NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro P5000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro P5000 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti are two very different products from different eras of NVIDIA’s lineup, and the benchmark data reflects that split personality. The Quadro P5000, a professional workstation card from the Pascal generation, and the GTX 1660 Ti, a consumer Turing-based card, deliver a near-perfect 5-5 split in the head-to-head benchmark suite. The average benchmark scores tell the story: the Quadro P5000 posts an 8039 average against the GTX 1660 Ti’s 7723, but both cards sit at the 41st percentile of all GPUs. This is not a case of one card being universally faster; it is a case of each card dominating in specific workloads, and the data shows exactly where those lines are drawn.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest single victory for the Quadro P5000 comes in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where it scores 1330 against the GTX 1660 Ti’s 1061. That is a 25.4% lead, and it is the largest delta in the entire benchmark set. This is a decisive win for the professional card, indicating that in modern DX12 workloads, the Quadro’s higher raw compute resources pay off substantially. The Quadro P5000 also shows a strong lead in Passmark’s GPU Compute test, scoring 6508 versus 5226, a 24.5% advantage. This is a clear signal that the Quadro’s architecture is better suited for general-purpose compute tasks.

The Quadro P5000 also wins in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 52509 against 51029, a modest 2.9% lead, and in Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 6342 against 5827, an 8.8% advantage. In the older Passmark DirectX 10 test, the Quadro wins 77 to 66, a 16.7% margin. These wins are spread across different API generations, but they consistently favor the Quadro in compute-heavy and modern rendering scenarios.

The GTX 1660 Ti, however, fights back in several important areas. Its biggest win is in Passmark DirectX 12, where it scores 51 against the Quadro’s 44, a 13.7% lead. This is notable because it directly contradicts the 3DMark DX12 result, suggesting that the GTX 1660 Ti’s driver optimizations or architectural tweaks give it an edge in certain DX12 paths. The GTX 1660 Ti also wins in Passmark DirectX 9, scoring 190 against 170, a 10.5% margin, and in Passmark G2D, scoring 804 against 674, a 16.2% lead. In Passmark DirectX 11, the GTX 1660 Ti edges out a narrow 103 to 102 win, a 1% margin, and in Passmark G3D it wins 12871 to 12634, a 1.8% lead. The GTX 1660 Ti also wins in Passmark DirectX 10? No, that was the Quadro. So the GTX 1660 Ti’s wins are concentrated in the older DX9, DX11, and DX12 Passmark tests, plus the 2D test, while the Quadro dominates the modern 3DMark test and compute workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The data paints a clear picture of two distinct usage profiles. The Quadro P5000 is the clear winner for anyone prioritizing compute performance and modern DX12 rendering. Its 25.4% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad and 24.5% lead in GPU Compute are not small margins; they represent a substantial performance advantage in workloads that stress raw shader throughput and compute units. The Quadro’s wins in OpenCL and Vulkan further solidify its position as the better choice for professional applications that rely on these APIs, such as 3D rendering, scientific simulation, and video processing. If the task is to crunch numbers or render a complex scene, the Quadro P5000 is the card the data supports.

The GTX 1660 Ti, on the other hand, is the winner for legacy API compatibility and 2D desktop performance. Its 16.2% lead in Passmark G2D shows that it handles 2D operations, likely including desktop compositing and UI rendering, more efficiently. Its wins in DirectX 9 and DirectX 11 are also significant, as these APIs are still used by many older games and applications. The GTX 1660 Ti’s 13.7% lead in Passmark DirectX 12 is interesting, as it suggests that in some DX12 implementations, the Turing architecture’s design delivers better results. For a user running a mix of older and newer games, the GTX 1660 Ti’s balanced performance across the Passmark suite, where it wins four of the six DirectX tests, makes it the more versatile gaming card.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is generational. The Quadro P5000 is built on the Pascal architecture, using the GP104 chip fabricated on a 16 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,200 million transistors into a 314 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 22.9M per mm². The GTX 1660 Ti uses the Turing architecture with the TU116 chip, built on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, resulting in a slightly higher density of 23.2M per mm². The newer process node allows the GTX 1660 Ti to achieve a higher transistor density despite having fewer total transistors.

The compute resources are starkly different. The Quadro P5000 has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the GTX 1660 Ti has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. This gives the Quadro a massive theoretical advantage in raw throughput, with FP32 performance of 8.873 TFLOPS versus the GTX 1660 Ti’s 5.437 TFLOPS. However, the GTX 1660 Ti has a significant advantage in FP16 performance, delivering 10.87 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the Quadro P5000 only manages 138.6 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio. This means the GTX 1660 Ti is far more capable in workloads that can use FP16, such as AI inference or certain shader effects, while the Quadro is built for pure FP32 compute.

Clock speeds also differ. The Quadro P5000 has a base clock of 1607 MHz and a boost of 1733 MHz, while the GTX 1660 Ti has a lower base of 1500 MHz but a higher boost of 1770 MHz. The GTX 1660 Ti’s higher boost clock helps it close the gap in some tests, but the Quadro’s superior shader count keeps it ahead in most compute scenarios. The Quadro also has a higher memory clock at 1127 MHz (9 Gbps effective) versus the GTX 1660 Ti’s 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Neither card has dedicated RT cores or Tensor cores, so ray tracing and DLSS are not differentiators here.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more VRAM?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P5000 has 16 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Quadro P5000 has a bandwidth of 288.5 GB/s, while the GTX 1660 Ti has a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The difference is negligible, at just 0.5 GB/s.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has a TDP of 120 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W, while the Quadro P5000 has a TDP of 180 W and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The GTX 1660 Ti is the lower-power card.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which card wins in Passmark G3D?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti wins with a score of 12871, which is 1.8% higher than the Quadro P5000’s 12634.

Q: What is the release date difference?

A: The Quadro P5000 was released on 2016-09-30, while the GTX 1660 Ti was released on 2019-02-21.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The Quadro P5000 uses the Pascal architecture on a 16 nm process, while the GTX 1660 Ti uses Turing on a 12 nm process. The Quadro has a larger die at 314 mm² and more transistors at 7,200 million, but the GTX 1660 Ti has a higher transistor density at 23.2M/mm². The Quadro has more shading units (2560 vs 1536), more TMUs (160 vs 96), and more ROPs (64 vs 48). The Quadro also has a higher base clock (1607 MHz vs 1500 MHz), but the GTX 1660 Ti has a higher boost clock (1770 MHz vs 1733 MHz). The Quadro has 16 GB of GDDR5X memory, while the GTX 1660 Ti has 6 GB of GDDR6. The Quadro produces higher pixel and texture rates (110.9 GPixel/s and 277.3 GTexel/s) versus the GTX 1660 Ti (84.96 GPixel/s and 169.9 GTexel/s). The Quadro also has higher FP32 performance (8.873 TFLOPS vs 5.437 TFLOPS), but the GTX 1660 Ti has vastly higher FP16 performance (10.87 TFLOPS vs 138.6 GFLOPS). The Quadro has a higher TDP (180 W vs 120 W) and is longer (267 mm vs 229 mm). The GTX 1660 Ti adds an HDMI 2.0 output, while the Quadro has a DVI and four DisplayPort outputs.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear division of labor. Choose the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 if your primary workloads are compute-intensive, modern DX12 rendering, or professional applications that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan. Its 25.4% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad and 24.5% lead in GPU Compute are decisive, and its 16 GB of VRAM provides ample capacity for large datasets. The Quadro’s higher TDP and dual-slot design are acceptable trade-offs for the substantial compute advantage.

Choose the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti if your focus is legacy API compatibility, 2D desktop performance, or a mix of older and newer games. Its wins in DirectX 9, 11, and 12 tests, plus its 16.2% lead in G2D, make it the more balanced option for consumer gaming. The GTX 1660 Ti also offers significantly higher FP16 throughput, making it a better choice for workloads that can utilize that precision. It is also the lower-power, shorter card, making it easier to fit into a variety of systems. Both cards are end-of-life, but the benchmark results show that each still has a distinct role to play, and the right choice depends entirely on the workload.