The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is a clear winner – it's at least 2x faster gaming GPU than the Radeon Pro WX 3100 and it's also a much better value for money, as it's only CA$320.13 more expensive!
Advantages of the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
- At least 2x faster GPU for gaming
- A much better value for money for gaming
- Up to 50% more VRAM memory – 6 vs 4 GB
Advantages of the Radeon Pro WX 3100
- Up to 53% cheaper – CA$279.87 vs CA$600.00
- Consumes up to 46% less energy – 65 vs 120 Watts
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs Radeon Pro WX 3100 for Gaming
The GPU's performance in selected game and settings
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
Feb 22nd, 2019
Average FPS
83
100%
Min 1% FPS
44
100%
Price, CA$
CA$600
46%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$7.22/FPS
82%
Radeon Pro WX 3100
Jun 12th, 2017
Average FPS
47
57%
Min 1% FPS
20
45%
Price, CA$
CA$279.87
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$5.95/FPS
100%
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs Radeon Pro WX 3100 in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs Radeon Pro WX 3100 in synthetic GPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs Radeon Pro WX 3100 in core GPU performance specifications
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
Feb 22nd, 2019
Memory
6 GB
100%
Memory Bandwidth
288 GB/s
100%
Pixel Fillrate
84.96 GPixel/s
100%
Texture Fillrate
169.9 GTexel/s
100%
FP32
5.437 TFLOPS
100%
Radeon Pro WX 3100
Jun 12th, 2017
Memory
4 GB
67%
Memory Bandwidth
96 GB/s
33%
Pixel Fillrate
19.5 GPixel/s
23%
Texture Fillrate
39.01 GTexel/s
23%
FP32
1.248 TFLOPS
23%
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | Radeon Pro WX 3100 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Feb 22nd, 2019 | Release Date | Jun 12th, 2017 |
| $279.00 | MSRP | $199.00 |
| GeForce 16 | Generation | Radeon Pro Polaris |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 120 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Memory | ||
6 GB | Memory Size | 4 GB |
| GDDR6 | Memory Type | GDDR5 |
| 192-bit | Memory Bus | 128-bit |
288 GB/s | Bandwidth | 96 GB/s |
| Theoretical Performance | ||
84.96 GPixel/s | Pixel Fillrate | 19.5 GPixel/s |
169.9 GTexel/s | Texture Fillrate | 39.01 GTexel/s |
5.437 TFLOPS | FP32 | 1.248 TFLOPS |
