Your Graphics Research
Your Graphics Research
| Recommended System Requirements | ||
|---|---|---|
| Game | GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB | Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB |
| Age of Empires IV | 20% | 25% |
| Grand Theft Auto VI | 12% | 5% |
| Resident Evil 8 | 4% | 3% |
| Far Cry 6 | 15% | 8% |
| Outriders | 4% | 3% |
| Battlefield 6 | 4% | 3% |
| It Takes Two | 31% | 35% |
| Star Citizen | 30% | 34% |
| Valheim | 20% | 25% |
| Total War: Rome Remastered | 86% | 87% |
In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB are very slightly better than the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB.
The GTX 1660 has a 30 MHz higher core clock speed than the RX Vega, but the RX Vega has 136 more Texture Mapping Units than the GTX 1660. As a result, the RX Vega exhibits a 201.4 GTexel/s better Texture Fill Rate than the GTX 1660. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.
The GTX 1660 has a 30 MHz higher core clock speed than the RX Vega, but the RX Vega has 8 more Render Output Units than the GTX 1660. As a result, the RX Vega exhibits a 10.6 GPixel/s better Pixel Fill Rate than the GTX 1660. However, both GPUs support DirectX 9 or above, and pixeling performance is only really relevant when comparing older cards.
The GTX 1660 was released over a year more recently than the RX Vega, and so the GTX 1660 is likely to have better driver support, meaning it will be more optimized for running the latest games when compared to the RX Vega.
Both GPUs exhibit very powerful performance, so it probably isn't worth upgrading from one to the other, as both are capable of running even the most demanding games at the highest settings.
The RX Vega has 2048 MB more video memory than the GTX 1660, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. However, overall, the GTX 1660 has superior memory performance.
The GTX 1660 has 80 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the RX Vega, which means that the memory performance of the GTX 1660 is much better than the RX Vega.
The GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB has 1408 Shader Processing Units and the Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB has 3584. However, the actual shader performance of the GTX 1660 is 2577 and the actual shader performance of the RX Vega is 3494. The RX Vega having 917 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the RX Vega delivers a significantly smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the GTX 1660.
The GTX 1660 transistor size technology is 2 nm (nanometers) smaller than the RX Vega. This means that the GTX 1660 is expected to run very slightly cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the RX Vega.
The GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB requires 125 Watts to run and the Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB requires 300 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 450 Watts for the GTX 1660 and a PSU with at least 600 Watts for the RX Vega. The RX Vega requires 175 Watts more than the GTX 1660 to run. The difference is significant enough that the RX Vega may have an adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the GTX 1660.
GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB gets 52.1 FPS on Tom Clancys Ghost Recon Wildlands
GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB gets 88.9 FPS on Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order
GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB gets 154 FPS on Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus
GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB gets 23.3 FPS on Tom Clancys Ghost Recon Wildlands
GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB gets 30.3 FPS on Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order
GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB gets 48.9 FPS on Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus
GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB gets 39.4 FPS on Tom Clancys Ghost Recon Wildlands
GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB gets 62.6 FPS on Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order
GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB gets 96.2 FPS on Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus
| Core Speed | 1530 MHz |  | vs | 1500 MHz | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boost Clock | 1830 MHz | | vs | - | |
| Architecture | Turing TU116 | Vega 10 XL | |||
| OC Potential | - | vs | - | ||
| Driver Support | - | vs | - | ||
| Release Date | 29 Oct 2019 |  | vs | 30 Jul 2017 | |
| GPU Link | GD Link | GD Link | |||
| Approved |  | | |||
| Comparison | |||||
| 1366x768 | 10
|
|
vs | |
10
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1600x900 | 10
|
|
vs | |
10
|
| 1920x1080 | 10
|
|
vs | |
10
|
| 2560x1440 | 8.6
|
vs | |
9.1
|
|
| 3840x2160 | 6.3
|
vs | |
7.1
|
|
| Memory | 6144 MB | vs | | 8192 MB | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Memory Speed | 1750 MHz | | vs | 500 MHz | |
| Memory Bus | 192 Bit | vs | | 2048 Bit | |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | | vs | HBM-2 | |
| Memory Bandwidth | 336GB/sec | | vs | 256GB/sec | |
| L2 Cache | 0 KB | |
vs | |
0 KB |
| Delta Color Compression | no | vs | no | ||
| Memory Performance | 0% | |
vs | |
0% |
| Comparison | |||||
| Shader Processing Units | 1408 | vs | | 3584 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual Shader Performance | 100% | | vs | | 100% |
| Technology | 12nm | | vs | 14nm | |
| Texture Mapping Units | 88 | vs | | 224 | |
| Texture Rate | 134.6 GTexel/s | vs | | 336 GTexel/s | |
| Render Output Units | 48 | vs | | 56 | |
| Pixel Rate | 73.4 GPixel/s | vs | | 84 GPixel/s | |
| Comparison | |||||
| Max Digital Resolution (WxH) | 7680x4320 | | vs | | 7680x4320 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VGA Connections | 0 | vs | 0 | ||
| DVI Connections | 1 | | vs | 0 | |
| HDMI Connections | 1 | | vs | | 1 |
| DisplayPort Connections | 1 | vs | | 4 | |
| Comparison | |||||
| Max Power | 125 Watts | | vs | 300 Watts | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended PSU | 450 Watts & 27 Amps | | vs | 600 Watts & 42 Amps | |
| DirectX | 12.1 | | vs | 12 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shader Model | 6.4 | | vs | 5.0 | |
| Open GL | 4.6 | | vs | 4.4 | |
| Open CL | - | vs | - | ||
| Notebook GPU | no | no | |||
| SLI/Crossfire | no | vs | | yes | |
| Dedicated | yes | | vs | | yes |
| Comparison | |||||
| Recommended Processor | Intel Core i5-8500 6-Core 3.0GHz | | vs | AMD Ryzen R7 1700 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended RAM | - | 16 GB | |||
| Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution | - | | 3840x2160 | ||
| Performance Value |  | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mini Review | Overview
The GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB is an entry to mid-level Nvidia graphics card which is expected to launched at the end of October 2019. The GeForce GTX 1660 Super 6GB is designed to compete against AMD's more affordable gaming cards such as the RX 570 and the RX 580, and replaces the outgoing GTX 1060. Architecture The Turing GPU architecture aims for 30-50% as much performance as the previous-gen Pascal Architecture. GPU It equips a GPU codenamed Turing TU116, more specifically the TU116-300-A1, which has 22 SM activated and thus 1408 Shader Processing Units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The central unit runs at 1530 MHz and goes up to 1830 MHz with the Boost Clock. Memory The GPU accesses a 6GB frame buffer of fast GDDR6 through a 192-bit memory interface, while the memory clock Operates at 1750MHz, or 14GHz effective. Power Consumption With a rated board TDP of 125W, this graphics card requires one 8-pin power connector. Performance The GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB will enable medium to high graphics performance on modern AAA 2018 released games. Although there will be variations on this frame rate we expect this card to deliver around 50+ FPS on High graphics settings at 1080p screen resolution. Comparatively, this card will have quite a bit faster performance than the GTX 1060. System Suggestions The GeForce GTX 1660 Super Asus Dual Evo OC 6GB is best suited for resolutions up to and including 2560x1440, so our recommendation would be to use 1920x1080 in order to get the most out of your settings. We recommend a high-end processor such as the i5-8500 and 12GB of RAM for optimal performance. | Overview Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB is an Enthusiast gaming Graphics Card based on the Fourth (4.0) Revision of the Graphics Core Next (GCN) Architecture. Architecture The Vega 10 XL GPU offers support for HBM-2 Memory, DirectX 12.0 and Open GL 4.5. While the Radeon RX Vega Eclipse uses the same Vega 10 XT GPU as the Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB, it is slightly down. This variant of the Vega 10 XL GPU with 56 Compute Units activated, offering 3584 Shader Processing Units, 224 TMUs and 56 ROPs, making it an estimated 12.5% slower than the Radeon RX Vega 64. This puts its predicted performance roughly in line with the GeForce GTX 1070. GPU The Central Unit is clocked at 1500MHz. Memory: Speed The GPU is equipped with stacked HBM-2 Memory and accesses the Frame Buffer through a 2048-bit memory interface. Memory: Frame Buffer The GPU can fill up a Memory Pool of up to 8GB. Under most circumstances, this only proves useful in certain 3D Games whose Settings Require Large Amounts of Memory. However,the GPU itself is aimed for 4K Gaming, In some limited scenarios, 8GB might be a bottleneck and Performance could be better were the Frame Buffer larger, however this would only be an issue in the most demanding games. Power Consumption With a rated board TDP of 300W, it requires at least a 600W PSU with two available 8-pin connectors. Performance Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB competes with GeForce GTX 1070 8GB, which is available for $399. Specs currently available suggest the Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB performance should be in the same region as the GeForce GTX 1070. However, the ultra-wide HBM2 memory may offer the Radeon RX Vega an advantage at higher resolutions. System Suggestions Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB HBM2 is best suited for resolutions up to and including 3840 x2160 (4K). We recommend a Very Strong Processor and at least 16GB of RAM for Optimal Performance.is | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended CPU | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Possible GPU Upgrades | - | ||||
| GPU Variants | - | - | |||