Radeon RX 6600 vs NVS 315

Place in the ranking	1126	113
Place by popularity	not in top-100	13
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.07	67.42
Power efficiency	3.25	20.43
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GF119	Navi 23
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	10 March 2013 (11 years ago)	13 October 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$159	$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6600 has 96214% better value for money than NVS 315.

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	48	1792
Core clock speed	523 MHz	1626 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2491 MHz
Number of transistors	292 million	11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	19 Watt	132 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.184	279.0
Floating-point processing power	0.1004 TFLOPS	8.928 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	64
TMUs	8	112
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	28

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 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	145 mm	190 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 8-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	DDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	875 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14 GB/s	224.0 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 Connectors	1x DMS-59	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	2.1	-

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.

NVS 315 0.90

RX 6600 39.30
+4267%

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.

NVS 315 346

RX 6600 15145
+4277%

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 −5550%	113 +5550%
1440p	1−2 −5600%	57 +5600%
4K	0−1	31

Cost per frame, $

1080p	79.50	2.91
1440p	159.00	5.77
4K	no data	10.61

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

107

+0%

107

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	113 +0%	113 +0%
Battlefield 5	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	91 +0%	91 +0%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Hitman 3	99 +0%	99 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Metro Exodus	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	92 +0%	92 +0%
Battlefield 5	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	73 +0%	73 +0%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Hitman 3	95 +0%	95 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Metro Exodus	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	182 +0%	182 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	78 +0%	78 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	59 +0%	59 +0%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Hitman 3	86 +0%	86 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	142 +0%	142 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	157 +0%	157 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	90 +0%	90 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	58 +0%	58 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

90−95

+0%

90−95

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	52 +0%	52 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	34 +0%	34 +0%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Hitman 3	54 +0%	54 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	102 +0%	102 +0%
Metro Exodus	97 +0%	97 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	101 +0%	101 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

65−70

+0%

65−70

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Hitman 3	36 +0%	36 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Metro Exodus	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	44 +0%	44 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24 +0%	24 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14 +0%	14 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	53 +0%	53 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	21 +0%	21 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

This is how NVS 315 and RX 6600 compete in popular games:

RX 6600 is 5550% faster in 1080p
RX 6600 is 5600% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.90	39.30
Recency	10 March 2013	13 October 2021
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	19 Watt	132 Watt

NVS 315 has 594.7% lower power consumption.

RX 6600, on the other hand, has a 4266.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6600 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 315 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 315 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6600 is a desktop one.

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