THE GTX 1660 SUPER THE BEST VALUED 1080P CARD RIGHT NOW OR A FLOP? A mini review by -Giotronics I.T Consultations and Services.
I’ve always had the question from clients “Should I get 1660 super or should I just invest my money on an RTX 2060 super card”
Well it is more of a question of, what results you want. If you’re someone who really wants max settings on every game on 1080p 100FPS +, then you’ll probably want an RTX card. But, let’s dive right in to the 1660 super and what we can expect out of this card.
Now, I wanted to test the 1660 super on a personal level as I have sold a ton of these. but I have never really owned one. All my opinions that I have given to customers are all based on research, but I’ve figured why not test an actual 1660 super card. Or better yet. Let’s get the cheapest 1660 super card possible (In the Philippines) and see what you’re getting for 250 USD (13,000 PHP/360 AUD)
What we have right now is THE PALIT GEFORCE GTX 1660 SUPER STORM X
So, what does this card look like how the temperatures, performance and size are.
photo by Palit.com
As you can see on this image. The Palit Storm X is a mini PCB card, that was made for small builds such as Mini ITX or Micro ATX. The card has a size of 168x122x40mm. how big is it? Well here’s a picture of the actual card that I’ve bought.
For this test I’ve used my spare test system a modest Ryzen 5 2600(3.6ghz no OC), an Asus Prime A320 motherboard, 16GB of 3200mhz Corsair RGB Pro memory, Crucial BX500 240GB SSD and a Seasonic 620 Watt Bronze fully Modular power supply.
The card fits really well even if I wasn’t using a MicroATX system and went with the console like build mini ITX cases this card will definitely fit.
Now, on to temperatures.
For my first test I tried maxing the GPU load using 3d mark firestrike.
The GPU maxes out at only 73 Degrees at a maximum of 125 Watts. Nvidia’s new 16 series cards are very power efficient thanks to DDR6’s architecture.
So what about gaming? The most important question of them all. Well here are some results that I’ve tested. (didn’t really post screenshots just recorded the average framerates I was too lazy because it’s 4 games) everything has been tested at 1920x1080 144hz. please take note that these are rough estimates accurate results will vary per system configuration
For GTA V at ultra-settings and x4AA (yes I didn’t max it out) and Nvidia PCSS enabled I was getting a minimum of 60 FPS and an average of 68 FPS and the highest I’ve seen was 95 FPS. Running the game at high settings would give you an average of 75 FPS which is a better option in my opinion.
For Witcher 3 at ultra-settings (Nvidia Hair AA disabled) we were getting an average of 75 FPS, a maximum of 83 and a minimum of 54.
For Red Dead Redemption 2 at ultra-settings everything maxed out we were getting an average of 45 FPS a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 50. One thing to note on this game is that even at low frame rates the game seems to be running very smooth but, I know most of you want the 60 FPS love. So how do we achieve 60 fps? Well it’s hard to say… if you lower down to medium, we get an average of 50, a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 86. So, asking for a steady 60 fps on this game is possible but at low settings and it’s not something that’s worth it in my opinion. 50 fps at medium is completely playable, looks great and something that most will enjoy.
Lastly, Rainbow Six Siege. Now I don't play this game, so I had a friend of mine join in (Thanks Glenn). At ultra-settings I was getting an average of 170 Frames per second. It was difficult to really find a minimum because the frame rate was all over the place, but I can assure you it maintained 100 +FPS. This game is not demanding to begin with but it’s a good reference for e-sport titles and what to expect when using this card.
now, with all these results in mind... most current generation games can be played at a minimum of 60 FPS with this card which was what NVIDIA intended. now not at ultra but it's safe to say high to ultra. this card is definitely a 1080p power house especially considering it's price. "but Gio, Palit's card looks ugly are their alternatives?" of course! there's a ton of 1660 super variants that look really good. I've sold two 1660 super gigabyte triple fan cards and they look amazing. Palit also has a dual fan version as well. the only reason why I picked the storm x was I wanted the cheapest variant. now to the original question, is it better to just skip this card and proceed to an RTX 2060 super? well... if ultra is a must for you at 1920x1080 the 2060 super will deliver. if you research on it's benchmarks you'll definitely see that the RTX 2060 super is at least much more powerful by 30% in most games than the 1660 super but, it also requires more wattage. so it's really a question of how much are you willing to spend. the 1660 super is in my humble opinion is a good enough card for 1080p. but if you want extra performance then the rtx 2060 super will deliver. we're looking at least a price difference of 8,000 php(165 USD or 220 AUD). so it will depend on you if the extra 30 percent performance is worth the 165 USD or 220 AUD. please be aware I am measuring in my country's prices. for most people the difference of 8,000 php or 165 USD can be allocated with better RAM, more SSD capacity or even a better motherboard. so it depends on your priority.
now here are the specs for this card (for the nerds)
MEMORY - 6 GB OF DDR6
INTERFACE - 192BIT
CLOCK - 1530 MHZ
BOOST CLOCK - 1830 MHZ
MEMORY CLOCK - 14GBPS
CUDA CORES - 1408
BANDWIDTH - 336 GB/S
API SUPPORT - 11,12,VULKAN
OPEN GL - 4.6
DVI - 1 DVI-D
HDMI - 1 HDMI 2.0
DISPLAY PORT - 1 DP 1.4A
MAXIMUM RESOLUTION SUPPORT - 7680x4320 @60hz
max power - 125 watts
recommended system power - 450 Watts
Power connectors - 1pc 8pin