GeForce GTX 1080 Ti vs GeForce GTX 1660: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
Compare with AIRendering and compute
A +76.7%NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti leads in this scenario (up to 76.7% in comparable benchmarks).
No comparable benchmarks yet: gaming: rasterization, gaming: ray tracing, power efficiency.
Advantages
Only measured and rated values: a noticeable benchmark gap and specs where more is better.
Where GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is better9
Blender Benchmark 2.90 48.6% lower70 s vs 104 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 74% lower198 s vs 344 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 57.4% lower127 s vs 201 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 52% lower217 s vs 329 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 69% lower359 s vs 607 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 65.5% lower472 s vs 782 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 20.8% faster821 samples/min vs 680 samples/min
Video memory 5 GB more11 GB vs 6 GB
Memory bus 160 bit more352 bit vs 192 bit
Where GeForce GTX 1660 is better1
Launch price $480 lower$219 vs $699
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- A ahead by 48.6%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti69.9 sGeForce GTX 1660103.8 sPosition among tested models (27, CUDA)
A · 70B · 1040100200300400Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 48.6% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
69.9 s · community measurement, sample 228 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 228 submissions (27 outliers excluded), interquartile range 68.7–71.27; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2022-01-28; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
103.8 s · community measurement, sample 68 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 68 submissions (8 outliers excluded), interquartile range 102.75–105.37; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-11-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- A ahead by 74%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti197.9 sGeForce GTX 1660344.5 sPosition among tested models (25, CUDA)
A · 198B · 3440200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 74% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
197.9 s · community measurement, sample 199 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 199 submissions (9 outliers excluded), interquartile range 192.68–204.4; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
344.5 s · community measurement, sample 45 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 45 submissions (8 outliers excluded), interquartile range 341.82–356.75; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-01-20; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- A ahead by 57.4%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti127.4 sGeForce GTX 1660200.5 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
A · 127B · 2010200400600Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 57.4% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
127.4 s · community measurement, sample 166 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 166 submissions (12 outliers excluded), interquartile range 124.67–130.48; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
200.5 s · community measurement, sample 40 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 40 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 199.05–204.92; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-01-09; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- A ahead by 52%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti216.7 sGeForce GTX 1660329.3 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
A · 217B · 3290200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 52% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
216.7 s · community measurement, sample 151 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 151 submissions (24 outliers excluded), interquartile range 213.35–220.93; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
329.3 s · community measurement, sample 38 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 38 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 326.4–336.55; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-01-09; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- A ahead by 69%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti359 sGeForce GTX 1660606.6 sPosition among tested models (23, CUDA)
A · 359B · 60705001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 69% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
359 s · community measurement, sample 157 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 157 submissions (19 outliers excluded), interquartile range 352.55–366.03; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
606.6 s · community measurement, sample 38 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 38 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 602.24–614.64; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-01-09; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- A ahead by 65.5%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, victor (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti472.4 sGeForce GTX 1660781.7 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
A · 472B · 78205001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 65.5% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
472.4 s · community measurement, sample 155 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 155 submissions (17 outliers excluded), interquartile range 463.04–482.59; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
781.7 s · community measurement, sample 36 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 36 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 768.8–797.89; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-01-09; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- A ahead by 20.8%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti821.4 samples/minGeForce GTX 1660679.7 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
B · 680A · 82105,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 20.8% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
821.4 samples/min · community measurement, sample 57 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 57 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 808.6–840.55; submissions 2025-07-18 to 2026-03-07; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
679.7 samples/min · community measurement, sample 22 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 22 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 623.88–697.87; submissions 2025-07-17 to 2026-03-26; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Cycles render in Blender Benchmark. Median of the sum of samples per minute over three scenes after removing outliers.
Other comparable benchmarks (16)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 62.2 | 97.7 | A +56.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 64.1 | 98.2 | A +53.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 192.3 | 337.8 | A +75.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 194.8 | 340.7 | A +74.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 124.1 | 194 | A +56.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 245.2 | 316.7 | A +29.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 236 | 330.3 | A +40% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 329.7 | 582.5 | A +76.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 337.5 | 580.9 | A +72.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 478.1 | 800.2 | A +67.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 868 | 744.3 | A +16.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 878.4 | 724.3 | A +21.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 879.8 | 726.6 | A +21.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 889.8 | 777.3 | A +14.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 830.7 | 700 | A +18.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 842.2 | 700.7 | A +20.2% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (89)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 529.5 | 1,138.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 532.3 | 1,181.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 62.5 | 96.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 63.2 | 95.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 65.4 | 103 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 64.3 | 103.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 56.2 | 88.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 61.2 | 82.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 61.8 | 74.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 61.3 | 79.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 62.7 | 86 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 189.1 | 342 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 192.2 | 345.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 193.9 | 347.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 185 | 361.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 172 | 316.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 212.6 | 319.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 216.5 | 313.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 221.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 221.4 | 328 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 119.6 | 186.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 121.3 | 186.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 123.4 | 188.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 122.4 | 188.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 119.1 | 201.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 124.3 | 198.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 115.4 | 159.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 115.5 | 159.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 119.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 117.4 | 170.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 245.9 | 320.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 248.4 | 316.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 214.6 | 286.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 213.3 | 313.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 220.4 | 334.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 132.1 | 199.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 133.7 | 196.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 172.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 135.1 | 211.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 331 | 580.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 330.5 | 584.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 341.4 | 551.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 334.7 | 592.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 310.6 | 518.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 330.9 | 458.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 326.6 | 455.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 333.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 334.1 | 471.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 493.3 | 806.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 491.8 | 798.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 487.7 | 789.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 460.2 | 764.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 521.5 | 919.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 521.3 | 860.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 447.9 | 646.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 436.1 | 688.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 480.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 462.5 | 702.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 936.1 | 808.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 873.8 | 707.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 895.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 976.1 | 764.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 931.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 928.2 | 791.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 960.5 | 616.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 886.4 | 744.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 905.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 925.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 969.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 821.5 | 689.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 685.3 | 595.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 699.6 | 617.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 935.9 | 798.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 780.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 888.7 | 644.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 883.9 | 753.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 889.7 | 754 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 829 | 686.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 820.8 | 676 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 726.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 695.2 | 490.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | — | 111.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | — | 385.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | — | 261.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | — | 402.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | — | 874.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | — | 980.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 754.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 775.6 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
| Specification | A · GeForce GTX 1080 Ti | B · GeForce GTX 1660 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GP102-350-K1-A1 | no data | no data for B |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 3,584 (CUDA cores) | 1,408 (CUDA cores) | not directly comparable |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,481 MHz | 1,530 MHz | B: 49 MHz more |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,582 MHz | 1,785 MHz | B: 203 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 11 GB | 6 GB | A: 5 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR5X | GDDR5 | differs |
| Memory bus | 352 bit | 192 bit | A: 160 bit more |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 484.4 GB/s | no data | no data for B |
| Power and dimensions | |||
| Board powerTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops. | 250 W (TDP) | 120 W (board power) | not directly comparable |
| Recommended PSU | no data | 450 W | no data for A |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 | differs |
| Length (reference / Founders Edition)Partner cards have different dimensions; check the specific SKU. | no data | 145 mm | no data for A |
| Thickness (slots) | no data | 2 | no data for A |
| Power connectors (reference) | no data | 1x 8-pin | no data for A |
Chip
GPU chip
AGP102-350-K1-A1
Bno data
no data for BArchitecture
APascal
BTuring
differsShader units
A3,584 (CUDA cores)
B1,408 (CUDA cores)
not directly comparableShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,481 MHz
B1,530 MHz
B: 49 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,582 MHz
B1,785 MHz
B: 203 MHz moreClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit.
Memory
Video memory
A11 GB
B6 GB
A: 5 GB moreMemory type
AGDDR5X
BGDDR5
differsMemory bus
A352 bit
B192 bit
A: 160 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A484.4 GB/s
Bno data
no data for BExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A250 W (TDP)
B120 W (board power)
not directly comparableTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops.
Recommended PSU
Ano data
B450 W
no data for AInterface
APCIe 3.0 x16
BPCIe 3.0
differsLength (reference / Founders Edition)
Ano data
B145 mm
no data for APartner cards have different dimensions; check the specific SKU.
Thickness (slots)
Ano data
B2
no data for APower connectors (reference)
Ano data
B1x 8-pin
no data for A
“More” does not always mean “better”: higher power draw or size is a system requirement, not an advantage (such bars are dimmed).
Compare with AI
An AI model reviews the specs and benchmarks of this pair and gives a plain-language verdict on who each model suits.
Questions and answers
How much video memory do NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti: 11 GB GDDR5X, 352-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660: 6 GB GDDR5, 192-bit bus.
Which PCIe interface do the cards use?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti: PCIe 3.0 x16. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660: PCIe 3.0.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
See also
Data sources (3)
- Wikipedia (English) — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
- NVIDIA — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660checked November 7, 2026
- Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation) — benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81a, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.82, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.83, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.91.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.92, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.93.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.0.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.