NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data splits decisively in favor of the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, with the Quadro P2200 winning only two of nine direct comparisons. The largest margin in either direction comes from the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the Quadro P2200 scores 31,351 against the GTX 1660 Ti's 5,827, a delta of 438 percent. This is an outlier result, one that dwarfs every other difference in the dataset, and it suggests a fundamental divergence in how each card handles the Vulkan API workload in question.

Outside of that single result, the GTX 1660 Ti leads consistently across the Passmark suite. In DirectX 10, the scores are 66 versus 45, a 31.8 percent gap. DirectX 11 shows 103 versus 70, a 32 percent gap. DirectX 12 follows with 51 versus 33, a 35.3 percent gap. The DirectX 9 result is closer: 190 versus 167, a 12.1 percent gap. The Passmark G3D score, which aggregates general 3D rendering performance, lands at 12,871 for the GTX 1660 Ti against 9,364 for the Quadro P2200, a 27.2 percent advantage. Passmark GPU compute also favors the GTX 1660 Ti at 5,226 versus 3,921, a 25 percent delta.

The Quadro P2200's other win comes in Passmark G2D, a 2D graphics throughput test. Here it scores 881 against the GTX 1660 Ti's 804, a 9.6 percent lead. This is a modest margin, but it is the only non-Vulkan test where the Quadro comes out ahead. The Geekbench OpenCL result shows the GTX 1660 Ti at 51,029 versus 32,344, a 36.6 percent advantage, reinforcing the pattern that the gaming card dominates compute-oriented workloads.

Looking at overall averages, the Quadro P2200 posts an average benchmark score of 8,686, while the GTX 1660 Ti averages 7,723. This seems counterintuitive given the head-to-head results, but the explanation lies in the Vulkan outlier: the Quadro's 31,351 score inflates its average, even though it loses the majority of individual tests. The percentile rankings tell a similar story: the Quadro sits at the 44th percentile among all GPUs, the GTX 1660 Ti at the 41st. Neither card is near the top of the overall distribution, but the Quadro's Vulkan spike gives it a slightly higher standing in the aggregate metric.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different NVIDIA architectures and process nodes. The Quadro P2200 uses the GP106 chip on the Pascal architecture, built on a 16 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 1660 Ti uses the TU116 chip on the Turing architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 12 nm node. The transistor counts reflect the generational jump: the Pascal chip packs 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, while the Turing chip contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die. Transistor density rises slightly from 22.0 million per mm² on Pascal to 23.2 million per mm² on Turing.

The GTX 1660 Ti has more of every execution resource. It carries 1,536 shading units against the Quadro's 1,280, 96 texture mapping units versus 80, and 48 raster output units versus 40. These numbers translate directly into higher theoretical throughput: the GTX 1660 Ti reaches 5.437 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 169.9 GTexel/s of texture rate, and 84.96 GPixel/s of pixel rate. The Quadro P2200 manages 3.822 TFLOPS, 119.4 GTexel/s, and 59.72 GPixel/s. The FP16 story is even more lopsided: the GTX 1660 Ti delivers 10.87 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the Quadro manages only 59.72 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio, a difference of over two orders of magnitude.

Clock speeds also favor the Turing card. The GTX 1660 Ti has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost of 1770 MHz, while the Quadro P2200 runs at 1000 MHz base and 1493 MHz boost. Memory configurations differ as well. The Quadro uses 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 160-bit bus, yielding 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 1660 Ti uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s. The effective memory speed is 10 Gbps for the Quadro and 12 Gbps for the GTX 1660 Ti.

Power and physical design separate the two. The Quadro P2200 draws 75 W, is single-slot, requires no external power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W. The GTX 1660 Ti draws 120 W, is dual-slot, requires one 8-pin connector, and has a suggested PSU of 300 W. The Quadro is shorter at 201 mm versus 229 mm, and both cards share the same 111 mm height, with the GTX 1660 Ti adding a 35 mm width that the single-slot Quadro does not need. Display outputs differ: the Quadro offers four DisplayPort 1.4a connections, while the GTX 1660 Ti offers one DVI, one HDMI 2.0, and one DisplayPort 1.4a.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores. The Quadro P2200 released on 2019-06-09, the GTX 1660 Ti on 2019-02-21. The Quadro's predecessors are Quadro Maxwell and its successor Quadro Volta; the GTX 1660 Ti's predecessor is GeForce 10 and its successor GeForce 20.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1660 Ti wins in every DirectX test, in OpenCL compute, in general 3D rendering, and in GPU compute throughput. Its Passmark G3D score of 12,871 indicates a clear advantage for rasterized 3D workloads, and the consistent DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 wins show that this advantage holds across legacy and modern API generations. The OpenCL score of 51,029 versus 32,344 suggests the GTX 1660 Ti is the stronger choice for general compute and GPU-accelerated tasks that use OpenCL. The Passmark GPU compute result of 5,226 versus 3,921 reinforces this conclusion.

The Quadro P2200 wins in two specific areas: Vulkan and 2D throughput. The Vulkan score of 31,351 versus 5,827 is so large that it cannot be dismissed as a minor edge; it is a 438 percent advantage. For workloads that rely heavily on Vulkan, the Quadro P2200 is the measured superior card. The Passmark G2D score of 881 versus 804 gives it a smaller but still positive lead for 2D graphics operations, which may matter for desktop rendering or legacy application compatibility.

The use-case split follows the data. For gaming, real-time 3D rendering, and compute-heavy tasks, the GTX 1660 Ti is the better performer. For Vulkan-specific applications or workloads where 2D throughput matters more than 3D, the Quadro P2200 holds the advantage. The Quadro's lower power draw of 75 W and single-slot design may also factor into deployment decisions, though these are physical characteristics rather than benchmark results.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 has an average benchmark score of 8,686, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti averages 7,723. However, the Quadro's average is inflated by its 31,351 Vulkan score, and it loses seven of nine head-to-head comparisons.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Quadro P2200 scores 31,351 against the GTX 1660 Ti's 5,827, a 438 percent difference. The next largest gap is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 1660 Ti leads by 36.6 percent.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 160-bit bus with 200.2 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 1660 Ti has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has higher power requirements?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has a 120 W TDP, requires one 8-pin connector, and has a suggested PSU of 300 W. The Quadro P2200 has a 75 W TDP, requires no external power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: Do either cards support ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: No. Both the Quadro P2200 and the GTX 1660 Ti have null entries for RT cores and tensor cores. Neither card supports hardware ray tracing or tensor acceleration.

Q: What are the release dates for each card?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti was released on 2019-02-21, and the Quadro P2200 was released on 2019-06-09. Both are marked as end-of-life production status.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear separation of roles. The GTX 1660 Ti is the stronger performer in the majority of measured workloads: it wins DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests, OpenCL, G3D, and GPU compute. Its FP32 throughput of 5.437 TFLOPS is roughly 42 percent higher than the Quadro's 3.822 TFLOPS, and its memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s exceeds the Quadro's 200.2 GB/s by a similar proportion. Any user running general 3D applications, gaming, or OpenCL compute should choose the GTX 1660 Ti based on these measurements.

The Quadro P2200 is the better choice only for Vulkan-centric workloads or 2D-heavy tasks. Its Vulkan score is an order of magnitude higher, and its G2D score leads by 9.6 percent. Additionally, its lower power draw of 75 W, single-slot profile, and lack of external power connectors make it a more flexible physical install in constrained systems. The Quadro also offers four DisplayPort outputs, which may be preferable for multi-monitor professional setups.

The percentile rankings place the Quadro at the 44th percentile and the GTX 1660 Ti at the 41st percentile among all GPUs, a difference of three points. This close aggregate standing masks the fact that the GTX 1660 Ti wins the majority of individual tests. The Quadro's average is pulled upward by a single Vulkan result, so the average benchmark score should not be read as an indication of overall superiority.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA Quadro P2200 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Pascal | Turing |

| Process node | 16 nm | 12 nm |

| Transistors | 4,400 million | 6,600 million |

| Die size | 200 mm² | 284 mm² |

| Transistor density | 22.0M / mm² | 23.2M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1493 MHz | 1770 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1251 MHz, 10 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 5 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR5X | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | 160 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 200.2 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1280 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 80 | 96 |

| ROPs | 40 | 48 |

| Pixel rate | 59.72 GPixel/s | 84.96 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 119.4 GTexel/s | 169.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.822 TFLOPS | 5.437 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 59.72 GFLOPS (1:64) | 10.87 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 120 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 300 W |

| Display outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Length | 201 mm (7.9 inches) | 229 mm (9 inches) |

| Width | Not specified | 35 mm (1.4 inches) |

| Release date | 2019-06-09 | 2019-02-21 |

| Launch MSRP | Not available | 279 USD |

| Predecessor | Quadro Maxwell | GeForce 10 |

| Successor | Quadro Volta | GeForce 20 |