NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive outcome: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti wins 8 of 9 head-to-head comparisons against the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M. The only exception is the Vulkan compute test, where the Quadro M5000M posts a substantial victory.

The most lopsided result comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 1660 Ti scores 51,029 versus 22,920 for the Quadro M5000M, a delta of 122.6%. This indicates the GTX 1660 Ti delivers more than double the general-purpose compute performance in this workload. In Geekbench Vulkan, the tables turn dramatically: the Quadro M5000M scores 24,875 against 5,827 for the GTX 1660 Ti, representing a 76.6% advantage for the older professional card. This suggests the Maxwell 2.0 architecture retains a significant edge in Vulkan compute tasks, or that driver optimization favors the Quadro lineup in this specific API path.

Across DirectX tests, the GTX 1660 Ti maintains a consistent lead. In Passmark DirectX 9, it scores 190 versus 119, a 59.7% advantage. DirectX 10 shows a 66 to 35 result, a 88.6% delta. DirectX 11 delivers 103 against 54, a 90.7% gap, while DirectX 12 shows 51 versus 29, a 75.9% margin. These results demonstrate that the Turing-based card outperforms the older Maxwell part across every generation of DirectX, with the smallest margin (59.7%) still representing a clear majority win.

In Passmark G3D, the GTX 1660 Ti scores 12,871 versus 7,062, an 82.3% advantage. This is the headline gaming and 3D rendering metric, and the margin is substantial. The Passmark G2D test shows 804 versus 476, a 68.9% lead for the GTX 1660 Ti, indicating better 2D desktop and compositing performance as well. Finally, Passmark GPU Compute shows 5,226 versus 2,756, a 89.6% delta, reinforcing the compute dominance seen in OpenCL.

The average benchmark scores confirm the overall picture: the GTX 1660 Ti averages 7,723 across all recorded tests, while the Quadro M5000M averages 6,481. The GTX 1660 Ti sits at the 41st percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Quadro M5000M sits at the 37th percentile. The GTX 1660 Ti's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 540 (0.7% ahead) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (1.9% ahead), placing it in a tight cluster. The Quadro M5000M's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile (0.1% ahead) and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (0.2% behind), showing it competes with much older or lower-tier parts.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the majority of head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti wins 8 of 9 head-to-head comparisons, with the only loss coming in Geekbench Vulkan.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 1660 Ti scores 51,029 versus 22,920 for the Quadro M5000M, a 122.6% difference.

Q: Does the Quadro M5000M win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 24,875 versus 5,827 for the GTX 1660 Ti, a 76.6% advantage.

Q: How do the two cards compare in DirectX 12 performance?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti scores 51 in Passmark DirectX 12, while the Quadro M5000M scores 29, giving the GTX 1660 Ti a 75.9% lead.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each card?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has an average benchmark score of 7,723, while the Quadro M5000M averages 6,481.

Q: How do their percentile rankings compare?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti ranks at the 41st percentile among all GPUs, while the Quadro M5000M ranks at the 37th percentile.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the superior performer in nearly every measurable category. It leads by double-digit percentages in 8 of 9 tests, with margins ranging from 59.7% in DirectX 9 to 122.6% in OpenCL. The only category where the Quadro M5000M excels is Vulkan compute, where it leads by 76.6%, but this single win does not offset the overall pattern.

For users prioritizing DirectX gaming, general 3D rendering, or OpenCL compute, the GTX 1660 Ti is the clear choice. Its Passmark G3D score of 12,871 versus 7,062 represents an 82.3% advantage, which translates to a substantially better experience in GPU-bound workloads. The GTX 1660 Ti also wins all Passmark DirectX tests, making it the more versatile card for modern and legacy API support.

The Quadro M5000M, however, holds a niche appeal for workloads that rely heavily on Vulkan compute. Its 24,875 Geekbench Vulkan score dwarfs the 5,827 of the GTX 1660 Ti, suggesting that specific applications leveraging this API could see better performance on the older card. Additionally, the Quadro M5000M offers double the memory capacity (8 GB versus 6 GB), which may benefit certain large dataset workloads even if raw throughput is lower.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the verdict: 7,723 for the GTX 1660 Ti versus 6,481 for the Quadro M5000M. The percentile rankings (41st versus 37th) confirm that the GTX 1660 Ti sits in a higher performance tier overall. For most users, the GTX 1660 Ti is the recommended option based on the recorded data.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across several key specifications. The GTX 1660 Ti uses a 12 nm process node, while the Quadro M5000M uses 28 nm. The GTX 1660 Ti contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, while the Quadro M5000M contains 5,200 million transistors on a larger 398 mm² die. Transistor density is 23.2M per mm² for the GTX 1660 Ti versus 13.1M per mm² for the Quadro M5000M.

Clock speeds differ significantly: the GTX 1660 Ti runs at 1500 MHz base and 1770 MHz boost, while the Quadro M5000M runs at 962 MHz base and 1051 MHz boost. Memory configurations also diverge: the GTX 1660 Ti has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro M5000M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clock is 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the GTX 1660 Ti versus 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the Quadro M5000M.

The GTX 1660 Ti has a TDP of 120 W and requires a 1x 8-pin power connector with a suggested PSU of 300 W, while the Quadro M5000M has a 100 W TDP and no power connectors. The GTX 1660 Ti is a dual-slot card with PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the Quadro M5000M is an MXM Module with MXM-B (3.0) interface. Display outputs differ: the GTX 1660 Ti offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Quadro M5000M's outputs are portable device dependent.

The GTX 1660 Ti has a launch MSRP of 279 USD. The Quadro M5000M has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 1660 Ti is built on the Turing architecture with the TU116 chip, while the Quadro M5000M uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip. This represents a generational leap: the GTX 1660 Ti belongs to the GeForce 16 generation, while the Quadro M5000M belongs to the Quadro Maxwell-M (Mx000M) generation.

Both cards share identical shading unit and TMU counts: 1,536 shading units and 96 TMUs each. However, the ROP count differs: the GTX 1660 Ti has 48 ROPs, while the Quadro M5000M has 64 ROPs. Neither card features ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

The GTX 1660 Ti achieves a pixel rate of 84.96 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 169.9 GTexel/s, while the Quadro M5000M achieves 67.26 GPixel/s and 100.9 GTexel/s respectively. FP32 compute is 5.437 TFLOPS for the GTX 1660 Ti versus 3.229 TFLOPS for the Quadro M5000M. The GTX 1660 Ti also supports FP16 at 10.87 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the Quadro M5000M has no recorded FP16 capability.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 1660 Ti was released on 2019-02-21, while the Quadro M5000M was released on 2015-08-17. Both are end-of-life products. The GTX 1660 Ti's predecessor is the GeForce 10 series and its successor is the GeForce 20 series. The Quadro M5000M's predecessor is the Quadro Kepler-M and its successor is the Quadro Pascal-M.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti wins in the vast majority of use cases based on the benchmark data. It dominates in DirectX gaming across all versions: DirectX 9 (190 versus 119), DirectX 10 (66 versus 35), DirectX 11 (103 versus 54), and DirectX 12 (51 versus 29). Its Passmark G3D score of 12,871 versus 7,062 makes it the stronger choice for 3D rendering and gaming workloads. The GTX 1660 Ti also leads in OpenCL compute (51,029 versus 22,920) and Passmark GPU Compute (5,226 versus 2,756), making it preferable for general-purpose compute tasks.

The GTX 1660 Ti additionally wins in Passmark G2D (804 versus 476), indicating better 2D desktop performance. Its higher pixel rate (84.96 GPixel/s versus 67.26 GPixel/s) and texture rate (169.9 GTexel/s versus 100.9 GTexel/s) support its dominance in rasterization-heavy tasks. The higher boost clock (1770 MHz versus 1051 MHz) and FP32 throughput (5.437 TFLOPS versus 3.229 TFLOPS) further reinforce its position.

The NVIDIA Quadro M5000M wins specifically in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 24,875 versus 5,827, a 76.6% advantage. This makes it the better choice for Vulkan-based compute applications where this API is heavily utilized. The Quadro M5000M also offers 8 GB of memory versus 6 GB, which could benefit memory-bound workloads despite its lower bandwidth (160.4 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s). Its lower TDP (100 W versus 120 W) and MXM form factor make it suited for portable or modular systems, though the GTX 1660 Ti's dual-slot design with PCIe 3.0 x16 is more standard for desktop builds.

Given the 8-to-1 win record and the magnitude of the margins, the GTX 1660 Ti is the recommended choice for the overwhelming majority of scenarios. The Quadro M5000M's Vulkan advantage and larger memory pool represent its only clear areas of superiority, and these are narrow compared to the GTX 1660 Ti's broad dominance across every other benchmark category.