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

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£360VRAM:6 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):125 W

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super Review: Compare 117 technical specifications, 50 expert and video reviews and 2 best-of lists to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super
7.1/10

Overall score

Score
7.1/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 62% of models
Score components

40%

5.2

Technical score

25%

8.6

Reviews score

25%

8.1

List score

10%

8.7

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 62% of graphics cards
7.6

Value for money

Value for money
7.6/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 62% of models
Score components

70%

7.1

Overall score

30%

8.6

Price

▲Better than 62%
5.2

Technical score

Technical score
5.2/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components

44%

3.3

Performance

24%

4.1

Memory

12%

9.1

Power

11%

7.7

Features

5%

9.9

Design

4%

7.4

Connectivity

▼Worse than 81%
8.6

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.6/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 96% of models

80%

8.3

Average grade

20%

9.6

Popularity

Grades by review (50)
24 reviews: 12 with a printed score, 12 estimated from the review. 26 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.
★Better than 96%
8.1

List score

List score
8.1/ 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 (2)
List score: in 2 of 94 lists (2%)
★Better than 97%
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-super
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 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super

Based on 24 · 26

Reviewers agree it runs cool and overclocks well, but are split on performance and value, and dislike its limited ports.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super

Based on 227 owners sharing their experience in online comments

77%positive9%mixed14%negative

Owners praise smooth, affordable gaming and cooler tuning, while limited memory, newer games, and weak ray tracing frustrate them.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say it struggles with newer demanding games at high settings, often dropping to around 40 fps or lower, and needs lower settings or upscaling.18
  • Owners say undervolting or overclocking settings from the guide caused crashes, black screens or driver errors in some games, and reverting fixed it.7
  • Owners say ray tracing performance is weak, with frame rates falling sharply when it is turned on, so it is hard to use in most games.6
  • Owners report stuttering and uneven frame rates in some games, which can drop from around 80 to 35 fps and sometimes stays after tuning.5
  • Owners say temperatures stayed high or rose again after tuning, reaching 80 to 87 degrees, especially on single-fan cards or with poor airflow.5
  • Owners say the 6 GB of video memory is too little for some newer games, and they expect to need an upgrade for future titles.3
  • Owners say voltage or clock settings did not behave as the guide showed, such as voltage rising instead of falling or clocks stuck at a lower value.3
  • Owners report blue screens, lost display or a grey screen after tuning, and in one case the screen went grey after raising the voltage too far.3

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super

Technical score
Technical score
5.2/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components:

44%

3.3

Performance

24%

4.1

Memory

12%

9.1

Power

11%

7.7

Features

5%

9.9

Design

4%

7.4

Connectivity

5.2
Reviews score
8.6
List score
8.1
Value for money
Value for money
7.6/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 62% of models
Score components:

70%

7.1

Overall score

30%

8.6

Price

7.6
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
6,000 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 6,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 83% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% 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
12,691 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 12,691 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 79.4% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
5,062 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 5,062 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 83% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
5 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 5 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 87.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
6 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 6 GB of VRAM, which is less than 82.5% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% 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
336 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 336 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 63.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
14,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 14,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 69.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 11.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
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
12.1
This graphics card supports DirectX 12.1, which is older than on 77.2% of graphics cards and equal to 4.5% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% 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
What reviewers say
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
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% 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
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
32.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 32.4 Gbps, which is faster than on 56.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
125 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 125 W, which is lower than that of 82.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
125 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 125 W under peak load, which is lower than 84.7% 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
125 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 125 W, which is lower than that of 85.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
125 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
229x 111x 35 mm
Length
229 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 229 mm long, which is shorter than 81.1% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.9% of graphics cards.
Height
111 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111 mm tall, which is shorter than 83.6% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.1% 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
560 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 560 g, which is lighter than 88.6% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 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
  • 41.9% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (125 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    125 W vs 215 W
  • 19.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.6/ 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
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 96% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    9.6

    Popularity

    Grades by review (50)
    24 reviews: 12 with a printed score, 12 estimated from the review. 26 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.
    8.6 vs 7.2
  • 53.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (229 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    229 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 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
  • 43.2% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (125 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    125 W vs 220 W
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 19.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.6/ 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
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 96% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    9.6

    Popularity

    Grades by review (50)
    24 reviews: 12 with a printed score, 12 estimated from the review. 26 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.
    8.6 vs 7.2
  • 6.6% higher list score
    List score
    8.1/ 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 (2)
    List score: in 2 of 94 lists (2%)
    8.1 vs 7.6
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 41.9% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (125 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    125 W vs 215 W
  • 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
  • 43.2% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (125 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    125 W vs 220 W
  • 53.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (229 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    229 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 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
  • 44.8% lighter
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (560 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    560 g vs 1,014 g
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 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
  • 28.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,785 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,785 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 18 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (22 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    22 vs 40
  • 2.4x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    12 nm vs 5 nm
  • 96 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (88 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    88 vs 184
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • 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
  • 28.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,785 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,785 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 18 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (22 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    22 vs 40
  • 96 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (88 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    88 vs 184
  • 58.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (157.1 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    157.1 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 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
  • 46.9% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (85.7 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    85.68 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 77.9% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (5 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    5 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 20.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,530 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,530 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 16 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (48 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    48 vs 64
  • 4 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2019 vs 2023).
    October 2019
    2019 vs 2023
  • 43.9% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (12,691 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    12,691 points vs 22,638 points
  • 59.4% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (6,000 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    6,000 points vs 14,779 points
  • 66.7% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.16 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 58.1% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (5,062 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    5,062 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 65.9% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (10.1 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    10.05 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 2,944 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,408 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,408 vs 4,352
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 26.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 95.8% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (1 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    1 MB vs 24 MB
  • 25% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (336 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    336 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 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
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 2.4x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    12 nm vs 5 nm
  • 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 Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Lower VRS tier
    This graphics card supports a lower VRS tier than the average graphics card (Tier 1 vs Tier 2).
    Tier 1 vs Tier 2
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12.1 vs 12 Ultimate
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 71.2% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (6,600 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    6,600 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
    6.7 vs 6.8
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (3 vs 3.1).
    3 vs 3.1
  • 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.
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1a).
    2.0b vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • 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
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (4 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    4 vs 6
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3

Video reviews

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

8.0
The Tech Quest
≈ estimated
17/05/2026
Hands-on review · 1080p game tests and value verdict
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super is still a solid 1080p budget card, though its 6 GB of VRAM and missing DLSS support are clear limits.
6.0
Cheap Bastard
≈ estimated
12/02/2025
Benchmark review · game tests at 1080p and 1440p
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super is much better than the base GTX 1660, but at current prices the RX 5700 or 5700 XT is the better buy.
9.0
BenchyDoesStuff
≈ estimated
26/06/2024
Hands-on test · four games at 1080p with temperature checks
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super still delivers strong 1080p performance years after launch and is worth buying used.
8.0
zWORMz Gaming
≈ estimated
16/07/2023
Long-term value test · 18 games at 1080p
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super is good value at a used price, but it is limited for the newest demanding games at high settings.
9.0
Linus Tech Tips
≈ estimated
10/11/2019
Full review · benchmarks and memory bandwidth tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super is easy to recommend for 1080p gaming, though its memory upgrade helps some games more than others.
7.0
Digital Foundry
≈ estimated
30/10/2019
Hands-on review · benchmark comparison with GTX 1660 Ti
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super performs almost exactly like the GTX 1660 Ti, so it feels more like a price cut than a new card.
7.0
Gamers Nexus
≈ estimated
29/10/2019
Benchmark review · lineup comparison and performance tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super offers fine performance for its price, but it is a dull refresh that adds little to a crowded NVIDIA lineup.
8.0
eTeknix
≈ estimated
29/10/2019
Benchmark review · three card models at 1080p, 1440p and 4K
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super is a good 1080p value for the price, though it feels like a rehash of the GTX 1660.
9.0
Tech Closet
≈ estimated
09/10/2022
Hands-on review · 1080p gaming and temperature tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super is a good fit for 1080p gaming and should stay relevant for a while.
Not graded
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
techspot.com
✓ explicit
29/10/2019
Benchmark test · Game tests
Verdict
The Nvidia GTX 1660 Super is a 1080p card that lands between the GTX 1660 and GTX 1660 Ti, averaging 88fps across 17 games but drawing more power.
9.0
tomshardware.com
✓ explicit
21/11/2019
Lab test · Quiet factory overclock
Verdict
The EVGA GTX 1660 Super SC Ultra is quiet and factory-overclocked, close to GTX 1660 Ti frame rates at 1080p, though it has only three video outputs.
6.0
rockpapershotgun.com
≈ estimated
05/11/2019
Hands-on test · Game benchmarks
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 1660 Super is a good 1080p card that gets near 60fps on high settings, but in many games it barely beats the standard GTX 1660.
8.0
hothardware.com
✓ explicit
29/10/2019
Hands-on test · Two card comparison
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 1660 Super gains more memory bandwidth than the GTX 1660 Ti, and the two-slot Gigabyte card is the more compact of the two cards tested.
10
techradar.com
✓ explicit
25/03/2021
Expert review · 1080p gaming card
Verdict
The Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super is a strong 1080p card that performs close to the GTX 1660 Ti, but it lacks ray tracing hardware and has few ports.
9.0
pcworld.com
✓ explicit
29/10/2019
Hands-on review · Quiet custom card
Verdict
The Asus Dual GeForce GTX 1660 Super EVO OC is a cool, quiet 1080p card with a metal backplate, but its display outputs are limited.
8.0
best.kevin.games
✓ explicit
24/10/2026
Review · 1080p gaming card
Verdict
The Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super nearly matches the GTX 1660 Ti in speed with GDDR6 memory, but it lacks RT cores and has few ports.
8.0
au.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
29/10/2019
Lab test · Short 1080p card
Verdict
The Zotac GeForce GTX 1660 Super Twin Fan is a short, strong 1080p card with good overclocking room, though some games gain little over the GTX 1660.
8.7
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
29/10/2019
Hands-on test · Memory upgrade
Verdict
The EVGA GTX 1660 Super SC Ultra is a GTX 1660 with GDDR6 memory, and Nvidia claims up to 20 percent more performance at similar clocks.
9.0
pcmasters.de
≈ estimated
15/12/2019
Hands-on test · Overclock and ray tracing
Verdict
The KFA2 GeForce GTX 1660 Super 1-Click OC is a solid 1080p card with fast memory, but ray tracing halves its frame rate in Battlefield V.
8.0
heise.de
✓ explicit
22/12/2019
Benchmark review · Full HD focus
Verdict
The KFA2 GTX 1660 Super is a solid Full HD card for gamers who don't need ray tracing; buyers who want it should look at an RTX card.
9.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
29/10/2019
Lab test · Asus and Gigabyte models
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 1660 Super is a GTX 1660 with 75 percent more memory bandwidth, reaching GTX 1660 Ti speed for Full HD gaming.
8.0
pcwelt.de
≈ estimated
29/10/2019
Lab test · Compact custom card
Verdict
The Gainward GeForce GTX 1660 Super Pegasus OC is a quiet, cool 1080p card short enough for mini PCs, but its 6GB of video memory limits it.
9.0
xataka.com.mx
≈ estimated
12/08/2020
Hands-on test · 1080p and 1440p
Verdict
The EVGA GTX 1660 Super SC Ultra is a solid 1080p card that hits 60fps in most games at max settings, but 1440p needs some settings lowered.
9.5
elchapuzasinformatico.com
≈ estimated
29/10/2019
Lab test · Full HD gaming
Verdict
The Asus GeForce GTX 1660 Super Dual OC is a near-silent, cool card that handles Full HD at Ultra settings well, but it isn't built for 2K.
7.0
notebookcheck.org
≈ estimated
12/02/2019
Benchmark results · Desktop card
Verdict
The KFA2 GeForce GTX 1660 Super beats the standard GTX 1660 in 3DMark tests and lands just below the GTX 1660 Ti, making it a solid middle-tier card.
9.5
profesionalreview.com
≈ estimated
29/10/2019
Lab test · Overclocking test
Verdict
The Asus GTX 1660 Super OC is a quiet, cool card that overclocks well and runs Full HD games at high frame rates, but it's bulky and short on ports.
8.0
rpp.pe
≈ estimated
30/07/2020
Hands-on test · Compact dual-fan card
Verdict
The ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce GTX 1660 Super OC is a compact two-fan card that runs AAA games smoothly and streams well with NVENC, but lacks RT cores.
9.5
as.com
✓ explicit
11/11/2019
Analysis · Gigabyte Windforce OC
Verdict
The Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1660 Super OC looks understated but performs strongly, running most games well at 1080p while staying cool, though it lacks ray tracing.
9.0
tomshw.it
≈ estimated
29/10/2019
Lab test · Gigabyte custom card
Verdict
The Gigabyte GTX 1660 Super Gaming OC performs close to the GTX 1660 Ti, stays cool and quiet, and suits Full HD gamers who want top settings.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super

  • Excellent value for 1080p gaming, often referred to as a 'budget beast' for its price-to-performance ratio
  • Smooth performance in popular esports titles like Fortnite, CS2, and Valorant, often exceeding 100 FPS
  • Power efficient with a low 125W draw, making it compatible with smaller 450W-500W power supplies
  • Runs relatively cool and quiet under load, typically staying around 68-72°C
  • Significant upgrade over older mid-range cards like the GTX 1050 Ti or original GTX 1060
  • Compact form factor fits easily into most PC cases, including smaller builds

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super

  • Lacks hardware support for Ray Tracing and DLSS, which limits performance in modern titles that rely on these features
  • The 6GB VRAM is increasingly insufficient for modern AAA games at high settings, leading to potential stuttering or crashes
  • Struggles with demanding 1440p gaming, often dropping below 60 FPS in unoptimized or modern titles
  • Limited port selection on many models, often featuring only one HDMI and one DisplayPort
  • Performance 'bottlenecks' can occur in newer titles like Stalker 2 or Alan Wake 2, requiring low graphical settings

Verdict

The Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super is a mainstream graphics card based on the 12nm Turing architecture, featuring the TU116 GPU with 1,408 CUDA cores, a 1530 MHz base clock, and an 1785 MHz boost clock. A key defining characteristic is its 6 GB of GDDR6 VRAM with a 14 Gbps memory speed on a 192-bit bus, providing a substantial 336 GB/s memory bandwidth. Its main pros include excellent 1080p gaming performance that rivals the GTX 1660 Ti, high power efficiency with a 125W TDP that works well with 450W power supplies, and strong value for budget builds. However, its notable cons include a lack of dedicated RT and Tensor cores for hardware-accelerated ray tracing and DLSS, performance struggles at 1440p resolution in demanding titles, and the 6 GB of VRAM becoming a potential bottleneck for modern AAA games with high-resolution textures.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super 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 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found