Ragingsilver

Would you consider used ? 
Because there is some great used cards with large frame buffers ( like a 1070 )

^ yes 
I forgot to say this but DON'T GET A 50 sku they all have 4 gigs of vram 

6GB VRAM minimum.

Try all cables and ports on your graphics card. Even without drivers you should at least get the POST screen. Try PC on a TV or other monitor. 

It means you probably weren't pushing the graphics card so it let your CPU do most of the work when in 1080p. When your card see's it's time to shine on a 1440p, the GPU will do most of the work. 

Shotcut
Avidemux
Openshot
 
are decent options.
Davinci Resolve is a bit more powerful but also free with sign up

I couldn't bring myself to spend close to $25 on an cable management solution so I came up with my own and I think it's honestly a lot better!
 
All that's needed is:
a roll of Velcro Hook and Loop a heavy stapler like the T-50 I have:  

 
 
 
1. Cut a piece of the velcro enough to wrap all your wires, plus a bit extra and staple it under the desk
 

 
 
2. Wrap up your wires! That's it!
 

 
 
The benefits of this is that it looks a lot cleaner (in my opinion), it's modular to fit your needs and is a TON cheaper than any other product you can buy. 
 
Here's an image of what it looks like: 
 

 
Let me know what you think!

Why not try both and see it for yourself? NVENC on the 1660 Ti is a lot better than previous implementations.

diminishing returns. idk how much data is being loaded during a load screen but lets say 1GB for an example. roughly an hard drive (200 mb/s) will load it in 5 seconds an SSD (500 mb/s) will load it in 2 second and an NVME ssd (2000 mb/s) will load it in 0.5. so the difference from sata ssd to nvme is 1/2 that from hard drive to sata ssd despite the nvme ssd being 4 times faster than the sata ssd and the sata ssd being 2.5 times faster than the hard drive. this is just an over simplified model.
 
if you are asking why it doesnt give you better fps because its mostly loaded into ram which is much faster than the nvme ssd. if you dont have enough ram and it starts using the drive then you might see a difference

Zero difference between SSD and NVMe in gaming.  It affects loading time, but as noted already - that is not the bottleneck (SSD) at this time

Because SSD/HDDs are not the performance bottleneck.

Yes it will work at 1440p at a combination of medium and high settings reliably over 60 fps. 

1080p or 1200p (like your current display) is best for that card. 1440p will require sacrificing graphics settings and will result in more frame drops

1440p will tax the 1660Ti more.  It's simple math.  
 
Should be okay at 1440p like @Skiiwee29 says but 1080p will results in near triple digit fps if you require that.

The TLC-based one is good. The QVO is crap

And yes, WD Blue is good. Enjoy

He'll no. The QVo is QLC junk. Do NOT buy QLC SSDs. Get a WD Blue or MX500

yes sata will do about that speed MAX and NVMe about 3000+ MAX but most of them fall in the 1000-2000 range.
 
For just a mass storage and game drive, NVMe is completely unnecessary and you'll be just fine with a SATA M.2 SSD like a Samsung 860 EVO or Crucial MX500, Sandisk SSD Plus etc

No, NVMe is not worth it. Much more heat and more expensive for no tangible gains. Get a SATA drive
..
 
 

Those drives listed are just Sata drives on the m.2 form factor, which for gaming is 1000000% adequate. The Crucial drive is a good drive and is also the cheapest of the 3 and would be my choice. 

Anyhow, SATA is plenty speed for mass storage. Get the cheapest TLC drive with a decent controller. WD Blue, MX500, SanDisk SSD Plus and etc.