OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

EVGA GeForce GTX 660 review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£200VRAM:2 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):140 W

EVGA GeForce GTX 660 Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 13 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

EVGA GeForce GTX 660
5.8/10

Overall score

Score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

40%

3.7

Technical score

25%

8.4

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

3.7

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 91% of graphics cards
6.9

Value for money

Value for money
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
Score components

70%

5.8

Overall score

30%

9.5

Price

â–¼Worse than 79%
3.7

Technical score

Technical score
3.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

44%

1.7

Performance

24%

2.9

Memory

12%

7.6

Power

11%

6.3

Features

5%

8.6

Design

4%

6.6

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 96%
8.4

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 85% of models

80%

8.3

Average grade

20%

8.7

Popularity

Grades by review (13)
9 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 6 estimated from the review. 4 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 85%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • evga-geforce-gtx-660
  • evga-geforce-gtx-660
  • evga-geforce-gtx-660
  • evga-geforce-gtx-660
  • evga-geforce-gtx-660
  • evga-geforce-gtx-660
  • evga-geforce-gtx-660
  • evga-geforce-gtx-660
evga-geforce-gtx-660
evga-geforce-gtx-660
evga-geforce-gtx-660
evga-geforce-gtx-660
evga-geforce-gtx-660
evga-geforce-gtx-660
evga-geforce-gtx-660
evga-geforce-gtx-660
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the EVGA GeForce GTX 660

Based on 9 · 4

Reviewers praise its quiet cooling and solid game performance, but are split on how it compares with rivals and whether upgrading pays off.
Praised
Mixed views
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the EVGA GeForce GTX 660

Based on 205 owners sharing their experience in online comments

65%positive15%mixed20%negative

Owners praise its strong gaming performance, while demanding newer games expose its age and limited headroom.

What owners dislike

  • Newer demanding games like Assassin's Creed Unity were unplayable, and others such as Red Dead Redemption 2 need 720p.40
  • Some owners see games freeze or crash, such as Metro Exodus, Assassin's Creed Valhalla and Dead by Daylight.6
  • Some cards start showing artifacts or die after a few years, and one owner got a warranty replacement.6
  • Gaming temperatures reach about 70 to 80°C, and owners fit larger fans or new thermal pads, especially for video memory.5
  • Newer drivers can fail to install or crash in some games, and owners say the older 378 version runs most stably.3
  • Heavy games can run short of video memory, and one owner saw lag start after about 10 minutes of play.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card EVGA GeForce GTX 660

Technical score
Technical score
3.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components:

44%

1.7

Performance

24%

2.9

Memory

12%

7.6

Power

11%

6.3

Features

5%

8.6

Design

4%

6.6

Connectivity

3.7
Reviews score
8.4
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
Score components:

70%

5.8

Overall score

30%

9.5

Price

6.9
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
1,269 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 1,269 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 97.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
4,104 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 4,104 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 94.7% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
1,817 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 1,817 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 95.2% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
1.98 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 1.98 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 94.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
2 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 2 GB of VRAM, which is less than 94.3% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
192 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 192 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 31.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 18.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
144.2 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 144.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 91.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
6,008 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 6,008 MHz, which is slower than that of 93.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.2
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.2, which is older than on 94.9% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
2560x1600
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 2560x1600, which is lower than that of 97.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
1
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 1 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 88.1% of graphics cards and equal to 8.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
8.64 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.64 Gbps, which is slower than on 65.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
140 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 140 W, which is lower than that of 78.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
140 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 140 W under peak load, which is lower than 79.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
450 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 450 W PSU, which is lower than that of 84% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.1% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
139 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 139 W, which is lower than that of 81% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
140 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
241x 111x 40 mm
Length
241 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 241 mm long, which is shorter than 74.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 1.7% of graphics cards.
Height
111.15 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111.15 mm tall, which is shorter than 81.1% of graphics cards and equal in height to 2.4% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
458 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 458 g, which is lighter than 92.7% of Graphics cards.
Show more

EVGA GeForce GTX 660 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 3.43x faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (6,008 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    6,008 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 16x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (384 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    384 MB vs 24 MB
  • 30.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (450 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    450 W vs 650 W
  • 34.9% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (140 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    140 W vs 215 W
  • 16.7% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 85% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    8.7

    Popularity

    Grades by review (13)
    9 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 6 estimated from the review. 4 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.4 vs 7.2
  • 13.85 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.15 mm vs 125 mm
  • 41.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (241 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    241 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 16.7% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 85% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    8.7

    Popularity

    Grades by review (13)
    9 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 6 estimated from the review. 4 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.4 vs 7.2
  • 2.6x cheaper
    EVGA GeForce GTX 660 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£200 vs £520).
    £200 vs £520
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:24 vs 1:64).
    1:24 vs 1:64
  • 3.43x faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (6,008 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    6,008 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 16x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (384 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    384 MB vs 24 MB
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • 30.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (450 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    450 W vs 650 W
  • 34.9% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (140 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    140 W vs 215 W
  • 36.8% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (139 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    139 W vs 220 W
  • 13.85 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.15 mm vs 125 mm
  • 41.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (241 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    241 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 54.8% lighter
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (458 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    458 g vs 1,014 g
  • 55.6% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,111 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,111 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 33 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (7 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    7 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 48.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (993 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    993 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 52.6% lower sentiment score
    3.7 vs 7.8
  • 7% worse value for money
    EVGA GeForce GTX 660 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.93 vs 7.4).
    6.93 vs 7.41
  • 55.6% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,111 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,111 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 33 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (7 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    7 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 48.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (993 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    993 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 104 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (80 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    80 vs 184
  • 79.3% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (78.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    78.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 87.2% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (20.6 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    20.64 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 40 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (24 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    24 vs 64
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 91.2% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (2 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    1.98 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 11 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2012 vs 2023).
    September 2012
    2012 vs 2023
  • 81.9% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (4,104 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    4,104 points vs 22,638 points
  • 91.4% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (1,269 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    1,269 points vs 14,779 points
  • 84.9% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (1,817 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    1,817 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 83.3% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.08 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 3,392 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (960 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    960 vs 4,352
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 67.8% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (144.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    144.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 68.4% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (6,008 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    6,008 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 50% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (64 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    64 KB vs 128 KB
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4).
    1.2 vs 1.4
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 3).
    1.2 vs 3
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.5 vs 6.8).
    6.5 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 88.9% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (2,540 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    2,540 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1a).
    1.4a vs 2.1a
  • 2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    1 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.3).
    1.4 vs 2.3
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (2560x1600 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    2560x1600 vs 7680x4320
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    1 vs 6
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 9 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (76 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    76 °C vs 67 °C
  • 3.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (39 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    39 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
GP
≈ estimated
24/05/2013
Short performance review · Planetside 2, Far Cry 3, Battlefield 3
Verdict
EVGA GeForce GTX 660 is a very good card and a strong pick for new builds and budget gaming.
8.0
PowerMES
≈ estimated
09/03/2013
Unboxing and review · benchmarks and gameplay
Verdict
EVGA GeForce GTX 660 is a solid card that meets the creator's needs, though it is not a top performer.
9.0
HiTechLegion
≈ estimated
13/09/2012
First look · overview of features, build and accessories
Verdict
The EVGA GeForce GTX 660 is nearly ideal for 1080p gamers, with efficient power draw and a sturdy build.
Overview video
Brand video
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
overclockers.com
≈ estimated
14/09/2012
Review · Overclocked Kepler card
Verdict
EVGA GTX 660 SC has plenty of memory headroom and runs cooler than the GTX 660 Ti SC, but its single 6-pin plug limits core overclocking.
9.0
legitreviews.com
≈ estimated
13/09/2012
Benchmark review · 1080p gaming card
Verdict
EVGA GeForce GTX 660 is a solid 1080p gaming card for anyone upgrading from an old GeForce 8000 or 9000 series card.
9.0
futurelooks.com
✓ explicit
13/09/2012
Launch review · Mid-range 1080p card
Verdict
EVGA GTX 660 Superclocked is a quiet 1080p card that stays close to the GTX 660 Ti and suits players of the newest games.
8.0
futurelooks.com
≈ estimated
13/09/2012
Feature overview · 2GB and 3GB models
Verdict
EVGA GTX 660 Superclocked is a factory-overclocked card that runs from one 6-pin plug, which suits upgraders with older power supplies.
8.0
gamerfront.net
≈ estimated
13/09/2012
Real-world benchmarks · 1080p gaming card
Verdict
EVGA GTX 660 SuperClocked handles 1080p well and clearly beats its predecessor, but trails the Radeon HD 7870 at higher resolutions.
8.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
13/09/2012
Lab benchmarks · Mid-range gaming card
Verdict
EVGA GeForce GTX 660 is a solid 1080p card for the latest PC games, though the GTX 660 Ti suits very large monitors better.
7.8
pcwelt.de
✓ explicit
13/12/2012
Review · Factory overclocked card
Verdict
EVGA GTX 660 Superclocked keeps every tested game above 40 fps at maximum detail in Full HD, but it runs hot and draws a lot of power.
8.0
pcgameshardware.de
≈ estimated
13/09/2012
Test conclusion · Kepler mid-range card
Verdict
GeForce GTX 660 is a solid Kepler card that matches the older GTX 570, but the Radeon HD 7870 is faster in almost every case.
9.0
madboxpc.com
≈ estimated
29/09/2012
Hands-on review · Kepler card
Verdict
EVGA GTX 660 SC is a solid, cool and quiet card, but its frame-rate gain over the GTX 570 is small and it trails the GTX 660 Ti.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about EVGA GeForce GTX 660

  • Excellent value for the price in the mid-range market
  • Strong performance for 1080p gaming on older and esports titles
  • EVGA's custom coolers (like Signature 2) offer near-silent operation
  • Power efficient, suitable for systems with entry-level 400W-500W power supplies
  • Includes a transferrable 3-year warranty that can be upgraded upon registration
  • Supports modern features for its era like PhysX, 3D Vision, and SLI

What customers don't like about EVGA GeForce GTX 660

  • Limited 2GB VRAM causes performance issues or crashes in modern AAA games
  • Not suitable for high-resolution gaming above 1080p (e.g., 2560x1600)
  • Reference 'squirrel cage' fan designs can be noisier than third-party dual-fan versions
  • Lacks support for modern NVIDIA technologies like DLSS, Ray Tracing, and ShadowPlay
  • The 192-bit memory interface can bottleneck performance compared to cards with wider buses

Verdict

The EVGA GeForce GTX 660 is a performance-tier graphics card built on the 28nm Kepler architecture (GK106 GPU), featuring 960 CUDA cores and 2GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit interface with a 144.2 GB/s bandwidth. It operates at a base clock of 980 MHz (boostable to 1033 MHz), though factory-overclocked EVGA 'Superclocked' variants reach up to 1046 MHz base and 1111 MHz boost clocks. Main characteristics include support for DirectX 12 (feature level 11_0), NVIDIA PhysX, and 2-way SLI, drawing a maximum of 140W through a single 6-pin power connector. Pros include its high power efficiency for the era, solid 1080p performance in classic DirectX 11 titles, and the compact dual-slot design that fits most mid-range builds. Cons include its limited 2GB VRAM for modern AAA titles, lack of support for newer feature levels like ray tracing, and a restricted 10% power target that limits manual overclocking headroom.

Compare EVGA GeForce GTX 660 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of EVGA GeForce GTX 660 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found