Contents:HighlightsSummaryGaming PerformanceBenchmark PerformanceTechnical SpecsRelated ComparisonsRelated GPUs
Performance
Radeon RX Vega 5667% better
29,08628% of 104,737
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
17,43917% of 104,737
The Radeon RX Vega 56 has 67% better performance than the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Performance per dollar
Radeon RX Vega 56
72.945% of 161.45
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
No data available
The Radeon RX Vega 56 has 45% of the performance per dollar compared to the leader for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark: AMD Radeon RX 7600.
Shop Radeon RX Vega 56
Shop GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Summary
#
About the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 GPU
The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 is a desktop graphics card that launched in Q3 2017 with a MSRP of $399. It is built on the GCN 5.0 GPU microarchitecture (codename Vega 10) and is manufactured on a 14 nm process.
Memory
The RX Vega 56 has 8 GB of HBM2 memory, with a 800 MHz memory clock and a 2,048 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 409.6 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The RX Vega 56 includes 3,584 stream processors (SPs), the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 1,156 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 1,471 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 224 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 64 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The RX Vega 56 occupies 2 PCIe expansion slots. It supports HDMI 2.0b, DisplayPort 1.4a display connections. AMD recommends a power supply of at least 550 W to handle the GPU's thermal design power (TDP) of 210 W.
Benchmark Performance & Value
The RX Vega 56 has the 81st best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 27.77% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. Its 29,086 score and $399 launch price (MSRP) gives it a performance per dollar of 72.9. This is the 42nd best in value for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
About the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GPU
The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is a mobile graphics card that launched in Q2 2019. It is built on the Turing GPU microarchitecture (codename TU116) and is manufactured on a 12 nm process.
Memory
The GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory, with a 1,500 MHz memory clock and a 192 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 288 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q includes 1,536 CUDA cores, the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 1,140 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 1,335 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 96 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 48 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The GPU has a thermal design power (TDP) of 60 W. A power supply not strong enough to handle this might result in system crashes and potentially damage your hardware.
Benchmark Performance
The GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has the 130th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 16.65% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
General Info
General overview of the GPU, including details like its manufacturer, release date, launch price, and current production status.
| Info | Radeon RX Vega 56 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | AMD | NVIDIA |
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Turing |
| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |
| Release Date | Q3 2017 | Q2 2019 |
| Launch Price (MSRP) | $399 | -- |
| Production Status | Active | Active |
| Shop | Check Price | Check Price |
Gaming Performance
#
Select a game to compare FPS metrics
Flight Simulator 2020
Horizon Zero Dawn
Death Stranding
F1 2020
Gears Tactics
Doom Eternal
Borderlands 3
FPS Benchmarks
This table showcases the average frame rate (FPS) achieved both GPUs in at various resolutions. Frame rate is a crucial indicator of how smoothly the GPU can run the game. A higher FPS generally translates to a smoother gameplay experience.
- Frames Per Second
Flight Simulator 2020 | Radeon RX Vega 56 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Low - 720p | -- | 55 FPS |
| Medium - 1080p | -- | 49 FPS |
| High - 1080p | -- | 37 FPS |
| Ultra - 1080p | -- | 25 FPS |
| QHD - 1440p | -- | -- |
| 4K UHD - 2160p | -- | -- |
FPS Source: Notebookcheck
Compare Frames Per Second (FPS)
The average frame rate (FPS) in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, higher FPS results in a smoother gameplay experience.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon RX Vega 56 orGeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
| GPU | Frames Per Second | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile | 31 | +23% |
| GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q | 30.9 | +22% |
| GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile | 28 | +11% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile | 28 | +11% |
| GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile | 26.4 | +4% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q | 25.3 | |
| GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile | 24.7 | -2% |
| GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile | 23 | -9% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile | 21.8 | -14% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile | 18 | -29% |
Compare Cost Per Frame
The average cost per frame in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. Generally, a lower cost per frame implies better value for your money.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon RX Vega 56 orGeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
| GPU | Cost Per Frame | |
|---|---|---|
| Our database does not have enough data to compare the FPS per dollar with other GPUs. | ||
Benchmark Performance
#
Performance
Radeon RX Vega 5667% better
29,08628% of 104,737
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
17,43917% of 104,737
The Radeon RX Vega 56 has 67% better performance than the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
The Radeon RX Vega 56 is ranked 81st with a score of 29,086, and the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is ranked 130th with a score of 17,439.
Performance per dollar
Radeon RX Vega 56
72.945% of 161.45
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
No data available
The Radeon RX Vega 56 has 111% of the performance per dollar compared to the leader for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
Radeon RX Vega 56's 72.9 performance per dollar ranks it 42nd among the other benchmarked GPUs in our database.
Relative Performance
The average score in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon RX Vega 56 or
| GPU | Benchmark Performance | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER | 29,668 | +2% |
| GeForce GTX 1080 | 29,263 | +1% |
| Radeon RX Vega 56 | 29,086 | |
| GeForce RTX 3060 | 28,375 | -2% |
| GeForce GTX 1070 Ti | 27,503 | -5% |
| Radeon RX 6500M | 17,889 | -38% |
| Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q | 17,523 | -40% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q | 17,439 | -40% |
| GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile (6 GB) | 17,421 | -40% |
| GeForce GTX 980 Mobile | 17,200.5 | -41% |
Relative Value For Money
The average performance per dollar in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. A higher score implies a better value for your money.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon RX Vega 56 orGeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
| GPU | Performance Per Dollar | |
|---|---|---|
| Radeon RX 590 | 83.74 | +15% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 Ti | 82.05 | +13% |
| Radeon RX 480 | 78.25 | +7% |
| GeForce RTX 2060 | 77.83 | +7% |
| GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER | 74.36 | +2% |
| Radeon RX Vega 56 | 72.9 | |
| GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER | 70.07 | -4% |
| GeForce GTX 1070 Ti | 68.93 | -5% |
| GeForce GTX 1070 | 65.04 | -11% |
| GeForce RTX 2070 | 62.65 | -14% |
Benchmark Scores
This table showcases the average performance scores achieved by both GPUs across industry-standard benchmark tests. These scores provide a valuable insight into overall performance. Powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
- Popular
| Benchmark | Radeon RX Vega 56 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| 3DMark Time Spy Graphics | 6,482 (+27.49%) | 5,084.5 |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 6,746 (+33%) | 5,072 |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics | 125,359 (+98.71%) | 63,086 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics | 20,759 (+55.44%) | 13,355 |
| 3DMark 11 Performance Score | 22,937 (+44.14%) | 15,913 |
| Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit | -- | 96.9 |
| PassMark G3D Mark | 13,234 (+53.87%) | 8,601 |
| PassMark G2D Mark | 760 (+109.37%) | 363 |
Benchmarks Source: Notebookcheck
Technical Specs
#
Graphics Processor
General information about the graphics processing unit like their architecture, manufacturing process size, and transistor count. Newer GPU architectures generally bring efficiency improvements and may introduce technologies that enhance graphical capabilities.
| Spec | Radeon RX Vega 56 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Codename | Vega 10 | TU116 |
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Turing |
| Process Size | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Transistors | 12,500 million | 6,600 million |
Memory Details
Memory specifications like their capacity, bandwidth, and clock speeds. GPU memory stores graphics data like frames, textures, and shadows which helps display rendered images. These specs are crucial for graphics-intense applications like gaming and 3D modeling.
| Spec | Radeon RX Vega 56 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Memory Size | 8 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 409.6 Gb/s | 288 Gb/s |
| Memory Clock | 800 MHz | 1,500 MHz |
| Memory Interface | 2,048 bit | 192 bit |
| L1 Cache | 16 KB | 64 KB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 1,536 KB |
Board Compatibility
Compatibility information like their slot size, bus interface, power consumption, and display support. These specs are useful for verifying compatibility with your motherboard, power supply, and monitor.
| Spec | Radeon RX Vega 56 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Slots | 2 slots | -- |
| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 210 W | 60 W |
| Suggested PSU | 550 W | -- |
| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | -- |
| Outputs | HDMI 2.0b, DisplayPort 1.4a | Device Dependent |
Cores & Clock Speeds
Processing power information like its cores and clock speed. These specs impact how fast they can process graphics. Each type of core or component serves a specific computational purpose.
| Spec | Radeon RX Vega 56 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Stream Processors (SP) | 3,584 | -- |
| CUDA Cores | -- | 1,536 |
| Compute Units (CU) | 56 | -- |
| Stream Multiprocessors (SM) | -- | 24 |
| Texture Mapping Units (TMU) | 224 | 96 |
| Render Output Units (ROP) | 64 | 48 |
| Core Clock Speed | 1,156 MHz | 1,140 MHz |
| Core Clock Speed (Boost) | 1,471 MHz | 1,335 MHz |
Theoretical Performance
Theoretical performance numbers derived from the raw specifications of the different components like core count and clock speeds. While these provide a glimpse into peak processing power, they do not represent real-world performance.
| Spec | Radeon RX Vega 56 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Pixel Fill Rate | 94.14 GPixel/s | 64.08 GPixel/s |
| Texture Fill Rate | 329.5 GTexel/s | 128.2 GTexel/s |
| FP32 Performance | 10.54 TFLOPS | 4.1 TFLOPS |
| FP64 Performance | 659 GFLOPS | 128.2 GFLOPS |
API Support
Graphics API versions supported by these graphics cards. APIs evolve over time, introducing new features and functionalities. Older GPUs may not support recent versions.
| Spec | Radeon RX Vega 56 | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.8 |
Check out these comparisons for similar GPUs:
Looking for alternatives? Check out these similar GPUs:
* Performance rating, performance per dollar, and rankings are based on the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark and MSRP.