NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 vs NVIDIA Tesla M10 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two NVIDIA cards, and the separation is not subtle. The GeForce GTX 1660 wins every recorded head-to-head test, and in some cases by margins that are difficult to describe as anything other than decisive. The Tesla M10, by contrast, does not record a single win in any benchmark category where both cards have data.

The GeForce GTX 1660 excels in compute-oriented workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, it posts a score of 47,850 against the Tesla M10's 10,318, a delta of 363.8% in favor of the GTX 1660. That is not a marginal advantage; it is a generational gap expressed in raw numbers. The same pattern repeats in Geekbench Vulkan, where the GTX 1660 scores 50,137 versus 9,130 for the Tesla M10, a 449.1% lead. For any workload that relies on general-purpose GPU compute, the GTX 1660 is the only reasonable choice from this pairing.

The Tesla M10's role is more specialized. It is a datacenter-oriented card with no display outputs, and its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory exceeds the GTX 1660's 6 GB. In scenarios where memory capacity matters more than raw throughput, the M10 has a structural advantage. However, the benchmark database does not include a test that isolates memory capacity as a performance factor. The recorded measurements, limited to OpenCL and Vulkan, show no test where the M10 comes out ahead.

The GTX 1660 also wins on architectural efficiency. It achieves higher scores while drawing 120 W, compared to the Tesla M10's 225 W. The performance per watt is not directly measured in the database, but the recorded figures imply a substantial efficiency gap. The GTX 1660 delivers roughly 4.6 times the OpenCL score while consuming roughly half the power budget, a combination that favors the consumer card in any power-constrained deployment.

For gaming or client-side rendering, the choice is unambiguous. The GTX 1660 has display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a) and runs the full DirectX 12 feature set at level 12_1. The Tesla M10 has no outputs and supports DirectX 12 only at the 11_0 feature level. The data shows a consumer graphics card that dominates a server accelerator in every measured metric, with the M10's only consolation being its larger memory pool.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural eras and different market segments. The GeForce GTX 1660 uses the TU116 chip built on Turing architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 12 nm process. It packs 6,600 million transistors into a 284 mm² die, for a transistor density of 23.2 million per square millimeter. The Tesla M10 uses the GM107 chip on Maxwell architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. It contains 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, with a density of 12.6 million per square millimeter.

The core configuration differences are stark. The GTX 1660 has 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 raster operation pipelines. The Tesla M10 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That is less than half the shader count, less than half the texture units, and one-third the ROPs. The GTX 1660 also clocks higher: 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost, against the M10's 1033 MHz base and 1306 MHz boost.

Memory subsystems diverge as well. The GTX 1660 uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 192.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla M10 has 8 GB of GDDR5 but on a narrower 128-bit bus, resulting in 83.20 GB/s. The M10 has more capacity but less than half the bandwidth. Memory clocks also favor the GTX 1660: 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective) versus 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective).

Feature support shows another gap. The GTX 1660 supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_1, while the Tesla M10 is limited to 11_0. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so those features are absent from both. The GTX 1660 has a 2:1 FP16 ratio with 10.05 TFLOPS of half-precision throughput, while the M10 has no FP16 data recorded. FP32 performance favors the GTX 1660 at 5.027 TFLOPS versus 1.672 TFLOPS.

Physical specifications reinforce the product positioning. The GTX 1660 is 229 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 35 mm wide, with a 120 W TDP and a single 8-pin power connector. The Tesla M10 is longer at 267 mm, has a 225 W TDP, and also uses a single 8-pin connector. The M10 has no display outputs, while the GTX 1660 offers a full set of modern connectors. The GTX 1660 was released in March 2019; the Tesla M10 launched in May 2016. Both are now end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these cards, and both are comprehensive victories for the GeForce GTX 1660. There are no tests where the Tesla M10 wins, and the margin of defeat is consistent across both workloads.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1660 scores 47,850 against the Tesla M10's 10,318. That is a delta of 363.8% in favor of the GTX 1660. In practical terms, the GTX 1660 processes OpenCL workloads nearly four and a half times faster than the M10. This test is particularly relevant for compute tasks, scientific simulation, and any application that offloads parallel work to the GPU. The M10's Maxwell architecture, with its lower shader count and narrower memory bus, simply cannot keep pace with the Turing-based GTX 1660.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens further. The GTX 1660 scores 50,137, while the Tesla M10 manages 9,130. The delta is 449.1%. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics and compute API, and the GTX 1660's advantage here suggests that both its raw compute capability and its architectural efficiency contribute to the result. The M10's Vulkan score is actually lower than its OpenCL score, while the GTX 1660's Vulkan score is higher than its OpenCL score, indicating that the newer card scales better with modern API workloads.

The broader benchmark record supports this dominance. The GTX 1660 has an average benchmark score of 11,680 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 51st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT at 11,627 (0.5% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M at 11,528 (1.3% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT at 11,842 (1.4% ahead). The Tesla M10, by contrast, averages 9,724 and sits in the 47th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 at 9,716 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 at 9,780 (0.6% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 at 9,665 (0.6% behind).

The GTX 1660's individual benchmark suite shows strength across API generations. It scores 61 in Passmark DirectX 10, 79 in DirectX 11, 49 in DirectX 12, and 177 in DirectX 9. Its Passmark G3D score is 11,646, with a GPU compute score of 4,963 and a G2D score of 776. The Tesla M10 has no recorded scores in any Passmark test, so direct comparison is limited to the two Geekbench workloads. Within those two tests, the GTX 1660 holds a minimum advantage of 363.8% and a maximum of 449.1%.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the GeForce GTX 1660 is the superior card in every benchmark where both are measured. It wins both head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score, and sits in a higher percentile of all GPUs. The Tesla M10's only advantages are its larger 8 GB memory pool and its server-oriented form factor, neither of which appears in any recorded performance metric.

Buyers should choose the GTX 1660 if they need compute performance, modern API support, or display output. It offers DirectX 12_1, full Vulkan 1.4 support, and a complete set of display connectors. Its 120 W TDP makes it feasible in systems with modest power supplies, and its 229 mm length fits standard desktop cases. The recorded data shows a card that performs at the level of the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT, based on the nearest rival comparisons.

The Tesla M10 is appropriate only for deployments where its 8 GB memory capacity is the deciding factor and where its 225 W TDP and lack of display outputs are acceptable. It is a datacenter accelerator from 2016, built on 28 nm Maxwell, and its compute scores are a fraction of the GTX 1660's. The database shows no workload where the M10 outperforms the GTX 1660.

For most users, this is not a difficult decision. The GTX 1660 wins on performance, efficiency, features, and connectivity. The Tesla M10 wins only on memory size, and even that advantage does not translate into a benchmark victory. Pick the GTX 1660 for anything that involves rendering, compute, or gaming. Pick the Tesla M10 only if you specifically need 8 GB of VRAM in a card with no display outputs and can tolerate its power draw.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better OpenCL performance?

A: The GeForce GTX 1660 scores 47,850 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to 10,318 for the Tesla M10, a 363.8% advantage.

Q: How does the Tesla M10 compare in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The Tesla M10 scores 9,130 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the GTX 1660 scores 50,137, giving the GTX 1660 a 449.1% lead.

Q: What memory configurations do these cards have?

A: The GTX 1660 has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 192.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Tesla M10 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 83.20 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports newer DirectX features?

A: The GTX 1660 supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_1. The Tesla M10 is limited to DirectX 12 at feature level 11_0.

Q: Does the Tesla M10 have display outputs?

A: No. The Tesla M10 has no display outputs, while the GTX 1660 includes 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The GTX 1660 has a 120 W TDP and requires a 300 W power supply. The Tesla M10 has a 225 W TDP and requires a 550 W power supply.