GTX 1650 vs GTX 1660 – 18 Games Tested

July 31, 2019 posted by

Nvidia just launched their new GTX 1650 graphics
card, but how does it compare with the next option up, the 1660? In this video we’ll
test out and compare 18 different games at 1080p and 1440p resolutions to help you see
the performance difference between them, followed by a discussion on value for money. Let’s quickly take a look at how the GTX
1650 and 1660 actually differ in terms of specs, note that things like clock speed and
power will vary between specific cards, these are just the reference specs for each model.
The 1660 is better in basically every way, it’s got 57% more CUDA cores, higher base
and boost clock speeds, as well as more memory. For the testing I’m using the Gigabyte GTX
1650 OC and the MSI GTX 1660 Gaming X, expect slightly different results with different
models. The system that I’m testing with has an
Intel i7-8700K CPU overclocked to 5.0GHz in an MSI Z390 ACE motherboard, along with 16GB
of T-Force Night Hawk CL16 memory from Team Group running at DDR4-3200 in dual channel.
Check the links in the description for details on all of the components as well as for up
to date pricing. The same Windows updates and game updates were used for testing, and
for drivers I’m using the newest available at the time of testing, Nvidia 430.39, so
let’s get into the results. Let’s start out Apex Legends, which was
tested with all settings maxed out. In all upcoming graphs I’ve got the GTX 1650 shown
by the top bar in red, while the GTX 1660 is underneath in purple. In terms of average
FPS the 1660 is getting 38% higher at 1080p, and 33% higher at 1440p. Assassin’s Creed Odyssey was tested with
the built in benchmark using high settings. Despite the 1660 looking to be a nice bit
ahead here, this is actually one of the smallest differences out of all 18 games tested, which
tells you where this is going. At 1080p the 1660 was 29% ahead of the 1650, rising up
to a 38% lead at 1440p. Battlefield 5 was tested in campaign mode
rather than multiplayer, as it’s easier to consistently reproduce the test run. The
1660 was again getting a much better result, with even the 1% lows significantly higher
than the average FPS from the 1650. At 1080p the 1660 was 47% ahead of the 1650, and 55%
ahead at 1440p. Far Cry New Dawn was tested using the built
in benchmark with high settings, and we’re seeing a 45% performance boost with the 1660
at 1080p, rising up to 49% higher FPS at 1440p. Far Cry 5 was also tested using the built
in benchmark with high settings, and while we’re seeing higher average FPS over the
newer Far Cry New Dawn just shown, the results between the two cards are closer together.
At 1080p the 1660 was 42% ahead of the 1650, rising to 49% at 1440p. Fortnite was tested using the replay feature
with the exact same replay on both graphics cards, so as apples to apples as you can get
in this game. At 1080p the 1660 was 52% ahead of the average FPS from the 1650, rising up
to a massive 63% boost at 1440p and achieving the best result at that resolution out of
all 18 games tested. Again even the 1% lows from the 1660 were significantly ahead of
the averages from the 1650. Metro Exodus was tested with the built in
benchmark at high settings. Most parts of the game perform a fair bit better than this,
so don’t take these results as a good indication of what to expect throughout the entire game,
it’s more of a worst case, it does however allow me to perform an accurate comparison.
At 1080p there was a large 54% improvement to average frame rate with the 1660, rising
up to a 57% increase at 1440p, one of the biggest differences out of the games tested. Shadow of the Tomb Raider was also tested
using the built in benchmark with high settings, and with a 1080p resolution the 1660 was coming
out 53% ahead of the 1650, and then once stepping up to 1440p there was a slightly larger 56%
improvement with the 1660. Rainbow Six Siege was tested using the built
in benchmark at high settings, and was another title where the 1% low from the 1660 was ahead
of the averages from the 1650. At 1080p we’re looking at a 49% improvement to average FPS
with the 1660 over the 1650, which rises a little to a 52% boost at 1440p. CS:GO was tested with the Ulletical FPS benchmark,
and the differences here were on the lower side compared to most of the other games covered.
At 1080p there was a relatively low 19% increase to average FPS with the 1660, while 1440p
saw a much larger 43% improvement. Overwatch was tested in the practice range
as I can easily perform the same test run compared to playing with bots or other players
which will vary every time. At 1080p this game saw the biggest difference out of all
18 tested, the 1660 was reaching average frame rates 57% higher than the 1650, then at 1440p
it was second place with a massive 61% improvement. PUBG was tested using the replay feature with
the exact same replay at high settings, and I don’t think either are really great for
1440p here, though with lower settings the 1660 should go alright. Anyway in terms of
differences at 1080p the 1660 was 39% ahead of the 1650 and 35% ahead at 1440p. Watch Dogs 2 is a resource intensive game
and was tested with very high settings. In my opinion this one doesn’t need a high
frame rate to play, I can get by with a solid 30 FPS, so the 1650 was a little behind here
while the 1660 played fine. In terms of differences at 1080p the 1660 was 42% ahead of the 1650
in average FPS, and 49% ahead at 1440p. Ghost Recon was tested with the built in benchmark
and high settings in use, and is another resource heavy game. The 1660 was 41% ahead of the
1650 at 1080p, and 49% ahead at 1440p. The Witcher 3 was tested with Hairworks disabled.
At 1080p the 1660 was achieving 53% higher average frame rates, with a slightly larger
56% increase at 1440p, and like most others that I didn’t bother mentioning, the 1%
low from the 1660 was even ahead of the average frame rate of the 1650. Strange Brigade was tested with the built
in benchmark using Vulkan and was maxed out at ultra settings. At 1080p we’ve got one
of the largest differences out of all games tested, with the 1660 54% ahead of the 1650
in average FPS, and also 54% ahead at 1440p too. DOOM was also tested using Vulkan, and it
was still quite playable even at 1440p on the 1650 with above 60 FPS averages, however
the 1660 is a fair bit ahead here, with 53% higher average FPS at 1440p and 51% at 1080p. Shadow of War was tested with the built in
benchmark, and saw the smallest difference between the two out of all 18 games tested,
with just a comparatively small 17% bump with the 1660 at 1080p and 23% higher FPS at 1440p. In terms of overall improvement, over all
18 games tested with a 1080p resolution on average the GTX 1660 was performing 43.6%
better when compared against the GTX 1650 in terms of average FPS. It really does depend
on the game, however there are clearly some big gains to be had from the 1660 in most
games. At 1440p on average over the same 18 games
the GTX 1660 was now scoring a little higher compared to the 1080p results just shown,
now with 48.8% higher average FPS in these titles. In general we’re seeing a larger
difference between the two, as 1440p should be more GPU intensive when compared with 1080p.
I definitely don’t consider the 1650 to be a 1440p capable card though, however as
we’ve seen the 1660 handles it fairly well even with higher settings. Given that there is quite a fair bit of performance
difference between these two graphics cards I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Nvidia
release something like a 1650 Ti at some point in the future to fill in the gap like they’ve
done in the past. Here’s what we’re looking at in terms
of synthetic benchmarks, I’ve just tested 3DMark’s Firestrike, Timespy and VRMark
here. I’ll note that in Timespy with the 1650 I did have some black screen flickering
which some others have reported, so I’m not 100% certain whether that affected results. As for the differences in total system power
draw the system with the 1660 was drawing 33% more power for an average 43% performance
boost at 1080p and 48% increase at 1440p, which to me sounds pretty fair. Now for the final difference, the price. I
suggest checking updated prices using the links in the description, as prices will change
over time. The 1650 just launched at $149 USD and can currently be bought for that price
on the low end. As we’ve seen in my recent video where I compared the 1650 against AMD’s
RX 570, the 1650 is pretty bad value comparatively, as the 570 is both cheaper and performs better.
At the moment though the 1660 is the next step up in Nvidia’s line up, and launched
recently at $219 USD, so $70 more than the 1650. This means that you have to spend about
47% more money in order to get that 43% average performance improvement at 1080p, or 48% better
at 1440p, granted exact results may differ a little, as again I’m using a higher end
1660 and not one of the low end options. In the context of an entire system though the
percentage difference will of course lower. Out of these two I think it’s worth paying
more for the 1660 if you can afford it, and if you can’t then you should just forget
the 1650 entirely and go for the RX 570, again it’s both cheaper and performs better, you
can find my comparison linked in the description. I’m actually working on a comparison between
the 1660 and RX 580 at the moment too, so make sure you’re subscribed so you don’t
miss that one. At the moment you’re probably not going
to find either of these cards much cheaper on the second hand market as they’re both
still quite new, however as they age that will of course lower the price further. If you were buying today let me know which
card you’d pick down in the comments and why, the GTX 1650 or GTX 1660, and if you’re
new to the channel get subscribed for future comparisons and tech videos like this one.


38 Replies to “GTX 1650 vs GTX 1660 – 18 Games Tested”

  1. Tech Help says:


  2. Achref Legend says:

    THANK YOU!! <3

  3. xXW1NNERXx says:

    Thanks mate, could you compare the 1660 with the rx580 next time? That's what I'm tossing up

  4. wingofwar qp says:


  5. kedar Joshi says:

    Nice man now compare 1660 ti along with 1650 and 1660

  6. Stefan Ramadan says:

    Well I wanted to get the xps 15 of this year with the 1650 but just seeing this massive difference I'll just get something better

  7. Aadarsh Bisht says:

    69th here

  8. Matt Christie says:

    Pretty sad when the 1650 makes the Intel IGPU look like a better choice! I mean, when the 1660's 1% lows are above the 1650's averages, makes it not worth the purchase at the price. And realistically, neither are really worth it. Better off buying an older generation mid/high end card from the used market. A GTX 1070/1080, or an RX580 (8GB), or even a Vega 56/64 can be had for a descent price, if you're patient.

    I just see the whole Turing line-up as overpriced for the performance gains, along with a bad naming scheme designed to trick the consumer.

    Great work as always Jarrod. o7

  9. kedar Joshi says:

    Btw i was 69 th

  10. Saxon Myx says:

    Please save us AMD!

  11. Igor Radoš says:

    These graphics cards are only interesting as a more efficient improvement in laptops.

  12. The Master says:

    It's hilarious to see the pathetic fanboys claim that not requiring a power connector is a great feature…

  13. Bikesh Shrestha says:

    Really jarrod? Where is dota 2😑😑

  14. Talone1 says:

    I'm mostly excited for Asus's upcoming Rog strix scar 3 with 1660ti inside since i'm not interested in RTX. Will you be reviewing that when you get your hands on it? Apparently, they also released a new budget rog line called strix g531, with 1660ti and other gpus inside. They're basically like rog scar 3 but lower in price and with slightly less features.

    I think there will be a $200-300 different between rog scar 3 1660ti and strix g531 1660ti. I'll get either depending on price. 1660ti in laptop seems to be performance comparable to laptop rtx 2060/gtx 1070. So not bad at all

  15. aravind r says:

    Your favorite game or game series?

  16. halistine jenkins says:

    this was like watching Mike Tyson vs Michael Spinks

  17. CRISS CROSS says:

    Nice performanceof 1660. Can u add anthem

  18. Puchkii says:

    Do you think a 1660 xps 15 will be worth it or should i go with a xps 15 1050 ti this summer?

  19. Joel Conolly says:

    To be fair, it's supposed to be a successor to the 1050 series graphic cards (1050 & 1050Ti). If we put this into perspective, then it will be worth it for any begginer E-sports player or at least anybody who's into casual gaming. Whether it will release a Ti-variant will yet remain to be seen. Plus it has advantage of power consumption per performance ratio as seen in Hardware Unbox's test measurements in comparison to the RX570. Yes it's not cheap, both price wise and price to performance wise, but a successor will always bring higher price tag than its predecessor.

  20. Yedige Moldagaliyev says:

    The biggest problem with gtx 1650 for me is that it comes with Volta NVENC encoder (basically, not very different from almost 3 year old Pascal) instead of the Turing NVENC encoder which is ridiculous. I mean if it’s a Turing gpu then make 100% Turing in all aspects. Also, there is no low-profile versions available on the market right now and it makes me wonder why. This card had potential to become the go-to card for super efficient but also fast SFF HTPCs for 4K hdr 10bit madVR thing replacing pretty old at this point 1050ti. But it lacks all the essential
    stuff for it and no 6-pin doesn’t save the 1650. It’s complete and utter garbage at 150 bucks. It has no place on the market at 150 while rx570 exists. If it had all the features aforementioned above, then some people like me could justify it at 150, but otherwise just no.

  21. Y Logan says:

    So detailed 👍👍, love your reviews

  22. Nick says:

    Best 1080p card right now is 1660 after the 1060 6gb

  23. Chanrith JR says:

    Nice review!

  24. Crazycauses 51 says:

    Go for the 1660, as it has fantastic price per performance. Just for the budget gamers 🙂

  25. Niko Gottschalk says:

    Why 1650 even exists.

  26. Ishaan Kharb says:

    Please someone tell me should i go for RX 570 or GTX 1650 because in my country they both are of same price near 190 $ u.s.

  27. zgoaty92 says:

    Y’know, I was going to give the 1650 the benefit of the doubt being that it’s a low power card, but at this point you’re not getting good value for the money when the RX 570 can handle the same settings tested at higher fps for the same or even less money than what the 1650 costs. The 1650 is a $100-130 US GPU, not a $150-180 GPU. The power consumption argument doesn’t even apply here and chances are if you’re buying an RX 570, you’re not pairing it with a high-end overclocking CPU so at best you’re drawing maybe 175-200W, less if you’re only aiming for 60 fps 1080p.

    The 1650 can’t hit 60 fps high/ultra unless you drop resolution to 720p or 900p, otherwise you drop the setting levels to medium or find a combination of settings to get that balance of visuals and performance. Again though, for $150 minimum, you can do better.

  28. Mubarak Hsquare says:

    goood to hear that, but rx is still better

  29. Gogeta MUI3 says:

    I recommend get 1650 oc

  30. Gul Dukat says:

    The special olympics of GPUs.

  31. Bleach says:

    Holy jesus, that 1660 got more fps in Far cry 5 than a 1070TI hahaha am I missing sth?

  32. Icarus Madman says:

    Just wanted to ask, have you contacted Lenovo for the y540? They said they were releasing it in May.

  33. computer2211 says:

    I'm planning on building a pc this summer and I'm hesitating in either buying a rx580 or a gtx 1660ti (gtx 1660ti is $70 – $80 more expensive).. which one is more worth it?

  34. TacticusPrime says:

    The 1650 could maybe be used to upgrade a cheap modern pre-build that someone gifted you, one that doesn't have any additional power pins available from its power source. That's the only use case that I can imagine.

  35. diedrick mckee says:

    would it be safe to remove the back plate of a gigabyte GTX 1660 OC card to help it fit onto my current motherboard? i dont care if it voids anything. i just want to know if i can take off the back plate and use it

  36. Cash Money says:

    Shit and i was thinking of buying a laptop with 1650, i think waiting for laptops with newer amd gpus would be a smart move rn

  37. Cash Money says:

    Hey make a video on second hand cards, should we buy them? If yes then how to check the life and approx price at which we should buy them

  38. Does it Really Matter Google? says:

    Thank you for this video, I was trying to see if I wanted to get a gaming pc with a 1650 or a 1660 but I didn't know which one was good until I have seen this video.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *