GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER vs GeForce RTX 2050 Laptop GPU: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 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 +8%NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER leads in this scenario (up to 8% 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 1660 SUPER is better3
Video memory 2 GB more6 GB vs 4 GB
Memory bus 128 bit more192 bit vs 64 bit
Memory bandwidth 224 GB/s more336 GB/s vs 112 GB/s
Where GeForce RTX 2050 Laptop GPU is better0
No advantages found in our data.
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions. Laptop chip results depend on the laptop model: its maker sets the power limit and cooling.
- 1% difference, within the threshold
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER753.8 samples/minGeForce RTX 2050 Laptop GPU746.6 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
B · 747A · 75405,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. The 1% difference is below the noticeable threshold (5%).
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Laptop GPU
746.6 samples/min · community measurement, sample 38 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 38 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 690.49–833.91; submissions 2025-07-17 to 2026-07-19; 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 (3)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 754.8 | 700.3 | A +7.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 750.8 | 695.1 | A +8% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 735.9 | 717.1 | A +2.6% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (98)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 1,123.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 1,096.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 88.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 88.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 89.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 90.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 94.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 93.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 95.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 81.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 77 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 77.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 76.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 79.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 333.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 336.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 322.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 331.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 331.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 330.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 336.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 351.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 308.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 309.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 307 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 315.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 311.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 153.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 165.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 171.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 177.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 180.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 167.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 194.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 176 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 154.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 153.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 173.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 152.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 287.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 287.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 287.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 302.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (CUDA) | 288.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 271.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 293 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 280.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 191.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 192.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 192.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 546.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 543 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 546.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 543.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 564.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 527.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 555.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 499.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 439.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 443.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 431.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 704.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 702 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 696.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 714.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (CUDA) | 690.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 686.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 845.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 757 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 604.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 605.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 1,041 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 847.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 858.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 851 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 884.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 895.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 823.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 945.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 650.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 834.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 847.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 864.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 700.4 | 823.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 679.1 | 683.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 850.6 | 724.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 825.9 | 961.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 807 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 843.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 809.1 | 770.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 820.6 | 833.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 779.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 818.7 | 803.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 831.8 | 849.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 751.9 | 796 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 768.9 | 818.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 616.7 | 647.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 692 | 794.2 | reference |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
Chip maker values. The laptop maker sets the power limit and clocks in each laptop.
| Specification | A · GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER | B · GeForce RTX 2050 Laptop GPU | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | TU116-300-A1 | GA107 | differs |
| Architecture | Turing | Ampere | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 1,408 (CUDA cores) | 2,048 (CUDA cores) | not directly comparable |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,530 MHz | 1,155 MHz | A: 375 MHz more |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,785 MHz | 1,477 MHz | A: 308 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 6 GB | 4 GB | A: 2 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 | equal |
| Memory bus | 192 bit | 64 bit | A: 128 bit more |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 336 GB/s | 112 GB/s | A: 224 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. | 125 W (TDP) | no data | no data for B |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x8 | no data for A |
Chip
GPU chip
ATU116-300-A1
BGA107
differsArchitecture
ATuring
BAmpere
differsShader units
A1,408 (CUDA cores)
B2,048 (CUDA cores)
not directly comparableShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,530 MHz
B1,155 MHz
A: 375 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,785 MHz
B1,477 MHz
A: 308 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
A6 GB
B4 GB
A: 2 GB moreMemory type
AGDDR6
BGDDR6
equalMemory bus
A192 bit
B64 bit
A: 128 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A336 GB/s
B112 GB/s
A: 224 GB/s moreExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A125 W (TDP)
Bno data
no data for BTGP (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
Ano data
BPCIe 3.0 x8
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 1660 SUPER and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Laptop GPU have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER: 6 GB GDDR6, 192-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Laptop GPU: 4 GB GDDR6, 64-bit bus.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER or NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Laptop GPU?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 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 1660 SUPER, specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Laptop GPU, 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 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, 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.