GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER vs Radeon R7 250
We compared two Desktop platform GPUs: 6GB VRAM GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER and 1024MB VRAM Radeon R7 250 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER Advantages
Released 6 years late
Boost Clock1785MHz
More VRAM (6GB vs 1024GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (336.0GB/s vs 28.80GB/s)
896 additional rendering cores
Radeon R7 250 Advantages
Lower TDP (55W vs 125W)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER
+601%
5027
Radeon R7 250
717
3DMark Time Spy
GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER
+978%
6048
Radeon R7 250
561
Graphics Card
Oct 2019
Release Date
Oct 2013
GeForce 16
Generation
Volcanic Islands
Desktop
Type
Desktop
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16
Clock Speeds
1530 MHz
Base Clock
-
1785 MHz
Boost Clock
-
1750 MHz
Memory Clock
900 MHz
Memory
6GB
Memory Size
1024MB
GDDR6
Memory Type
DDR3
192bit
Memory Bus
128bit
336.0GB/s
Bandwidth
28.80GB/s
Render Config
-
Compute Units
8
22
SM Count
-
1408
Shading Units
512
88
TMUs
32
48
ROPs
16
64 KB (per SM)
L1 Cache
16 KB (per CU)
1536 KB
L2 Cache
256 KB
Theoretical Performance
85.68 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
11.20 GPixel/s
157.1 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
22.40 GTexel/s
10.05 TFLOPS
FP16 (half)
-
5.027 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
716.8 GFLOPS
157.1 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
44.80 GFLOPS
Board Design
125W
TDP
55W
300 W
Suggested PSU
250 W
1x DVI
1x HDMI 2.0
1x DisplayPort 1.4a
1x HDMI 2.0
1x DisplayPort 1.4a
Outputs
1x DVI
1x HDMI 1.4a
1x DisplayPort 1.2
1x HDMI 1.4a
1x DisplayPort 1.2
1x 8-pin
Power Connectors
None
Graphics Processor
TU116
GPU Name
Cape Verde
TU116-300-A1
GPU Variant
Cape Verde PRO
Turing
Architecture
GCN 1.0
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
12 nm
Process Size
28 nm
6.6 billion
Transistors
1.5 billion
284 mm²
Die Size
123 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (12_1)
DirectX
12 (11_1)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
1.2
1.3
Vulkan
1.2
7.5
CUDA
-
6.6
Shader Model
5.1