ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT vs GeForce 920M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 920M with Radeon HD 2600 XT, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 920M
2015
4 GB DDR3, 33 Watt
1.86
+155%

920M outperforms ATI HD 2600 XT by a whopping 155% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9121161
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiency3.931.13
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGK208BRV630
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)28 June 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores384120
Core clock speed954 MHz800 MHz
Number of transistors915 million390 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate30.536.400
Floating-point processing power0.7327 TFLOPS0.192 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs328

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB256 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s22.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)10.0 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 920M 1.86
+155%
ATI HD 2600 XT 0.73

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.

GeForce 920M 719
+155%
ATI HD 2600 XT 282

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 HD16
+167%
6−7
−167%
4K9
+200%
3−4
−200%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data33.17
4Kno data66.33

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 15
+200%
5−6
−200%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
+183%
6−7
−183%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

This is how GeForce 920M and ATI HD 2600 XT compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 920M is 167% faster in 1080p
  • GeForce 920M is 200% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.86 0.73
Recency 13 March 2015 28 June 2007
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 45 Watt

GeForce 920M has a 154.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 36.4% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 920M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 2600 XT in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 920M is a notebook card while Radeon HD 2600 XT is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 920M
GeForce 920M
ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT
Radeon HD 2600 XT

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.1 1285 votes

Rate GeForce 920M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 90 votes

Rate Radeon HD 2600 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.