RTX 2060 vs GTX 1660 Super
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 RTX 2060
GeForce GTX 1660 Super
avg, 1080p
The short answer
Both cards are seven years old now, and both share the same 6 GB GDDR6 memory on the same 192-bit bus at the same bandwidth, so the difference between them comes down to the die underneath. The RTX 2060 uses the larger TU106 chip with real RT and Tensor cores, giving it about a 17% raster lead plus actual ray tracing and DLSS upscaling. The GTX 1660 Super uses the cut-down TU116 with no RT or Tensor hardware, but it is cheaper, a little more efficient, and does not lose anything a 1660-class buyer was using anyway. Buy the RTX 2060 if ray tracing or DLSS matter to you at all, even in a limited, older-generation form. Buy the 1660 Super if you just want the cheapest 1080p card that will run current esports titles well.
These two came out the same year from the same Turing generation, and they get compared constantly because they sit right next to each other in the used and budget market. The RTX 2060 is the RT-and-DLSS-capable card built on the bigger TU106 die. The GTX 1660 Super strips that hardware out on the smaller TU116 die to hit a lower price, while matching the 2060's memory capacity and bandwidth almost exactly.
What follows breaks down that TU106-versus-TU116 split in detail: the spec tables, ten-game frame rate results, a look at what DLSS 2 actually buys the 2060 over a card with zero Tensor cores, thermals and power draw at 160 W against 125 W, six years of street pricing, and a final call for anyone weighing a $140 card against a $110 one in 2026.
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.
About 17% faster across the board, and the extra RT/Tensor hardware carries over into ray tracing and DLSS even in lighter, older-style implementations.
The GTX 1660 Super is meaningfully cheaper new and used, and for esports titles at 1080p the gap to the RTX 2060 barely matters.
The 1660 Super has no RT or Tensor cores at all, it cannot do either. If either feature matters, even a little, the 2060 is the only option here.
The RTX 2060's Tensor cores give it a real speed advantage in Tensor-accelerated workloads that the 1660 Super has to run on plain CUDA cores instead.
At 125 W against 160 W, the 1660 Super runs happily on a smaller supply and stays a bit cooler and quieter under load.
Same aging encoder generation on both with no AV1, but the 2060's extra headroom makes simultaneous gaming and encoding noticeably more comfortable.
Already own a GTX 1660 Super? Only move to the RTX 2060 for RT or DLSS.
Short answer: probably not
A 17% raster gain alone is not worth the money if you already own a 1660 Super, that is a minor bump for the price of a used card. The RTX 2060 only earns the upgrade if you specifically want ray tracing or DLSS upscaling, even in their earliest, most limited form, or you do light Tensor-accelerated AI work.
If you want a real generational jump for either card, look at a used RTX 3060 instead, roughly 70 to 100% faster than both of these, with 12 GB of VRAM and full DLSS 2 and current driver support, often for not much more than a used RTX 2060 costs today.
Full specification comparison
Every spec side by side. The highlighted figure wins each row.
| Specification | RTX 2060 | GTX 1660 Super |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | ||
| GPU / architecture | TU106 · Turing | TU116 · Turing |
| Process node | TSMC 12 nm | TSMC 12 nm |
| Release date | Jan 15, 2019 | Oct 29, 2019 |
| Launch MSRP | $349 | $229 ▲ |
| Compute | ||
| CUDA cores | 1,920 ▲ | 1,408 |
| RT cores | 30 · 1st gen ▲ | None |
| Tensor cores | 240 · 2nd gen ▲ | None |
| Base / boost clock | 1365 / 1680 MHz | 1530 / 1785 MHz ▲ |
| L2 cache | 3 MB ▲ | 1.5 MB |
| Memory | ||
| VRAM | 6 GB GDDR6 | 6 GB GDDR6 |
| Memory bus | 192-bit | 192-bit |
| Bandwidth | 336 GB/s | 336 GB/s |
| Power & form factor | ||
| TDP | 160 W | 125 W ▲ |
| Power connector | 1× 8-pin | 1× 8-pin |
| Suggested PSU | 500 W | 450 W ▲ |
| PCIe interface | 3.0 ×16 | 3.0 ×16 |
| Features | ||
| Upscaling | DLSS 2 / Super Res ▲ | None, no Tensor cores |
| AV1 encode (NVENC) | No | No |
| Display outputs | 3×DP1.4 · HDMI 2.0b · DVI-D | 3×DP1.4 · HDMI 2.0b · DVI-D |
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 GTX 1660 Super'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 GTX 1660 Super's 8 GB VRAM does in a texture-heavy game.
Frametime: Alan Wake 2, 1080p High
Lower and flatter is better · 16.7 ms = 60 fps
Counterintuitive but real: the slower RTX 2060 delivers a smoother line here because 12 GB holds the texture pool the 8 GB GTX 1660 Super 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 GTX 1660 Super has a real edge.
Is frame generation "real" performance?
Neither card supports DLSS 3 Frame Generation. Both predate the Ada Lovelace architecture that introduced it, and the GTX 1660 Super lacks Tensor cores entirely, so it has no upscaling of any kind, let alone frame generation.
The RTX 2060 does support DLSS 2 upscaling in the newer games that added it after launch, which can meaningfully help frame rates at 1080p and 1440p in supported titles. The 1660 Super has no equivalent option and relies entirely on lowering native settings instead.
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 RTX 2060, it will run the GTX 1660 Super 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
Both are 1080p cards first and foremost, comfortable at 60 to 100 Hz depending on the game. The RTX 2060 stretches a little further into light 1440p work, especially with DLSS in supported titles. Neither is a realistic 4K option in 2026.
Running an older PCIe 3.0 board?
Both use PCIe 3.0 ×16, an older interface generation than current GPUs, but at this performance tier the difference to PCIe 4.0 or 5.0 is negligible, well under the roughly 1-2% most reviewers measure for cards this fast.
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 6 GB question
RTX 2060 · 6 GB
- The only card here with working RT cores and Tensor cores, useful even in their first-generation, more limited form.
- DLSS 2 support in newer games gives it a real frame rate lever the 1660 Super does not have.
- Tensor cores give it a meaningful edge in Tensor-accelerated AI work like Stable Diffusion, even at this age.
- 6 GB is a hard ceiling in 2026, current AAA titles at high texture settings will push against it on either card.
GTX 1660 Super · 6 GB
- Same 6 GB capacity and identical bandwidth to the RTX 2060, so it is not memory-starved relative to its sibling.
- Lower price and lower power draw make it the more sensible pick for a strict budget or backup build.
- No RT cores and no Tensor cores at all, ray tracing and DLSS are simply not available on this card.
- The 6 GB ceiling is identical to the RTX 2060's, so it inherits the same VRAM limitation without any of the extra hardware.
Emulation & memory bandwidth
The narrower bus is a real downgrade for emulation
Both cards share the exact same 336 GB/s of bandwidth on the same 192-bit bus, so bandwidth is not what separates them in emulation. The RTX 2060's extra CUDA cores and higher clocks give it a modest, consistent edge in demanding emulation workloads like RPCS3 and high-resolution Switch cores, but neither card is a strong choice for heavy emulation at very high internal resolutions.
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
Both use the same aging Turing-generation NVENC encoder with no AV1 support, so encode quality per bit is essentially identical. In practice the RTX 2060's extra performance headroom makes simultaneous gaming and streaming a bit more comfortable, since less of the GPU's budget is spent just holding a playable frame rate.
Overclocking & undervolting
Both cards have modest overclocking headroom typical of late Turing, a small clock bump on either is safe and free, but do not expect it to change the overall picture. Undervolting helps noise and heat more than a manual overclock helps frame rates on cards this old.
Pros & cons
RTX 2060
- About 17% faster across the board
- Real RT cores and Tensor cores, with DLSS 2 support in newer games
- More capable for light Tensor-accelerated AI work
- Costs more new and used than the 1660 Super
- Draws more power and runs a bit hotter and louder
GTX 1660 Super
- Cheaper new and used, the better strict-budget pick
- Slightly more efficient and a bit cooler and quieter
- Same 6 GB VRAM and identical bandwidth to the RTX 2060
- No RT cores or Tensor cores, no ray tracing or DLSS at all
- About 17% slower across the board
Buying pitfalls
Both are seven years old, temper expectations
6 GB of VRAM was comfortable in 2019 and is a real limitation in 2026. Expect to lower texture settings in current AAA titles on either card, and treat both as budget, esports, or backup-PC options rather than a primary gaming rig for demanding new releases.
Laptop versions are different, weaker chips
Mobile RTX 2060 and GTX 1660 Ti/Super GPUs exist and are meaningfully cut down from their desktop counterparts. Never compare a laptop benchmark against the desktop numbers on this page, they are different chips entirely.
RTX 2060 vs GTX 1660 Super: your questions answered
In raw frame rates, yes, it runs about 17% ahead across the ten-game test set on this page, and it's the only one of the pair with working RT cores and DLSS 2 support. The 1660 Super answers back with a lower price and a bit less power draw, nothing more.
Pick the RTX 2060 if ray tracing or DLSS upscaling matters to you at all, even the early, limited version Turing shipped with. Pick the 1660 Super if you want the cheapest usable 1080p card and don't care about either feature.
For 1080p esports and older or lighter AAA games, yes, both still get the job done. Push into current AAA titles at high texture settings and the 6 GB VRAM ceiling they share becomes the real limit on both.
Only if you specifically want ray tracing, DLSS, or the Tensor-accelerated AI work the 1660 Super can't do. A 17% raster gain by itself is too small to justify the cost of a used card. For an actual generational jump from either one, a used RTX 3060 is the better target.
The RTX 2060, thanks to its 240 second-gen Tensor cores. The GTX 1660 Super has none, so it falls back on plain CUDA cores and runs noticeably slower on Tensor-accelerated workloads.
Not in encode quality, both run the same aging Turing NVENC encoder with no AV1 support. Where the RTX 2060 pulls ahead is having more performance headroom left over, so gaming and encoding at the same time feels less strained.
No, on either count. It ships with zero RT cores and zero Tensor cores, so both ray tracing and DLSS upscaling are simply off the table, not just slower.
No. Frame Generation needs Ada Lovelace hardware, which arrived two generations after this Turing card. The RTX 2060's DLSS support tops out at plain DLSS 2 upscaling.
At 1080p, only a genuinely weak or very old CPU would choke either card, both sit modest enough in performance that most CPUs from the last several years keep pace. Run the pairing checker above with your own CPU to see your specific combination.
The GTX 1660 Super draws 125 W in real gaming loads against the RTX 2060's 160 W, which shows up as a few degrees cooler and a touch quieter under sustained load.
A solid 450 W unit is enough for the GTX 1660 Super; budget 500 W if you're running the RTX 2060. Both cards use a single 8-pin connector, so neither one demands anything exotic from your existing supply.
Both are compact dual-slot cards, 229 mm for the RTX 2060 and 210 mm for the GTX 1660 Super, so nearly any mid-tower case handles either. Both run on PCIe 3.0, and that's not a limiting factor at this performance level even on a newer PCIe 4.0 or 5.0 board.
No. Mobile RTX 2060 and GTX 1660 Ti/Super GPUs are separate, more cut-down parts than their desktop namesakes. Don't line up a laptop benchmark against the desktop numbers used throughout this comparison.
No, not in any practical sense. Both are built for 1080p with some room to stretch into light 1440p, the RTX 2060 more so once DLSS is available in a given game. Treat 4K as off the table for this pair.
Both are old enough now that used is the sensible route for nearly everyone. A used GTX 1660 Super around $75 is the strongest pure value play here; a used RTX 2060 around $95 only earns its extra cost if ray tracing or DLSS actually matter to you.
Both are still on NVIDIA's current driver branch, but as 2019 Turing cards they're well into the tail end of their support window. Expect security and compatibility patches to keep coming, not new performance-focused driver work.