Radeon RX 6500 XT vs GeForce 7950 GT
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 7950 GT and Radeon RX 6500 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RX 6500 XT outperforms 7950 GT by a whopping 2662% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 1136 | 232 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 95 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.05 | 58.18 |
Power efficiency | 0.95 | 15.92 |
Architecture | Curie (2003−2013) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024) |
GPU code name | G71 | Navi 24 |
Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
Release date | 6 August 2006 (18 years ago) | 19 January 2022 (3 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $114.95 | $199 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
RX 6500 XT has 116260% better value for money than 7950 GT.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Pipelines / CUDA cores | no data | 1024 |
Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 2610 MHz |
Boost clock speed | no data | 2815 MHz |
Number of transistors | 278 million | 5,400 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 90 nm | 6 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 107 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 13.20 | 180.2 |
Floating-point processing power | no data | 5.765 TFLOPS |
ROPs | 16 | 32 |
TMUs | 24 | 64 |
Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 16 |
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).
Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |
Width | 1-slot | 2-slot |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin |
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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 8 GB |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | 2248 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 44.8 GB/s | 143.9 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video | 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |
HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 9.0c (9_3) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
Shader Model | 3.0 | 6.6 |
OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | N/A | 2.2 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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.
- Passmark
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.
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 HD | 2−3
−3150%
| 65
+3150%
|
1440p | 1−2
−2900%
| 30
+2900%
|
4K | 0−1 | 16 |
Cost per frame, $
1080p | 57.48
−1777%
| 3.06
+1777%
|
1440p | 114.95
−1633%
| 6.63
+1633%
|
4K | no data | 12.44 |
- RX 6500 XT has 1777% lower cost per frame in 1080p
- RX 6500 XT has 1633% lower cost per frame in 1440p
FPS performance in popular games
- Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - Full HD
Epic Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 1440p
Epic Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset - 4K
Epic Preset
Atomic Heart | 111
+0%
|
111
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 64
+0%
|
64
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 72
+0%
|
72
+0%
|
Atomic Heart | 84
+0%
|
84
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 40
+0%
|
40
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 54
+0%
|
54
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 102
+0%
|
102
+0%
|
Fortnite | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 66
+0%
|
66
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
Valorant | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
Atomic Heart | 48
+0%
|
48
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 250−260
+0%
|
250−260
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 34
+0%
|
34
+0%
|
Dota 2 | 145
+0%
|
145
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 92
+0%
|
92
+0%
|
Fortnite | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 35
+0%
|
35
+0%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 86
+0%
|
86
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 52
+0%
|
52
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 92
+0%
|
92
+0%
|
Valorant | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 24
+0%
|
24
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 30
+0%
|
30
+0%
|
Dota 2 | 110
+0%
|
110
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 86
+0%
|
86
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 47
+0%
|
47
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 54
+0%
|
54
+0%
|
Valorant | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
Fortnite | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 37
+0%
|
37
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 18
+0%
|
18
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
Valorant | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 17
+0%
|
17
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 57
+0%
|
57
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Fortnite | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
Atomic Heart | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 34
+0%
|
34
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 11
+0%
|
11
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
Valorant | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4
+0%
|
4
+0%
|
Dota 2 | 67
+0%
|
67
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 3
+0%
|
3
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
Fortnite | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
This is how 7950 GT and RX 6500 XT compete in popular games:
- RX 6500 XT is 3150% faster in 1080p
- RX 6500 XT is 2900% faster in 1440p
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 0.90 | 24.86 |
Recency | 6 August 2006 | 19 January 2022 |
Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 8 GB |
Chip lithography | 90 nm | 6 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 107 Watt |
7950 GT has 64.6% lower power consumption.
RX 6500 XT, on the other hand, has a 2662.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1400% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6500 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 7950 GT in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.