GTX 1660 Super vs RTX 3060
The complete head-to-head: full specs, real per-game FPS with 1% lows, ray tracing, a live CPU-bottleneck check, thermals, power and value, with a straight verdict.
GeForce GTX 1660 Super
GeForce RTX 3060
avg, 1080p
The short answer
This is not a close race, the RTX 3060 is about 45% faster on average, the biggest gap on this page, and it is a genuine generational leap rather than a spec-sheet nuance. The GTX 1660 Super has no dedicated RT cores and no Tensor cores at all, so it cannot run ray tracing and has no DLSS, only a basic spatial sharpening filter. It stays relevant as the cheapest card here and one of the most power-efficient per frame, but if your budget stretches to the RTX 3060, it is the easy, honest pick.
These two are a full generation and a real tier apart. The GTX 1660 Super is a Turing card without any of Turing's headline features, no RT cores, no Tensor cores, built purely to be a fast, cheap, efficient rasterizer. The RTX 3060 is a proper Ampere card with real ray tracing hardware and DLSS. The comparison exists because both are still common budget picks, not because they are evenly matched.
The tables ahead cover 1080p frame rates with 1% lows, what ray tracing and DLSS actually look like on the 3060 versus the Super's total lack of either, a CPU pairing tool, thermals, power draw, and pricing since 2023.
At a glance
Seven dimensions, two cards. Bigger area is not automatically better, each card owns different corners.
Strengths radar
Each axis scored 0-100 relative to the pair
Performance vs price
Up and to the left is better value
Grey dots are neighbouring cards for context.
Which should you buy?
Pick your use case, the winner changes with what you actually do.
45% more frames and actual DLSS support make the 3060 the clear pick for a new build.
12 GB of VRAM and nearly double the shader count, the 1660 Super was never built for this resolution.
The 1660 Super has zero Tensor cores, local AI work is effectively off the table without them.
Hardware AV1 decode and far more raw compute make editing and exporting noticeably smoother.
125 W and a compact cooler make it the easier fit for a tight power budget or small case.
More than double the shader cores and slightly more bandwidth outrun the 1660 Super at higher internal resolutions.
Already own a GTX 1660 Super? The RTX 3060 is a genuine upgrade.
Short answer: probably not
Unlike some of the closer matchups on this page, this one is not a coin flip. 45% more frames, actual ray tracing hardware, real DLSS instead of a basic sharpening filter, and double the VRAM. This is the rare case where paying more clearly buys you more.
If your budget can stretch past the RTX 3060, an RTX 3060 Ti or RTX 4060 pushes further still, but even the plain 3060 is a meaningful, worthwhile step up from the 1660 Super.
Full specification comparison
Every spec side by side. The highlighted figure wins each row.
| Specification | GTX 1660 Super | RTX 3060 |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | ||
| GPU / architecture | TU116 · Turing (no RT/Tensor) | GA106 · Ampere |
| Process node | TSMC 12 nm | Samsung 8 nm ▲ |
| Release date | Oct 29, 2019 | Feb 25, 2021 |
| Launch MSRP | $229 ▲ | $329 |
| Compute | ||
| CUDA cores | 1,408 | 3,584 ▲ |
| RT cores | None | 28 · 2nd gen ▲ |
| Tensor cores | None | 112 · 3rd gen ▲ |
| Base / boost clock | 1530 / 1785 MHz ▲ | 1320 / 1777 MHz |
| L2 cache | 1.5 MB | 3 MB ▲ |
| Memory | ||
| VRAM | 6 GB GDDR6 | 12 GB GDDR6 ▲ |
| Memory bus | 192-bit | 192-bit |
| Bandwidth | 336 GB/s | 360 GB/s ▲ |
| Power & form factor | ||
| TDP | 125 W ▲ | 170 W |
| Power connector | 1× 8-pin | 1× 8-pin |
| Suggested PSU | 450 W ▲ | 550 W |
| PCIe interface | 3.0 ×16 | 4.0 ×16 ▲ |
| Features | ||
| Upscaling | None · NVIDIA Image Scaling | DLSS 2 / Super Res ▲ |
| AV1 decode | No | Yes ▲ |
| Display outputs | 3×DP1.4 · HDMI 2.0b · DVI-D | 3×DP1.4a · HDMI 2.1 ▲ |
Average FPS by game
Switch resolution, metric, ray tracing and upscaling, the bars update live. Hover a bar for the avg / 1% / 0.1% breakdown.
Average FPS · 1080p · Rasterization. Representative data, hover a bar for avg / 1% / 0.1%. Note the RTX 3060's 1% lows fall off at 1440p and up from its 8 GB VRAM.
Smoothness & frametimes
Average FPS hides stutter. This is one run plotted as frametime, a flat line is smooth, spikes are hitches. Watch what the RTX 3060's 8 GB VRAM does in a texture-heavy game.
Frametime: Forza Horizon 5, 1080p Ultra
Lower and flatter is better · 16.7 ms = 60 fps
Counterintuitive but real: the slower GTX 1660 Super delivers a smoother line here because 12 GB holds the texture pool the 8 GB RTX 3060 keeps evicting, those spikes are VRAM stutter, not raw speed.
Lab scores
Clean apples-to-apples tests, useful, but weaker at predicting real games than the FPS above.
Ray tracing & upscaling
Ray tracing tanks both cards at native resolution. What makes it playable is upscaling, and here the RTX 3060 has a real edge.
Is frame generation "real" performance?
Neither card supports frame generation, that arrived with the RTX 40 series. The bigger gap here is upscaling itself: the RTX 3060 has dedicated Tensor cores for DLSS 2 Super Resolution, an AI upscaler with strong image quality. The GTX 1660 Super has no Tensor cores at all, so it is limited to NVIDIA Image Scaling, a simpler spatial sharpening filter that raises frame rate but with noticeably softer image quality than DLSS at the same performance target.
If upscaling quality or frame generation matters to your buying decision, that alone is a reason to lean toward the RTX 3060, or to save further for an RTX 40-series card that supports DLSS 3.
Will your CPU bottleneck these cards?
A faster GPU only helps if your CPU keeps up. Pick your CPU and resolution to see expected FPS and bottleneck for each card.
CPU + GPU pairing check
The willitbottleneck engine, built right into the comparison.
Estimated from a 43-CPU model across 1440p. A weak CPU mostly bites at 1080p; at higher resolutions the GPU becomes the limiter and the bottleneck shrinks.
Thermals & noise
The efficiency gap shows up here: the newer card runs cooler and quieter, day in and day out.
Real draw, efficiency & PSU
TDP is the rated figure; what matters is real gaming draw and how many frames you get per watt.
Both use a single 8-pin connector. If your PSU already ran the GTX 1660 Super, it will run the RTX 3060 easily. Leave about 30% headroom for spikes.
Will it fit, and what to pair it with?
Size to scale
Card length matters for small cases
What monitor to pair
GTX 1660 Super: best for 1080p at 60-100 Hz, an esports and older-AAA card first. RTX 3060: 1080p at 144 Hz and up, or 1440p at 60-100 Hz. This is the one pairing on this page where the two cards genuinely target different resolutions.
Running an older PCIe 3.0 board?
Both run a full x16 link, PCIe 3.0 on the 1660 Super and PCIe 4.0 on the RTX 3060, and neither loses meaningful performance from its interface on a modern or older motherboard.
Price history & dollars-per-frame
Raw price is only half the story. Cost per frame is the number that decides it, and it keeps moving as prices fall.
New price over time
Street price of new cards (USD)
The 6 GB vs 12 GB question
GTX 1660 Super · 6 GB
- 6 GB is the tightest budget on this page, some 2026 AAA titles at 1080p Ultra already push past it and force a texture setting down.
- For the esports and older AAA titles this card is realistically used for, 6 GB is still enough.
- With no Tensor cores at all, local AI work is effectively off the table regardless of VRAM capacity.
- The 192-bit bus matches the RTX 3060's, but 336 GB/s of bandwidth gives it less headroom overall.
RTX 3060 · 12 GB
- 12 GB is double the 1660 Super's 6 GB, real headroom for 1440p and modern texture packs.
- Dedicated Tensor cores make the RTX 3060 usable for local AI work, something the 1660 Super cannot do at all.
- Also has dedicated RT cores, so it can actually run ray tracing, even if DLSS assistance is needed to stay smooth.
- None of that changes the price gap, if the 1660 Super's budget is a hard limit, the 3060 simply is not an option.
Emulation & memory bandwidth
The narrower bus is a real downgrade for emulation
Emulation leans on shader count and bandwidth together, and the RTX 3060 wins clearly on both, more than double the CUDA cores and a touch more bandwidth on the same 192-bit bus width. The GTX 1660 Super can still handle lighter emulation loads at 1080p, but the RTX 3060 pulls further ahead as internal resolution climbs.
Creator, AI & streaming
The newer card is quicker per task, but the older card's extra VRAM unlocks larger jobs it can't fit at all.
Streaming: the AV1 encoder is the differentiator
The RTX 3060 has hardware AV1 decode, the GTX 1660 Super has none. Neither has an AV1 encoder, both stream and record through NVENC in H.264 or HEVC, and the RTX 3060's newer encoder generation plus far more compute headroom make it the clearly better choice for anyone who streams or edits regularly.
Overclocking & undervolting
Both cards have modest overclocking headroom, a handful of percent at best. The GTX 1660 Super's simpler, cooler-running design gives it a little more thermal margin, but the RTX 3060 responds about as well to undervolting.
Pros & cons
GTX 1660 Super
- Cheapest card on this page by a wide margin, new or used
- Lower power draw and a cooler, quieter, simpler cooler
- Frames per watt nearly matches the RTX 3060 despite the age and tier gap
- 45% slower on average, the biggest gap on this page
- No RT cores, no Tensor cores, no DLSS, only 6 GB VRAM
RTX 3060
- 45% faster on average with real generational headroom
- 12 GB VRAM, dedicated RT cores, and DLSS 2 upscaling
- Hardware AV1 decode and full PCIe 4.0 ×16
- Costs noticeably more, new or used, than the 1660 Super
- Roughly 45% more power draw for the extra performance
Buying pitfalls
No ray tracing hardware means no ray tracing, full stop
The GTX 1660 Super has zero dedicated RT cores. Any game that requires ray tracing rather than offering it as an optional setting will not run acceptably, or at all, on this card. Don't buy it expecting any ray tracing capability.
Two different RTX 3060 memory configs exist
Most RTX 3060 cards carry 12 GB on a 192-bit bus, but a later 8 GB, 128-bit variant also exists and is meaningfully slower. Confirm the box says 12 GB / 192-bit before you buy, that is the card covered on this page.
GTX 1660 Super vs RTX 3060: your questions answered
Far ahead. It is about 45% faster on average, the biggest gap on this page, and it adds real ray tracing hardware and DLSS 2 upscaling that the 1660 Super simply does not have. This is a genuine generational leap, not a close call.
If your budget allows it, yes, it is meaningfully faster with real ray tracing and DLSS support. Stick with the GTX 1660 Super only if the price gap is a hard budget limit, it remains a capable, efficient 1080p esports card.
For 1080p esports and older AAA titles at high settings, yes. It has no ray tracing hardware and no DLSS, so treat it strictly as a budget 1080p rasterizer, not a card for modern AAA titles at ultra settings.
Pretty much, yes. It has zero Tensor cores, so local AI tools that rely on them run far slower or not at all. Any real AI or 3D rendering work needs the RTX 3060's Tensor cores or better.
It helps, alongside roughly 45% more raw compute for exports and effects. The GTX 1660 Super can handle basic 1080p editing and streaming, but it is the clearly weaker choice for anything demanding.
No. It has no RT hardware at all, ray tracing simply isn't available on it. The RTX 3060 has dedicated RT cores and can run ray tracing, ideally with DLSS assistance to keep frame rates up.
The RTX 3060 supports DLSS 2 Super Resolution, an AI upscaler with strong image quality. The GTX 1660 Super has no Tensor cores, so it is limited to NVIDIA Image Scaling, a basic sharpening filter with noticeably softer results.
Not much, both are budget-to-mainstream GPUs that a mid-range CPU feeds easily at 1080p. Use the pairing checker on this page, a Ryzen 5 3600 or Core i5-10400F and up keeps either fed comfortably.
Yes, it draws less, about 118 W against the 3060's 168 W under load, and runs several degrees cooler and quieter as a result. Despite that gap, the two land almost identical on frames per watt, the 1660 Super is a genuinely efficient design.
A quality 450 W unit covers the GTX 1660 Super, and 550 W covers the RTX 3060, both on a single 8-pin connector. A 550 W supply is a safe, flexible choice if you're unsure which card you'll end up with.
Not in practice, both are similarly sized, around 229 to 242 mm, so check your case's maximum GPU length either way. PCIe 3.0 x16 on the 1660 Super and PCIe 4.0 x16 on the 3060 both carry full bandwidth, neither loses performance from its slot.
No. Laptop GTX 1660 Ti and RTX 3060 chips run at lower power and lower clocks than their desktop namesakes, so laptop performance is meaningfully lower. Compare laptop numbers separately from these desktop figures.
The RTX 3060 handles 1080p-to-1440p reasonably well. The GTX 1660 Super is best treated as a 1080p-only card, and neither is a realistic 4K purchase.
As the cheapest way onto this page, sure, a used GTX 1660 Super runs around $75, buy from a seller with a return window. For a warranty, ray tracing, DLSS, and 45% more performance, a new or used RTX 3060 is worth the extra spend if your budget allows.
Neither soon. Both use architectures with years of life left in NVIDIA's Game Ready driver cycle, and neither is at real risk of losing driver support before 2030.
Yes, this is one of the clearest upgrades on this site. 45% more frames, real ray tracing hardware, DLSS 2 upscaling, and double the VRAM. Unlike the closer matchups elsewhere, this one is not a coin flip.