NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins more benchmark tests in the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 wins 7 of the 9 head-to-head tests, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile wins only 2. The GTX 1660's victories include PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, plus G2D, G3D, and GPU compute tests.

Q: How much faster is the RTX A2000 Mobile in OpenCL performance?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56518 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 18.1% higher than the GTX 1660's 47850. This is the largest margin of victory for the A2000 Mobile in any recorded benchmark.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores between the two cards?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 13821, while the GTX 1660 averages 11680. The A2000 Mobile sits at the 55th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the GTX 1660's 51st percentile.

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile delivers 8.637 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the GTX 1660 delivers 5.027 TFLOPS. The A2000 Mobile's FP16 output matches its FP32 at 8.637 TFLOPS (1:1), whereas the GTX 1660 doubles its FP16 rate to 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1).

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 1660 has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 192.1 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clocks differ: 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the A2000 Mobile versus 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for the GTX 1660.

Q: Which card supports hardware ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: Only the RTX A2000 Mobile includes 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. The GTX 1660 has no RT cores and no tensor cores, reflecting its Turing architecture without the RTX feature set.

Architecture Differences

The RTX A2000 Mobile and GTX 1660 represent two distinct NVIDIA architectures: Ampere and Turing, respectively. The A2000 Mobile uses the GA107 chip fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process, while the GTX 1660 uses the TU116 chip on TSMC's 12 nm node. This process difference is significant: the A2000 Mobile packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The GTX 1660 contains 6,600 million transistors across a larger 284 mm² die, resulting in a density of 23.2M per mm². The A2000 Mobile's denser design enables more compute resources in a smaller package.

The compute architectures diverge substantially. The A2000 Mobile features 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. It also includes 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The GTX 1660 has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, but lacks RT and tensor cores entirely. Despite fewer TMUs, the GTX 1660 achieves a higher texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s versus 135.0 GTexel/s for the A2000 Mobile, thanks to its higher clock speeds.

The memory subsystems also differ in technology and configuration. The A2000 Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus, while the GTX 1660 uses 6 GB of GDDR5 with a 192-bit bus. Bandwidth is nearly identical at 192.0 GB/s versus 192.1 GB/s. The A2000 Mobile operates at a 1500 MHz memory clock (12 Gbps effective), while the GTX 1660 runs at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The GTX 1660's wider bus compensates for its slower effective data rate.

API support marks another difference. The A2000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GTX 1660 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The A2000 Mobile's newer API tier reflects its Ampere generation and RTX feature set.

Physical and power characteristics differ markedly. The A2000 Mobile is an IGP (integrated graphics package) with no power connectors and a 95 W TDP. The GTX 1660 is a dual-slot card measuring 229 mm by 111 mm by 35 mm, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and has a 120 W TDP with a suggested 300 W power supply. The GTX 1660 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the A2000 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A2000 Mobile dominates in compute and modern API workloads. Its 18.1% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL and 6% lead in Geekbench Vulkan indicate strong general-purpose compute performance. The presence of tensor cores and RT cores makes it better suited for AI inference, ray-traced rendering, and professional visualization tasks. Its 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio means it does not rely on reduced precision for compute acceleration, which benefits scientific and engineering workloads. The A2000 Mobile's 55th percentile ranking versus all GPUs, compared to the GTX 1660's 51st percentile, reflects this compute-oriented positioning.

The GTX 1660 wins in legacy DirectX benchmarks and rasterization-focused tests. It leads by 35% in PassMark DirectX 9, 13.9% in DirectX 11, 6.6% in DirectX 10, and 4.1% in DirectX 12. Its PassMark G3D score of 11646 versus 9611 for the A2000 Mobile, a 17.5% gap, indicates stronger traditional 3D rendering performance. The GTX 1660 also wins PassMark G2D (776 versus 491, a 36.7% lead) and GPU compute (4963 versus 4334, a 12.7% lead). These results suggest the GTX 1660 is better for gaming, particularly in titles that rely on DirectX 9 or 11 paths, and for general desktop acceleration.

The A2000 Mobile is the superior choice for compute-heavy professional applications, while the GTX 1660 is the better performer for conventional gaming and older API workloads. The GTX 1660's larger 6 GB memory capacity also gives it an advantage in scenarios requiring more VRAM, such as high-resolution textures, despite its lower overall compute throughput.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two GPUs:

• Process node: 8 nm (Samsung) for the A2000 Mobile, 12 nm (TSMC) for the GTX 1660
• Transistors: 8,700 million versus 6,600 million
• Die size: 200 mm² versus 284 mm²
• Transistor density: 43.5M / mm² versus 23.2M / mm²
• Base clock: 1215 MHz versus 1530 MHz
• Boost clock: 1687 MHz versus 1785 MHz
• Memory clock: 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) versus 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 4 GB versus 6 GB
• Memory type: GDDR6 versus GDDR5
• Memory bus width: 128 bit versus 192 bit
• Shading units: 2560 versus 1408
• TMUs: 80 versus 88
• RT cores: 20 versus none
• Tensor cores: 80 versus none
• Pixel rate: 80.98 GPixel/s versus 85.68 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 135.0 GTexel/s versus 157.1 GTexel/s
• FP32: 8.637 TFLOPS versus 5.027 TFLOPS
• FP16: 8.637 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 95 W versus 120 W
• Slot width: IGP versus dual-slot
• Power connectors: none versus 1x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: none versus 300 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display outputs: portable device dependent versus 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
• DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1)
• Release date: 2021-04-11 versus 2019-03-13
• Predecessor: Quadro Turing-M versus GeForce 10
• Successor: Ada-MW versus GeForce 20
• Launch MSRP: none listed versus 219 USD

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records 9 head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two GPUs. The A2000 Mobile wins 2, and the GTX 1660 wins 7.

The A2000 Mobile's strongest result comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 56518 against the GTX 1660's 47850, a 18.1% advantage. This test measures general compute performance across multiple workloads, and the A2000 Mobile's higher shading unit count and FP32 throughput (8.637 TFLOPS versus 5.027 TFLOPS) explain the margin. In Geekbench Vulkan, the A2000 Mobile scores 53146 versus 50137, a 6% lead. Vulkan performance benefits from the A2000 Mobile's newer architecture and PCIe 4.0 interface, though the gap is narrower than in OpenCL.

The GTX 1660's largest victory is in PassMark DirectX 9, scoring 177 against the A2000 Mobile's 115, a 35% difference. This older API test heavily favors the GTX 1660's higher clock speeds and dedicated rasterization pipeline. In PassMark DirectX 11, the GTX 1660 scores 79 versus 68, a 13.9% lead. DirectX 10 shows a 6.6% margin (61 versus 57), and DirectX 12 shows a 4.1% margin (49 versus 47). The DirectX 12 gap is modest, suggesting the A2000 Mobile's newer API support partially compensates for its other disadvantages.

PassMark G2D results show the GTX 1660 at 776 versus 491, a 36.7% lead, indicating superior 2D rendering and desktop compositing performance. The PassMark G3D score of 11646 for the GTX 1660 versus 9611 for the A2000 Mobile represents a 17.5% gap in overall 3D graphics performance. PassMark GPU compute gives the GTX 1660 a 12.7% edge (4963 versus 4334), which is notable given the A2000 Mobile's higher theoretical compute throughput; the GTX 1660's higher clocks and wider memory bus likely contribute to this result.

The aggregate data shows a clear split: the A2000 Mobile excels in modern compute APIs, while the GTX 1660 dominates legacy DirectX and general 3D workloads. The A2000 Mobile's average benchmark score of 13821 exceeds the GTX 1660's 11680 by approximately 18%, but this average is heavily weighted by the A2000 Mobile's strong OpenCL and Vulkan results. The GTX 1660's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (0.5% higher average score) and the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (1.3% lower). The A2000 Mobile's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 660M (0.1% higher) and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT (0.6% lower), placing it in a different competitive tier.