ATI Radeon X1600 XT vs GeForce GTX 1070 SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
1050 1050 3 GB 1050 Ti 1060 3 GB 1060 3 GB GP104 1060 5 GB 1060 6 GB 1060 6 GB 9Gbps 1060 6 GB GDDR5X 1060 6 GB GP104 1060 6 GB Rev. 2 1070 1070 GDDR5X 1070 SLI 1070 Ti 1080 1080 11Gbps 1080 Ti
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
X1300 XT X1300 XT AGP X1600 PRO X1600 PRO AGP X1600 XT X1600 XT Dual X1650 AGP X1650 GTO X1650 PRO

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1070 SLI and Radeon X1600 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1070 SLI
2016
2x 8 GB GDDR5, 300 Watt
37.22
+13685%

1070 SLI outperforms X1600 XT by a whopping 13685% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GTX 1070 SLI GTX 1070 SLI
ATI X1600 XT X1600 XT

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1391400
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency9.530.49
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)R500 (2005−2007)
GPU code namePascal GP104 SLIRV530
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 August 2016 (9 years ago)1 October 2007 (18 years ago)

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 cores3840no data
Core clock speed1506 MHz590 MHz
Boost clock speed1683 MHzno data
Number of transistors14400 Million157 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)300 Watt42 Watt
Texture fill rateno data2.360
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data4

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2x 8 GB256 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed8000 MHz690 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data22.08 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectorsno data1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12_19.0c (9_3)
Shader Modelno data3.0
OpenGLno data2.0
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA+-

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 HD1180−1
4K56-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+20700%
1−2
−20700%
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 85−90 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 130−140 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+20700%
1−2
−20700%
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90 0−1
Far Cry 5 120−130 0−1
Fortnite 280
+13900%
2−3
−13900%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+14400%
1−2
−14400%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 85−90 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+14800%
1−2
−14800%
Valorant 220−230
+22000%
1−2
−22000%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 130−140 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+20700%
1−2
−20700%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+13850%
2−3
−13850%
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90 0−1
Dota 2 140−150
+14200%
1−2
−14200%
Far Cry 5 120−130 0−1
Fortnite 176
+17500%
1−2
−17500%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+14400%
1−2
−14400%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 87 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 85−90 0−1
Metro Exodus 85−90 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+14800%
1−2
−14800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 111 0−1
Valorant 220−230
+22000%
1−2
−22000%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90 0−1
Dota 2 140−150
+14200%
1−2
−14200%
Far Cry 5 120−130 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+14400%
1−2
−14400%
Hogwarts Legacy 85−90 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+14800%
1−2
−14800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 73 0−1
Valorant 220−230
+22000%
1−2
−22000%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 123 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 90−95 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 260−270
+26300%
1−2
−26300%
Grand Theft Auto V 75−80 0−1
Metro Exodus 55−60 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+17400%
1−2
−17400%
Valorant 250−260
+25200%
1−2
−25200%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 95−100 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 0−1
Far Cry 5 90−95 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 40−45 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 95−100 0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 40−45 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 81 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27 0−1
Metro Exodus 30−35 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 54 0−1
Valorant 230−240
+22900%
1−2
−22900%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 40−45 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22 0−1
Dota 2 100−110 0−1
Far Cry 5 45−50 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 70−75 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 38 0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 37.22 0.27
Recency 16 August 2016 1 October 2007
Chip lithography 16 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 300 Watt 42 Watt

GTX 1070 SLI has a 13685.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 462.5% more advanced lithography process.

ATI X1600 XT, on the other hand, has 614.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1070 SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1600 XT in performance tests.

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 GTX 1070 SLI
GeForce GTX 1070 SLI
ATI Radeon X1600 XT
Radeon X1600 XT
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

GTX 1070 SLI GeForce GTX 1070 SLI
vs
GTX 1080 GeForce GTX 1080
ATI X1600 XT Radeon X1600 XT
vs
8300 GS GeForce 8300 GS
GTX 1070 SLI GeForce GTX 1070 SLI
vs
RTX 2060 12 GB GeForce RTX 2060 12 GB
RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling
vs
UHD Graphics 16EU UHD Graphics 16EU
RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling
vs
L40G L40G
RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling
vs
RTX 2000 Ada Generation RTX 2000 Ada Generation
RX 6800 3456SP RX 6800 3456SP
vs
RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling
GTX 1070 SLI GeForce GTX 1070 SLI
vs
HD 7600G Radeon HD 7600G
GTX 1070 SLI GeForce GTX 1070 SLI
vs
MX570 A GeForce MX570 A
GTX 1070 SLI GeForce GTX 1070 SLI
vs
RX 9060 XT Radeon RX 9060 XT
Quadro P5200 Quadro P5200
vs
W4170M FirePro W4170M
Quadro P5200 Quadro P5200
vs
HD 8750M Radeon HD 8750M
Quadro P5200 Quadro P5200
vs
Quadro4 980 XGL Quadro4 980 XGL

Community ratings

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

4.1 214 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1070 SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 44 votes

Rate Radeon X1600 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 1070 SLI or Radeon X1600 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.