GeForce GTX 1080 Ti vs GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER: 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 +90.1%NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti leads in this scenario (up to 90.1% 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 better12
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 45.1% lower56 s vs 82 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 25.9% lower61 s vs 77 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 79.3% lower172 s vs 308 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 45.8% lower213 s vs 310 s
Blender Benchmark 2.92 63.1% lower119 s vs 194 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 33% lower217 s vs 288 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 57.2% lower359 s vs 564 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 46.3% lower472 s vs 691 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 9% faster821 samples/min vs 754 samples/min
Video memory 5 GB more11 GB vs 6 GB
Memory bus 160 bit more352 bit vs 192 bit
Memory bandwidth 148.4 GB/s more484.4 GB/s vs 336 GB/s
Where GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is better2
Board power 125 W lower125 W (TDP) vs 250 W (TDP)
Launch price $470 lower$229 vs $699
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- A ahead by 45.1%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti56.2 sGeForce GTX 1660 SUPER81.6 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
A · 56B · 820100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 45.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
56.2 s · community measurement, sample 76 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 76 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 55.4–57.39; submissions 2021-07-11 to 2022-03-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER
81.6 s · community measurement, sample 46 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 46 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 80.4–87.83; submissions 2021-07-10 to 2022-02-24; 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 25.9%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti61.2 sGeForce GTX 1660 SUPER77 sPosition among tested models (17, OptiX)
A · 61B · 77050100150Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 25.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
61.2 s · community measurement, sample 47 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 47 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 58.87–65.51; submissions 2020-09-04 to 2021-01-31; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER
77 s · community measurement, sample 43 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 43 submissions (4 outliers excluded), interquartile range 76.1–78.57; submissions 2020-09-04 to 2021-01-16; OPTIX 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 79.3%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti172 sGeForce GTX 1660 SUPER308.4 sPosition among tested models (26, CUDA)
A · 172B · 3080200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 79.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
172 s · community measurement, sample 58 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 58 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 169.09–175.74; submissions 2021-07-19 to 2022-03-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER
308.4 s · community measurement, sample 22 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 22 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 305.17–310.96; submissions 2021-07-16 to 2022-02-24; 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 45.8%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, classroom (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti212.6 sGeForce GTX 1660 SUPER309.9 sPosition among tested models (15, OptiX)
A · 213B · 3100100200300400Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 45.8% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
212.6 s · community measurement, sample 23 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 23 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 203.94–221.54; submissions 2020-09-06 to 2022-01-26; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER
309.9 s · community measurement, sample 20 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 20 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 305.49–311.77; submissions 2020-09-05 to 2021-01-16; OPTIX 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 63.1%
Blender Benchmark 2.92
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti119.1 sGeForce GTX 1660 SUPER194.3 sPosition among tested models (13, CUDA)
A · 119B · 1940100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 63.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
119.1 s · community measurement, sample 28 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 28 submissions (5 outliers excluded), interquartile range 115.05–121; submissions 2021-03-14 to 2021-07-02; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER
194.3 s · community measurement, sample 20 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 20 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 179.96–203.49; submissions 2021-03-21 to 2021-07-23; 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 33%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti216.7 sGeForce GTX 1660 SUPER288.3 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
A · 217B · 2880200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 33% 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 SUPER
288.3 s · community measurement, sample 91 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 91 submissions (19 outliers excluded), interquartile range 284.81–290.84; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-30; 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 57.2%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti359 sGeForce GTX 1660 SUPER564.4 sPosition among tested models (23, CUDA)
A · 359B · 56405001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 57.2% 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 SUPER
564.4 s · community measurement, sample 99 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 99 submissions (15 outliers excluded), interquartile range 555.7–572.24; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-30; 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 46.3%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, victor (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti472.4 sGeForce GTX 1660 SUPER690.9 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
A · 472B · 69105001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 46.3% 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 SUPER
690.9 s · community measurement, sample 91 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 91 submissions (15 outliers excluded), interquartile range 679.94–700.55; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-05-10; 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 9%
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 1660 SUPER753.8 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
B · 754A · 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 9% 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 SUPER
753.8 samples/min · community measurement, sample 102 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 102 submissions (10 outliers excluded), interquartile range 722.53–764.51; submissions 2025-07-20 to 2026-04-11; 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 (28)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 62.2 | 89.6 | A +43.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 64.1 | 90.6 | A +41.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 69.9 | 94.8 | A +35.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 64.3 | 95.3 | A +48.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 192.3 | 322.1 | A +67.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 194.8 | 331.8 | A +70.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 197.9 | 331.9 | A +67.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 185 | 351.8 | A +90.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 123.4 | 171.9 | A +39.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 124.1 | 177.3 | A +42.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 127.4 | 180.5 | A +41.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 245.2 | 287.8 | A +17.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 236 | 302.8 | A +28.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 329.7 | 546.3 | A +65.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 337.5 | 543.6 | A +61.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 487.7 | 696.3 | A +42.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 478.1 | 714.8 | A +49.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 821.5 | 754.8 | A +8.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 868 | 825.9 | A +5.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 883.9 | 809.1 | A +9.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 878.4 | 820.6 | A +7% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 879.8 | 779.4 | A +12.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 889.7 | 818.7 | A +8.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 889.8 | 831.8 | A +7% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 830.7 | 751.9 | A +10.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 842.2 | 768.9 | A +9.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 829 | 750.8 | A +10.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 820.8 | 735.9 | A +11.5% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (71)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 529.5 | 1,123.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 532.3 | 1,096.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 62.5 | 88.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 63.2 | 88.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 65.4 | 93.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 61.8 | 77.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 61.3 | 76.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 62.7 | 79.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 189.1 | 333.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 192.2 | 336.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 193.9 | 336.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 216.5 | 307 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 221.1 | 315.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 221.4 | 311.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 119.6 | 153.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 121.3 | 165.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 122.4 | 167.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 124.3 | 176 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 115.4 | 154.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 115.5 | 153.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 119.4 | 173.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 117.4 | 152.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 245.9 | 287.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 248.4 | 287.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 214.6 | 271.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 213.3 | 293 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 220.4 | 280.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 132.1 | 191.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 133.7 | 192.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 172.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 135.1 | 192.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 331 | 546.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 330.5 | 543 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 341.4 | 527.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 334.7 | 555.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 310.6 | 499.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 330.9 | 439.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 326.6 | 443.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 333.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 334.1 | 431.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 493.3 | 704.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 491.8 | 702 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 460.2 | 686.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 521.5 | 845.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 521.3 | 757 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 447.9 | 604.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 436.1 | 605.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 480.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 462.5 | 1,041 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 936.1 | 847.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 873.8 | 858.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 895.1 | 851 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 976.1 | 884.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 931.9 | 895.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 928.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 960.5 | 945.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 886.4 | 834.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 905.1 | 847.8 | reference |
| 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 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 685.3 | 700.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 699.6 | 679.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 935.9 | 850.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 780.2 | 807 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 888.7 | 843.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 726.9 | 616.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 695.2 | 692 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | — | 330.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 823.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 650.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 864.9 | 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 SUPER | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GP102-350-K1-A1 | TU116-300-A1 | differs |
| 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 | GDDR6 | 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 | 336 GB/s | A: 148.4 GB/s more |
| 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) | 125 W (TDP) | A: 125 W higher |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data | no data for B |
Chip
GPU chip
AGP102-350-K1-A1
BTU116-300-A1
differsArchitecture
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
BGDDR6
differsMemory bus
A352 bit
B192 bit
A: 160 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A484.4 GB/s
B336 GB/s
A: 148.4 GB/s moreExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A250 W (TDP)
B125 W (TDP)
A: 125 W higherTGP (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.
Interface
APCIe 3.0 x16
Bno data
no data for B
“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 SUPER have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti: 11 GB GDDR5X, 352-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER: 6 GB GDDR6, 192-bit bus.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER?
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 (2)
- Wikipedia (English) — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 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 3.4.0, 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 5.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.