GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs GeForce RTX 2060: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 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 +117.3%NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 leads in this scenario (up to 117.3% 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 Ti is better0
No advantages found in our data.
Where GeForce RTX 2060 is better8
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 20.2% lower70 s vs 84 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 109.7% lower35 s vs 74 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 27.7% lower133 s vs 170 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 18% lower252 s vs 298 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 16.9% lower494 s vs 578 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 20.7% lower588 s vs 709 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 109.1% faster1,574 samples/min vs 753 samples/min
Shader units 384 more1,920 (CUDA cores) vs 1,536 (CUDA cores)
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- B ahead by 20.2%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti84.2 sGeForce RTX 206070 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
B · 70A · 840100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is ahead by 20.2% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
84.2 s · community measurement, sample 43 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 43 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 80.69–88.8; submissions 2021-07-14 to 2022-02-26; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060
70 s · community measurement, sample 99 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 99 submissions (4 outliers excluded), interquartile range 65.53–74.02; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-02-27; 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 109.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti74.2 sGeForce RTX 206035.4 sPosition among tested models (17, OptiX)
B · 35A · 74050100150Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is ahead by 109.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
74.2 s · community measurement, sample 25 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 25 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 72.18–76.22; submissions 2020-09-04 to 2021-02-04; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060
35.4 s · community measurement, sample 170 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 170 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 34.18–38.26; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2022-01-01; 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.
- 1% difference, within the threshold
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti300.4 sGeForce RTX 2060297.5 sPosition among tested models (26, CUDA)
B · 297A · 3000200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. The 1% difference is below the noticeable threshold (5%).
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
300.4 s · community measurement, sample 22 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 22 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 296.02–316.53; submissions 2021-07-11 to 2022-01-31; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060
297.5 s · community measurement, sample 68 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 68 submissions (13 outliers excluded), interquartile range 281.72–323.97; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-02-27; 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 27.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti169.5 sGeForce RTX 2060132.7 sPosition among tested models (21, CUDA)
B · 133A · 1700100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is ahead by 27.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
169.5 s · community measurement, sample 21 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 21 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 166.86–181.87; submissions 2021-07-12 to 2022-01-31; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060
132.7 s · community measurement, sample 51 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 51 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 125.23–140.84; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-02-27; 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 18%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti298 sGeForce RTX 2060252.5 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
B · 252A · 2980200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is ahead by 18% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
298 s · community measurement, sample 77 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 77 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 292.89–312.81; submissions 2020-09-04 to 2021-02-04; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060
252.5 s · community measurement, sample 219 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 219 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 242.91–271.44; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-03-01; 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 16.9%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti577.5 sGeForce RTX 2060494.2 sPosition among tested models (23, CUDA)
B · 494A · 57805001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is ahead by 16.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
577.5 s · community measurement, sample 82 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 82 submissions (5 outliers excluded), interquartile range 564.82–600.01; submissions 2020-09-04 to 2021-02-04; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060
494.2 s · community measurement, sample 215 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 215 submissions (8 outliers excluded), interquartile range 426.04–538.06; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-02-01; 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 20.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, victor (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti709.3 sGeForce RTX 2060587.9 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
B · 588A · 70905001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is ahead by 20.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
709.3 s · community measurement, sample 77 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 77 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 693.39–748.04; submissions 2020-09-04 to 2021-02-04; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060
587.9 s · community measurement, sample 206 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 206 submissions (11 outliers excluded), interquartile range 527.27–641.21; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-02-01; 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 109.1%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti752.7 samples/minGeForce RTX 20601,573.6 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 753B · 1,57405,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is ahead by 109.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
752.7 samples/min · community measurement, sample 58 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 58 submissions (4 outliers excluded), interquartile range 713.01–780.43; submissions 2025-07-17 to 2026-07-24; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060
1,573.6 samples/min · community measurement, sample 162 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 162 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 1437.27–1643.46; submissions 2025-07-20 to 2026-07-05; 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 (35)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 90.2 | 74.2 | B +21.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 91.7 | 74.3 | B +23.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 92.4 | 74.6 | B +23.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 98.6 | 79.9 | B +23.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 97.3 | 78.6 | B +23.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 333 | 322.2 | B +3.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 322.2 | 295.4 | B +9.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 328 | 297.5 | B +10.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 333.4 | 310.5 | B +7.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 341.5 | 327.1 | B +4.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 168.3 | 127.4 | B +32.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 173.3 | 130.9 | B +32.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 177.1 | 133.2 | B +32.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 185.6 | 139.4 | B +33.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 288.5 | 252.8 | B +14.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 284.9 | 249.4 | B +14.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 302.4 | 258.3 | B +17.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 546.1 | 490.1 | B +11.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 543.8 | 478 | B +13.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 546.7 | 473.2 | B +15.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 704.2 | 588.8 | B +19.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 708.4 | 603.8 | B +17.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 763.4 | 1,524.6 | B +99.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 702.6 | 1,522.3 | B +116.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 685.6 | 1,426.3 | B +108% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 820.5 | 1,712.1 | B +108.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 810.8 | 1,743.7 | B +115.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 825.9 | 1,759.7 | B +113.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 825.2 | 1,713.7 | B +107.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 862.4 | 1,830.5 | B +112.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 854.4 | 1,856.7 | B +117.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 781.6 | 1,613.2 | B +106.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 788.7 | 1,627.8 | B +106.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 765.6 | 1,529 | B +99.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 753.9 | 1,522.9 | B +102% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (97)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 1,104.2 | 1,092.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 1,122.6 | 1,058.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 90.5 | 75.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 94.2 | 80.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 74.5 | 36.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 72.3 | 37.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 78 | 42.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 331 | 310.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 338.7 | 332.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 298 | 160.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 302.3 | 175.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 289.8 | 179.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 307.1 | 176.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 166.2 | 127.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 169.5 | 133.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 183.9 | 136.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 146.3 | 63.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 148.8 | 66.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 158.6 | 74.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 165.4 | 74.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 286.5 | 258.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 275 | 247.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 286.2 | 259.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 269.1 | 238.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 182.5 | 137.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 182 | 139.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 230 | 150.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 548.6 | 488 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 528.2 | 468.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 538.2 | 481.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 481.4 | 437.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 429.1 | 180.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 427 | 215.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 454.8 | 209.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 712.3 | 597.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 718.6 | 603.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 684.3 | 595.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 805.1 | 644.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 706.2 | 622.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 585.4 | 234.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 598.2 | 263.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 690.1 | 288.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 851.2 | 1,079.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 883.7 | 946.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 898.2 | 983.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 849.6 | 1,011.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 907.5 | 1,194.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 971.3 | 1,223 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 773.7 | 1,136.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 777.5 | 1,032.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 888.1 | 1,886.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 875.8 | 905 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 813 | 1,762.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 686.9 | 1,447.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 698.7 | 1,487.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (OPTIX) | — | 1,892.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (OPTIX) | — | 1,781.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | — | 93.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 38.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 37.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 37.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 35.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 40.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | — | 351 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 188.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 163.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 159.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 142.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 180.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | — | 161.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 70.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 63.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 63.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 63 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 135.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 117.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 112.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 111 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 239 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 226.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 203.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 194.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 183.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 211.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | — | 646.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 364.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 382.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 265.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 255.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 299.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 548 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 315.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 991.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 1,115.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 1,087.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 874.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 977.2 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
| Specification | A · GeForce GTX 1660 Ti | B · GeForce RTX 2060 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | TU116-400-A1 | no data | no data for B |
| Architecture | Turing | Turing | equal |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 1,536 (CUDA cores) | 1,920 (CUDA cores) | B: 384 more |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,500 MHz | 1,370 MHz | A: 130 MHz more |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,770 MHz | 1,680 MHz | A: 90 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 6 GB | 6 GB | equal |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 | equal |
| Memory bus | 192 bit | 192 bit | equal |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 288 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. | 120 W (TDP) | 160 W (board power) | not directly comparable |
| Recommended PSU | no data | 500 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 | 229 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
ATU116-400-A1
Bno data
no data for BArchitecture
ATuring
BTuring
equalShader units
A1,536 (CUDA cores)
B1,920 (CUDA cores)
B: 384 moreShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,500 MHz
B1,370 MHz
A: 130 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,770 MHz
B1,680 MHz
A: 90 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
B6 GB
equalMemory type
AGDDR6
BGDDR6
equalMemory bus
A192 bit
B192 bit
equalMemory bandwidth
A288 GB/s
Bno data
no data for BExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A120 W (TDP)
B160 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
B500 W
no data for AInterface
Ano data
BPCIe 3.0
no data for ALength (reference / Founders Edition)
Ano data
B229 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 1660 Ti and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti: 6 GB GDDR6, 192-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060: 6 GB GDDR6, 192-bit bus.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti or NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 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 Ti, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
- NVIDIA — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060checked 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 3.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.0.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, 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.