Power Consumption
We used GPU-Z to log power consumption during the Metro: Exodus benchmark running at 2560 x 1440 with the default Ultra settings. The graphics card is warmed up before testing, and benchmarking begins when it settles to an idle temperature (about 10 minutes). The benchmark loops a total of five times, which yields around 10 minutes of testing. In the charts you will see a few blips in power use; this is a result of the benchmark starting the next loop.
We also use Furmark to capture worst-case power readings. Although both Nvidia and AMD consider the application to be a “power virus,” or program that deliberately taxes the components beyond normal limits, the data we gather from it offers useful information about a card’s capabilities.
Starting with the gaming power results, the EVGA 1660 Super SC Ultra averaged 123W during the Metro: Exodus test. The slightly faster GTX 1660 Ti SC Ultra used 128W, which fits in well with the expected power use. The GTX 1650, a notably slower video card, sipped power at an average of 72W.
Due to the cards’ power management, Furmark’s power consumption doesn’t end up much higher than the gaming result, but it still tells a story. In this case, the 1660 Super SC averaged 125W, up a mere 2W from the Metro: Exodus value. We see the same theme with the 1660 Ti, with it consuming 130W, while the GTX 1650 was 77W. The latter card showed the biggest difference between the two tests.
Temperatures, Fan Speeds and Clock Rates
Gaming
The EVGA GTX 1660 Super SC Ultra (in red) peaked at 70C during our testing run, which is the warmest of the group. Even with its dual fans, the smaller heatsink on this card let the temperatures run a bit higher than the EVGA GTX 1660 Ti XC, which peaked at 69C. Meanwhile, the low-powered GTX 1650 and its dual-fan cooling solution peaked at 58C during this testing.
At first, the SC Ultra’s dual fans don't spin at all, and then ramp up as temperature increases. In the case of the Metro testing, the card’s fans went from zero RPM up to 1,900 RPM, then peaked around 2,400 RPM at the highest temperature. While the fans were audible during use, they were not loud and were quite tolerable throughout testing. We’re not going to compare them to the other cards in this testing as they are different tiers with different cooling solutions.
The GTX 1660 Super SC Ultra averaged 1,899 MHz under load during this set of tests. Examining the specifications list above and the GPU-Z data, we can see this is well over the rated boost, per usual. The card drops down, like most of the Turing based cards, to 300 MHz at idle.
Furmark
As we shift the focus to the more consistent and heavier load in Furmark, we see similar results as we saw on the gaming side, except the loads are consistent throughout. Surprisingly, temperatures did not increase with Furmark’s loads. And because of that, fan speeds slowly crept up to the same 2,400 RPM peak we measured during gaming.
In fact, in regards to temperatures, peak temperature reached 68C, which is two degrees Celsius less than what we saw in gaming. This makes sense when looking at the significantly lower clock speeds and the card trying to fit under the power limit, and struggling to do so.
The GTX 1660 Super SC’s clock speeds in Furmark are much lower than what we saw in gaming. In this case, the card averaged 1,573 MHz throughout the test while under load. Compare that to 1,899 MHz during gaming, and we can confirm that the GPU is banging off the power limit and throttling clocks and voltage to fit within those parameters.
MORE: Best Graphics Cards
MORE: Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table
MORE: All Graphics Content
