Radeon RX 6600 XT vs Quadro K620

Place in the ranking	601	88
Place by popularity	not in top-100	79
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.77	62.48
Power efficiency	8.87	18.51
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GM107	Navi 23
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	22 July 2014 (10 years ago)	30 July 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$189.89	$379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6600 XT has 2156% better value for money than Quadro K620.

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	384	2048
Core clock speed	1058 MHz	1968 MHz
Boost clock speed	1124 MHz	2589 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	41 Watt	160 Watt
Texture fill rate	26.98	331.4
Floating-point processing power	0.8632 TFLOPS	10.6 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	64
TMUs	24	128
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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	160 mm	190 mm
Width	1" (2.5 cm)	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	128 Bit	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 29 GB/s	256.0 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 DVI, 1x DisplayPort	1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displays	4	no data
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Desktop Management	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.2
CUDA	5.0	-

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.

Quadro K620 5.79

RX 6600 XT 42.95
+642%

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.

Quadro K620 2226

RX 6600 XT 16509
+642%

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	18−20 −644%	134 +644%
1440p	10−12 −680%	78 +680%
4K	5−6 −780%	44 +780%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	10.55 −273%	2.83 +273%
1440p	18.99 −291%	4.86 +291%
4K	37.98 −341%	8.61 +341%

RX 6600 XT has 273% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RX 6600 XT has 291% lower cost per frame in 1440p
RX 6600 XT has 341% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	120 +0%	120 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	79 +0%	79 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	75 +0%	75 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	257 +0%	257 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	123 +0%	123 +0%
Metro Exodus	131 +0%	131 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Valorant	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	75 +0%	75 +0%
Dota 2	147 +0%	147 +0%
Far Cry 5	65 +0%	65 +0%
Fortnite	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	209 +0%	209 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	115 +0%	115 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	135 +0%	135 +0%
Metro Exodus	100 +0%	100 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Valorant	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
World of Tanks	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	67 +0%	67 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	66 +0%	66 +0%
Dota 2	120 +0%	120 +0%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	183 +0%	183 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	97 +0%	97 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Valorant	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	68 +0%	68 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	68 +0%	68 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
World of Tanks	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	39 +0%	39 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	38 +0%	38 +0%
Far Cry 5	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	118 +0%	118 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	71 +0%	71 +0%
Metro Exodus	98 +0%	98 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Valorant	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Dota 2	64 +0%	64 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	64 +0%	64 +0%
Metro Exodus	34 +0%	34 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	64 +0%	64 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	13 +0%	13 +0%
Dota 2	86 +0%	86 +0%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Fortnite	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	61 +0%	61 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	36 +0%	36 +0%
Valorant	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%

This is how Quadro K620 and RX 6600 XT compete in popular games:

RX 6600 XT is 644% faster in 1080p
RX 6600 XT is 680% faster in 1440p
RX 6600 XT is 780% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.79	42.95
Recency	22 July 2014	30 July 2021
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	41 Watt	160 Watt

Quadro K620 has 290.2% lower power consumption.

RX 6600 XT, on the other hand, has a 641.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K620 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K620 is a workstation graphics 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.