Radeon RX 6700 XT vs GeForce GTX 960

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 960 and Radeon RX 6700 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 960
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
15.72

RX 6700 XT outperforms GTX 960 by a whopping 228% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking31846
Place by popularity5298
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.2123.15
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Navi / RDNA2 (2020−2022)
GPU code nameGM206Navi 22
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date22 January 2015 (9 years ago)3 March 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $479
Current price$440 (2.2x MSRP)$685 (1.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6700 XT has 948% better value for money than GTX 960.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores10242560
CUDA cores1024no data
Core clock speed1127 MHz2321 MHz
Boost clock speed1178 MHz2581 MHz
Number of transistors2,940 million17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt230 Watt
Texture fill rate72 billion/sec413.0
Floating-point performance2,413 gflopsno 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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length9.5" (24.1 cm)267 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)400 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pins1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
SLI options+no data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB12 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth112 GB/s384.0 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.21x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI++
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support+no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+no data
GeForce ShadowPlay+no data
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan+1.2
CUDA+no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GTX 960 15.72
RX 6700 XT 51.49
+228%

Radeon RX 6700 XT outperforms GeForce GTX 960 by 228% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 960 6072
RX 6700 XT 19884
+227%

Radeon RX 6700 XT outperforms GeForce GTX 960 by 227% in Passmark.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 960 10768
RX 6700 XT 45676
+324%

Radeon RX 6700 XT outperforms GeForce GTX 960 by 324% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 960 30751
RX 6700 XT 109039
+255%

Radeon RX 6700 XT outperforms GeForce GTX 960 by 255% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 960 7916
RX 6700 XT 35504
+349%

Radeon RX 6700 XT outperforms GeForce GTX 960 by 349% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 960 49918
RX 6700 XT 176617
+254%

Radeon RX 6700 XT outperforms GeForce GTX 960 by 254% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

GTX 960 310860
RX 6700 XT 579310
+86.4%

Radeon RX 6700 XT outperforms GeForce GTX 960 by 86% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

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 HD65
−132%
151
+132%
1440p24−27
−258%
86
+258%
4K30
−66.7%
50
+66.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 no data
Battlefield 5 50−55 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27 no data
Far Cry 5 35−40 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45 no data
Forza Horizon 4 70−75 no data
Hitman 3 30−33 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65 no data
Metro Exodus 50−55 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 no data
Battlefield 5 50−55 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27 no data
Far Cry 5 35−40 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45 no data
Forza Horizon 4 70−75 no data
Hitman 3 30−33 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65 no data
Metro Exodus 50−55 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27 no data
Far Cry 5 35−40 no data
Forza Horizon 4 70−75 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 no data
Far Cry 5 24−27 no data
Forza Horizon 4 30−33 no data
Hitman 3 18−20 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35 no data
Metro Exodus 27−30 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27 no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14 no data
Hitman 3 10−12 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data
Far Cry 5 8−9 no data
Forza Horizon 4 21−24 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18 no data
Metro Exodus 14−16 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 no data

This is how GTX 960 and RX 6700 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6700 XT is 132% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6700 XT is 258% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6700 XT is 67% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.72 51.49
Recency 22 January 2015 3 March 2021
Cost $199 $479
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 230 Watt

The Radeon RX 6700 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 960 in performance tests.


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 GTX 960
GeForce GTX 960
AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT
Radeon RX 6700 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.


4 3461 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 960 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 5981 vote

Rate Radeon RX 6700 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.