GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER vs GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU 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 +84.8%NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU leads in this scenario (up to 84.8% 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 better2
Video memory 2 GB more6 GB vs 4 GB
Memory bus 64 bit more192 bit vs 128 bit
Where GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU is better2
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 14.7% lower71 s vs 82 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 71.4% faster1,292 samples/min vs 754 samples/min
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.
- B ahead by 14.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER81.6 sGeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU71.1 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
B · 71A · 820100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU is ahead by 14.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU
71.1 s · community measurement, sample 36 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 36 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 65.13–80.73; submissions 2021-07-15 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.
- 2.8% difference, within the threshold
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER308.4 sGeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU317.1 sPosition among tested models (26, CUDA)
A · 308B · 3170200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. The 2.8% difference is below the noticeable threshold (5%).
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU
317.1 s · community measurement, sample 20 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 20 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 304.56–333.41; submissions 2021-07-30 to 2022-02-23; 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.
- B ahead by 71.4%
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 3050 Ti Laptop GPU1,291.7 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 754B · 1,29205,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU is ahead by 71.4% in this benchmark.
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 3050 Ti Laptop GPU
1,291.7 samples/min · community measurement, sample 92 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 92 submissions (12 outliers excluded), interquartile range 1138.79–1369.38; submissions 2025-07-18 to 2026-03-06; 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 (11)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 754.8 | 1,286 | B +70.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 825.9 | 1,375.7 | B +66.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 809.1 | 1,336.6 | B +65.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 820.6 | 1,416.9 | B +72.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 779.4 | 1,399.8 | B +79.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 818.7 | 1,449.7 | B +77.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 831.8 | 1,537.1 | B +84.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 751.9 | 1,339.5 | B +78.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 768.9 | 1,312.8 | B +70.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 750.8 | 1,311.8 | B +74.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 735.9 | 1,202.8 | B +63.4% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (92)
| 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 | 81.7 | reference |
| 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 | 40.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 79.7 | 43.1 | reference |
| 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 | 263.4 | reference |
| 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 | 159.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 311.6 | 135 | reference |
| 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 | 159.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 176 | 144.2 | reference |
| 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 | 88.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 152.6 | 79.7 | reference |
| 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 | 262.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 280.1 | 249.5 | reference |
| 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 | 166 | reference |
| 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 | 512.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 499.7 | 437.6 | reference |
| 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 | 192.1 | reference |
| 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 | 3,189.2 | reference |
| 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 | 298.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 847.7 | 691.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 858.5 | 707.3 | reference |
| 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 | 697.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 895.9 | 788.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 823.1 | 616.1 | reference |
| 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 | 165.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 847.8 | 889.8 | reference |
| 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 | 1,287.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 679.1 | 1,110.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 850.6 | 1,264.7 | 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 | 1,274 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 616.7 | 1,109 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 692 | 1,202.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 187.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 198.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 646.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 908.1 | no pair |
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 3050 Ti Laptop GPU | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | TU116-300-A1 | no data | no data for B |
| Architecture | Turing | Ampere | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 1,408 (CUDA cores) | 2,560 (CUDA cores) | not directly comparable |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,530 MHz | no data | no data for B |
| 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 | 1,035–1,695 MHz | not directly comparable |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 6 GB | 4 GB | A: 2 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 | equal |
| Memory bus | 192 bit | 128 bit | A: 64 bit more |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 336 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. | 125 W (TDP) | no data | no data for B |
Chip
GPU chip
ATU116-300-A1
Bno data
no data for BArchitecture
ATuring
BAmpere
differsShader units
A1,408 (CUDA cores)
B2,560 (CUDA cores)
not directly comparableShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,530 MHz
Bno data
no data for BBoost clock
A1,785 MHz
B1,035–1,695 MHz
not directly comparableClocks 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
B128 bit
A: 64 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A336 GB/s
Bno data
no data for BExcludes 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.
“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 3050 Ti Laptop GPU have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER: 6 GB GDDR6, 192-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU: 4 GB GDDR6, 128-bit bus.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER or NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU 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 1660 SUPER, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
- NVIDIA — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPUchecked 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 3.4.0, 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 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, 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 5.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.