This is the largest relative gap in the recorded data. Vulkan performance on the GTX 1660 SUPER is nearly four times that of the Quadro M2000. The Quadro M2000's Vulkan score is almost identical to its OpenCL score, suggesting it is compute-bound in both APIs. The GTX 1660 SUPER shows a larger jump from OpenCL to Vulkan, from 52490 to 57102, indicating the Turing architecture handles Vulkan workloads particularly well.

Beyond the head-to-head tests, the other benchmark results for the GTX 1660 SUPER provide additional context. In Passmark G3D, it scores 12699. In Passmark GPU Compute, it scores 5076. In Passmark DirectX 11, it scores 104, while DirectX 10 scores 65, DirectX 12 scores 50, and DirectX 9 scores 189. Its Passmark G2D score is 805. The Quadro M2000 has no Passmark results recorded, so no comparison is possible there. The GTX 1660 SUPER also has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1278, which the Quadro lacks.

The average benchmark score for the GTX 1660 SUPER is 12986, which is lower than the Quadro M2000's average of 14532. This is a quirk of the different test suites, not an indication of real-world performance. In the only tests where both cards were measured under identical conditions, the GTX 1660 SUPER won by more than 70%. A builder should trust the head-to-head results over the aggregate averages, because the aggregate averages mix different workloads and different test versions.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification. The process node is 28 nm for the Quadro M2000 versus 12 nm for the GTX 1660 SUPER. Transistor count is 2,940 million versus 6,600 million. Die size is 228 mm² versus 284 mm². Transistor density is 12.9 million per mm² versus 23.2 million per mm².

Clock speeds: the Quadro M2000 runs at 796 MHz base and 1163 MHz boost, while the GTX 1660 SUPER runs at 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). Memory size is 4 GB GDDR5 versus 6 GB GDDR6. Bus width is 128-bit versus 192-bit. Bandwidth is 105.8 GB/s versus 336.0 GB/s.

Compute resources: 768 shading units versus 1408. Texture mapping units: 48 versus 88. Render output units: 32 versus 48. FP32 performance: 1.786 TFLOPS versus 5.027 TFLOPS. The GTX 1660 SUPER also lists FP16 at 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1), which the Quadro M2000 does not specify. Pixel rate: 37.22 GPixel/s versus 85.68 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 55.82 GTexel/s versus 157.1 GTexel/s.

Power and physical design: the Quadro M2000 has a 75 W TDP, is single-slot, uses no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The GTX 1660 SUPER has a 125 W TDP, is dual-slot, uses one 8-pin connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. Both are PCIe 3.0 x16. The Quadro M2000 is 201 mm long and 111 mm tall. The GTX 1660 SUPER is 229 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 35 mm wide.

Display outputs: the Quadro M2000 provides 4x DisplayPort 1.2. The GTX 1660 SUPER provides 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores. The Quadro M2000 was released in April 2016, and the GTX 1660 SUPER was released in October 2019. Both are end-of-life. The GTX 1660 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 229 USD; the Quadro M2000 has no recorded launch MSRP.