Radeon RX 6600 XT vs Quadro FX 880M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 880M with Radeon RX 6600 XT, including specs and performance data.

FX 880M
2010
1 GB GDDR3, 35 Watt
0.58

RX 6600 XT outperforms FX 880M by a whopping 7279% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking120590
Place by popularitynot in top-10087
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data63.52
Power efficiency1.1518.49
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGT216Navi 23
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date7 January 2010 (14 years ago)30 July 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$379

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 cores482048
Core clock speed550 MHz1968 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2589 MHz
Number of transistors486 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate8.800331.4
Floating-point processing power0.1162 TFLOPS10.6 TFLOPS
ROPs864
TMUs16128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data190 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.28 GB/s256.0 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 outputs1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA1.2-

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.

FX 880M 0.58
RX 6600 XT 42.80
+7279%

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.

FX 880M 223
RX 6600 XT 16511
+7304%

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.

FX 880M 2639
RX 6600 XT 88163
+3241%

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 HD20
−570%
134
+570%
1440p1−2
−7700%
78
+7700%
4K0−142

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.83
1440pno data4.86
4Kno data9.02

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2533%
79
+2533%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−2150%
90−95
+2150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2767%
85−90
+2767%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2500%
78
+2500%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−10400%
100−110
+10400%
Hitman 3 5−6
−2060%
108
+2060%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−1482%
170−180
+1482%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−2550%
150−160
+2550%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−343%
130−140
+343%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−2150%
90−95
+2150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2767%
85−90
+2767%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2433%
76
+2433%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−10400%
100−110
+10400%
Hitman 3 5−6
−2060%
108
+2060%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−1482%
170−180
+1482%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−3383%
209
+3383%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−780%
85−90
+780%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−343%
130−140
+343%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−2150%
90−95
+2150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2767%
85−90
+2767%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2200%
69
+2200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−1900%
100
+1900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−1327%
157
+1327%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−2950%
183
+2950%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−890%
99
+890%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−103%
61
+103%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−6400%
65−70
+6400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 45−50
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3900%
40
+3900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−4800%
45−50
+4800%
Hitman 3 6−7
−1017%
67
+1017%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−3767%
116
+3767%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−20100%
200−210
+20100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−2367%
70−75
+2367%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 28

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1850%
35−40
+1850%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 129
+0%
129
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 106
+0%
106
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 75
+0%
75
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 56
+0%
56
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Metro Exodus 98
+0%
98
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 118
+0%
118
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 33
+0%
33
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 54
+0%
54
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 61
+0%
61
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24
+0%
24
+0%

This is how FX 880M and RX 6600 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6600 XT is 570% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6600 XT is 7700% faster in 1440p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6600 XT is 20100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6600 XT is ahead in 35 tests (50%)
  • there's a draw in 35 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.58 42.80
Recency 7 January 2010 30 July 2021
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 160 Watt

FX 880M has 357.1% lower power consumption.

RX 6600 XT, on the other hand, has a 7279.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 880M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 880M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6600 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 Quadro FX 880M
Quadro FX 880M
AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT
Radeon RX 6600 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.


3.2 41 vote

Rate Quadro FX 880M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 4215 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6600 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.