GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains only one shared benchmark between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 and the AMD FirePro W5000: the Geekbench OpenCL test. This single data point is decisive. The GTX 1660 scored 47,850, while the FirePro W5000 scored 9,803. That is a delta of 388.1%, meaning the NVIDIA card is nearly four times faster in this compute workload. The margin is not close; it is a landslide.

Looking at the broader database context, the GTX 1660's average benchmark score is 11,680, which places it at the 51st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT at 11,627 (a 0.5% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT at 11,842 (a -1.4% delta). The GTX 1660 sits in a tight cluster, slightly ahead of the RX 7800 XT and slightly behind the RX 6500 XT. The FirePro W5000, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 9,803, placing it at the 47th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 at 9,780 (0.2% delta) and the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M at 9,832 (-0.3% delta). The FirePro W5000 is essentially tied with those cards, showing that it belongs to an older performance tier.

The head-to-head comparison shows a single win for the GTX 1660 and zero wins for the FirePro W5000. In the one test where both cards have recorded scores, the GTX 1660 wins outright. The FirePro W5000 has no recorded victories in any shared benchmark. The data does not support any scenario where the AMD card comes out ahead.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1660 wins in every measurable category where both cards have data. The Geekbench OpenCL score is the only overlapping test, and the NVIDIA card dominates it. For users running OpenCL compute workloads, the GTX 1660 delivers 388.1% higher performance. That is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational leap in raw compute throughput.

The FirePro W5000, on the other hand, does not win any benchmark in this comparison. Its only recorded score, 9,803 in Geekbench OpenCL, is below the GTX 1660's score in the same test. The FirePro W5000's nearest rivals, such as the GTX 1070 and Quadro M2000M, are all within 0.4% of its score, indicating that it performs at a level consistent with mid-range GPUs from several generations ago. In this head-to-head, the FirePro W5000 has no use case where it emerges as the faster card.

The GTX 1660 also has a broader benchmark profile in the database. It has recorded scores in 10 different tests, including PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, and GPU Compute, plus 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and Geekbench Vulkan. The FirePro W5000 has only one recorded benchmark. This difference in data coverage means the GTX 1660's average score is based on a wider range of workloads, while the FirePro W5000's score comes from a single test. The database shows the GTX 1660 as a more versatile performer, with wins across multiple API levels and workload types.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is built on the Turing architecture, using the TU116 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It contains 6,600 million transistors on a die size of 284 mm², giving a transistor density of 23.2 million per mm². The FirePro W5000 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Pitcairn chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It has 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, with a density of 13.2 million per mm². The GTX 1660 has more than double the transistor count and a higher density, reflecting the newer manufacturing process.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The GTX 1660 has a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 1785 MHz, with memory running at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The FirePro W5000 has no recorded base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective). The GTX 1660's memory clock is more than double that of the FirePro W5000.

Memory configurations are also distinct. The GTX 1660 has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 192.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro W5000 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 102.4 GB/s. Although the FirePro W5000 has a wider bus, the GTX 1660's higher memory clock gives it nearly double the bandwidth.

Shader and texture resources favor the GTX 1660 heavily. It has 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 48 render output units (ROPs). The FirePro W5000 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 1660 has roughly 83% more shading units, 83% more TMUs, and 50% more ROPs. Pixel rate for the GTX 1660 is 85.68 GPixel/s, while the FirePro W5000 manages 26.40 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 157.1 GTexel/s versus 39.60 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 5.027 TFLOPS for the GTX 1660 versus 1,267.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro W5000. The GTX 1660 also has FP16 capability at 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio); the FirePro W5000 has no recorded FP16 score.

Power and physical characteristics differ as well. The GTX 1660 has a TDP of 120 W, uses a dual-slot cooler, requires one 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. It measures 229 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 35 mm in width. The FirePro W5000 has a TDP of 75 W, uses a single-slot cooler, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. It measures 183 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with no recorded width. The FirePro W5000 is shorter and consumes less power, but the GTX 1660 offers far higher performance.

API support shows another gap. The GTX 1660 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro W5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 1660 has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version. Display outputs also differ: the GTX 1660 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the FirePro W5000 has 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2.

The Verdict

The database is unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms the AMD FirePro W5000 in every shared benchmark, with a 388.1% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. The GTX 1660's average benchmark score of 11,680 is 19.1% higher than the FirePro W5000's 9,803. The GTX 1660 sits at the 51st percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro W5000 sits at the 47th percentile. The GTX 1660's nearest rivals are modern cards like the RX 7800 XT and RX 6500 XT, while the FirePro W5000's nearest rivals are older GPUs like the GTX 1070 and Quadro 6000.

Users should choose the GTX 1660 if they need compute performance, modern API support, or higher memory bandwidth. It offers 6 GB of memory versus 2 GB, 192.1 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s, and a higher DirectX feature level. The FirePro W5000 might be considered only for legacy compatibility or power-constrained environments, given its 75 W TDP and no external power requirement. However, its performance deficit is so large that no workload in the database justifies choosing it over the GTX 1660. The GTX 1660 is the clear winner in this comparison.

FAQ

Q: What is the performance difference in the only shared benchmark?

A: The GTX 1660 scores 47,850 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the FirePro W5000 scores 9,803, a delta of 388.1% in favor of the GTX 1660.

Q: How do the two cards compare in average benchmark scores?

A: The GTX 1660 has an average benchmark score of 11,680, and the FirePro W5000 has 9,803. The GTX 1660 is 19.1% higher.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The GTX 1660 has 6 GB GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 192.1 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W5000 has 2 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the architecture and process nodes?

A: The GTX 1660 uses Turing (TU116) on a 12 nm process. The FirePro W5000 uses GCN 1.0 (Pitcairn) on a 28 nm process.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The GTX 1660 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro W5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The GTX 1660 has a 120 W TDP, requires one 8-pin connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. The FirePro W5000 has a 75 W TDP, requires no connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 | AMD FirePro W5000 |

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

| Architecture | Turing | GCN 1.0 |

| Chip | TU116 | Pitcairn |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 6,600 million | 2,800 million |

| Die Size | 284 mm² | 212 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.2M / mm² | 13.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1530 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost Clock | 1785 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory Clock | 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective) | 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.1 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1408 | 768 |

| TMUs | 88 | 48 |

| ROPs | 48 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 85.68 GPixel/s | 26.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 157.1 GTexel/s | 39.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.027 TFLOPS | 1,267.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1) | Not specified |

| TDP | 120 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Length | 229 mm (9 inches) | 183 mm (7.2 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

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