RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded vs Radeon RX 7600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 7600 with RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded, including specs and performance data.

RX 7600
2023, $269
8 GB GDDR6, 165 Watt
39.27
+1.2%
RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded
8 GB GDDR7, 45 Watt
38.82

RX 7600 outperforms RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking133135
Place by popularity25not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation84.05no data
Power efficiency18.5367.15
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026)
GPU code nameNavi 33GB206
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date24 May 2023 (3 years ago)no data
Launch price (MSRP)$269 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores20483328
Core clock speed1720 MHz2160 MHz
Boost clock speed2655 MHz2662 MHz
Number of transistors13,300 million21,900 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)165 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate339.8276.8
Floating-point processing power21.75 TFLOPS17.72 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs128104
Tensor Coresno data104
Ray Tracing Cores3226
L0 Cache512 KBno data
L1 Cache512 KB3.3 MB
L2 Cache2 MB32 MB
L3 Cache32 MBno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 5.0 x16
Length204 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR6GDDR7
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2250 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s384.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR++

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1Portable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.86.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.23.0
Vulkan1.31.4
CUDA-12.0
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

RX 7600 39.27
+1.2%
RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded 38.82

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RX 7600 16430
+1.2%
Samples: 6966
RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded 16242
Samples: 1

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD141
+8.5%
130−140
1440p71
+1.4%
70−75
4K37
+5.7%
35−40

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.91no data
1440p3.79no data
4K7.27no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 213
+1.4%
210−220
Counter-Strike 2 348
+16%
300−310
Cyberpunk 2077 148
+5.7%
140−150
Resident Evil 4 Remake 149
+6.4%
140−150

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 158
+5.3%
150−160
Battlefield 5 130−140
+3.8%
130−140
Counter-Strike 2 336
+12%
300−310
Cyberpunk 2077 117
+6.4%
110−120
Far Cry 5 183
+1.7%
180−190
Fortnite 170−180
+1.2%
170−180
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+2%
150−160
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+4%
150−160
Valorant 230−240
+2.6%
230−240

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 93
+3.3%
90−95
Battlefield 5 130−140
+3.8%
130−140
Counter-Strike 2 179
+5.3%
170−180
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+3%
270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 100
+5.3%
95−100
Far Cry 5 174
+2.4%
170−180
Fortnite 170−180
+1.2%
170−180
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+2%
150−160
Grand Theft Auto V 150
+7.1%
140−150
Metro Exodus 113
+2.7%
110−120
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+4%
150−160
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 210
+5%
200−210
Valorant 230−240
+2.6%
230−240

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140
+3.8%
130−140
Cyberpunk 2077 90
+5.9%
85−90
Far Cry 5 163
+1.9%
160−170
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+2%
150−160
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+4%
150−160
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 123
+2.5%
120−130
Valorant 230−240
+2.6%
230−240

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 170−180
+1.2%
170−180

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 90
+5.9%
85−90
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+3.3%
270−280
Grand Theft Auto V 77
+2.7%
75−80
Metro Exodus 65
+8.3%
60−65
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+2.9%
170−180
Valorant 270−280
+3.8%
260−270

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110
+6.3%
95−100
Cyberpunk 2077 56
+1.8%
55−60
Far Cry 5 115
+4.5%
110−120
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+3.6%
110−120
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 86
+1.2%
85−90

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 100−110
+6%
100−105

4K
High

Atomic Heart 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
Counter-Strike 2 22
+4.8%
21−24
Grand Theft Auto V 82
+2.5%
80−85
Metro Exodus 38
+8.6%
35−40
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 59
+7.3%
55−60
Valorant 240−250
+1.7%
240−250

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+6.7%
60−65
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+4.4%
45−50
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+14.3%
21−24
Far Cry 5 57
+3.6%
55−60
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+1.3%
75−80
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+10%
50−55

4K
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+6%
50−55

This is how RX 7600 and RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded compete in popular games:

  • RX 7600 is 8% faster in 1080p
  • RX 7600 is 1% faster in 1440p
  • RX 7600 is 6% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 39.27 38.82
Chip lithography 6 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 165 Watt 45 Watt

RX 7600 has a 1% higher aggregate performance score.

RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded, on the other hand, has a 17% more advanced lithography process, and 73% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX 7600 and RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded.

Be aware that Radeon RX 7600 is a desktop graphics card while RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded is a mobile workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 4058 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX 7600 or RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Embedded, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.