GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs GeForce GTX 1660: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 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
B +49.6%NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 leads in this scenario (up to 49.6% 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 1650 SUPER is better1
Launch price $60 lower$159 vs $219
Where GeForce GTX 1660 is better8
Blender Benchmark 2.90 49.6% lower104 s vs 155 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 32.9% lower344 s vs 458 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 39.5% lower201 s vs 280 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 32.5% lower329 s vs 436 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 41.7% lower607 s vs 859 s
Shader units 128 more1,408 (CUDA cores) vs 1,280 (CUDA cores)
Video memory 2 GB more6 GB vs 4 GB
Memory bus 64 bit more192 bit vs 128 bit
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- B ahead by 49.6%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER155.3 sGeForce GTX 1660103.8 sPosition among tested models (27, CUDA)
B · 104A · 1550100200300400Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is ahead by 49.6% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
155.3 s · community measurement, sample 48 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 48 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 151.89–157.88; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-06-21; 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.
- B ahead by 32.9%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER457.9 sGeForce GTX 1660344.5 sPosition among tested models (25, CUDA)
B · 344A · 4580200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is ahead by 32.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
457.9 s · community measurement, sample 27 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 27 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 449.24–463.14; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-01-18; 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.
- B ahead by 39.5%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER279.8 sGeForce GTX 1660200.5 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
B · 201A · 2800200400600Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is ahead by 39.5% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
279.8 s · community measurement, sample 24 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 24 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 275.58–282.32; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-01-18; 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.
- B ahead by 32.5%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER436.3 sGeForce GTX 1660329.3 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
B · 329A · 4360200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is ahead by 32.5% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
436.3 s · community measurement, sample 24 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 24 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 429.7–442.75; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-01-18; 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.
- B ahead by 41.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER859.5 sGeForce GTX 1660606.6 sPosition among tested models (23, CUDA)
B · 607A · 85905001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is ahead by 41.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
859.5 s · community measurement, sample 22 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 22 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 843.62–871.67; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-01-18; 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.
Other comparable benchmarks (3)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 142 | 97.7 | B +45.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 141.2 | 98.2 | B +43.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 432.9 | 340.7 | B +27% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (98)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 1,216.2 | 1,181.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 139.2 | 96.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 137.7 | 95.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 151.5 | 103 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 153 | 103.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 126.2 | 88.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 96.4 | 82.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 94.6 | 74.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 99.4 | 79.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 100.5 | 86 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 638.3 | 342 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 453.8 | 345.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 438 | 337.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 456.6 | 347.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 458.3 | 361.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 403.9 | 316.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 340.7 | 319.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 359.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 367.2 | 328 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 430.9 | 186.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 243.1 | 186.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 256.6 | 188.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 260.5 | 194 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 263.5 | 188.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 288.3 | 201.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 255.4 | 198.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 180.9 | 159.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 181.9 | 170.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 704.3 | 320.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 391.4 | 316.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 391.2 | 316.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 418.3 | 330.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 405.6 | 286.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 418.1 | 313.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 386.4 | 334.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 218.9 | 199.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 239.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 217.8 | 211.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 1,367.5 | 580.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 782.1 | 584.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 791.5 | 582.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 795.8 | 580.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 803.3 | 551.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 830.2 | 592.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 703.3 | 518.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 528.3 | 458.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 546.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 545.3 | 471.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 2,390.4 | 806.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,927.6 | 789.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 2,197.9 | 800.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,909.2 | 781.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,483 | 764.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,510.9 | 919.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 2,780.5 | 860.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 759.5 | 646.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 890.6 | 702.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 516.2 | 808.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 550.4 | 707.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 560 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 622.8 | 791.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 604.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 556.6 | 689.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 554.8 | 679.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 478.2 | 595.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 462.8 | 617.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 645.3 | 798.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 580.4 | 744.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 542.5 | 644.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 560.6 | 753.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 562.8 | 724.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 452.9 | 726.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 603.2 | 754 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 577.1 | 777.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 526.3 | 700 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 564.4 | 700.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 540 | 686.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 540.9 | 676 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 472.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 521.1 | 490.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | — | 1,138.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | — | 111.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | — | 385.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 313.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | — | 261.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 159.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | — | 402.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 196.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | — | 874.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 455.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | — | 798.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | — | 980.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 688.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 764.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 616.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 754.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 744.5 | 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 1650 SUPER | B · GeForce GTX 1660 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | TU116-250-KA-A1 | no data | no data for B |
| Architecture | Turing | Turing | equal |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 1,280 (CUDA cores) | 1,408 (CUDA cores) | B: 128 more |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,530 MHz | 1,530 MHz | equal |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,725 MHz | 1,785 MHz | B: 60 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 4 GB | 6 GB | B: 2 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 | differs |
| Memory bus | 128 bit | 192 bit | B: 64 bit more |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 192 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. | 100 W (TDP) | 120 W (board power) | not directly comparable |
| Recommended PSU | no data | 450 W | no data for A |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 | no data for A |
| 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
ATU116-250-KA-A1
Bno data
no data for BArchitecture
ATuring
BTuring
equalShader units
A1,280 (CUDA cores)
B1,408 (CUDA cores)
B: 128 moreShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,530 MHz
B1,530 MHz
equalBoost clock
A1,725 MHz
B1,785 MHz
B: 60 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
A4 GB
B6 GB
B: 2 GB moreMemory type
AGDDR6
BGDDR5
differsMemory bus
A128 bit
B192 bit
B: 64 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A192 GB/s
Bno data
no data for BExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A100 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
Ano data
BPCIe 3.0
no data for ALength (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 1650 SUPER and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER: 4 GB GDDR6, 128-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660: 6 GB GDDR5, 192-bit bus.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 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 1650 SUPER, 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 2.81a, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81, 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 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.3.0, 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.