Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB vs ATI 9600 PRO

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
All-In-Wonder 2006 AGP Edition All-In-Wonder 2006 Edition AGP All-In-Wonder 9600 All-In-Wonder 9600 PRO 9550 9550 SE 9550 XT 9600 9600 PRO 9600 SE X1050 AGP
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
9060 XT 9060 XT 8 GB 9060 XT 16 GB 9060 XT 16GB 9070 9070 GRE 9070 XT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 9600 PRO and Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI 9600 PRO
2003
128 MB DDR, 18 Watt
0.10

RX 9060 XT 16GB outperforms ATI 9600 PRO by a whopping 57630% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
ATI 9600 PRO 9600 PRO
RX 9060 XT 16GB RX 9060 XT 16GB

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking148940
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.43no data
ArchitectureRage 8 (2002−2007)RDNA 4 (2025)
GPU code nameRV350no data
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 October 2003 (21 years ago)2 January 2025 (less than a year 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 coresno data2048
Core clock speed400 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data2530 MHz
Number of transistors60 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology130 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Wattno data
Texture fill rate1.600no data
ROPs4no data
TMUs4no 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).

InterfaceAGP 8xno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount128 MB16 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed300 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth9.6 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data-
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Videono data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0 (9_0)no data
OpenGL2.0no data
OpenCLN/Ano data
VulkanN/A-

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-0−1165
1440p-0−175
4K-0−147

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Sons of the Forest 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Far Cry 5 270
+0%
270
+0%
Fortnite 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Sons of the Forest 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Far Cry 5 248
+0%
248
+0%
Fortnite 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 154
+0%
154
+0%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Sons of the Forest 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 273
+0%
273
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Far Cry 5 233
+0%
233
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Sons of the Forest 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 146
+0%
146
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 83
+0%
83
+0%
Metro Exodus 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 160
+0%
160
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Sons of the Forest 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 102
+0%
102
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 91
+0%
91
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 84
+0%
84
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 80
+0%
80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Sons of the Forest 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.10 57.73
Recency 1 October 2003 2 January 2025
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 16 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 4 nm

RX 9060 XT 16GB has a 57630% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 21 years, a 12700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 3150% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 9600 PRO 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.

ATI Radeon 9600 PRO
Radeon 9600 PRO
AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB
Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

ATI 9600 PRO Radeon 9600 PRO
vs
FX 5900 Ultra GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
RX 9060 XT 16GB Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB
vs
RX 7800 XT Radeon RX 7800 XT
ATI 9600 PRO Radeon 9600 PRO
vs
ATI 9500 PRO Radeon 9500 PRO
RTX A2000 Mobile RTX A2000 Mobile
vs
ATI X1800 XL X1800 XL
RTX 4090 RTX 4090
vs
ATI X850 XT X850 XT
PRO V710 PRO V710
vs
ATI X800 SE X800 SE
Radeon 550 550
vs
ATI 9000 PRO Mac Edition 9000 PRO Mac Edition
RX Vega 3 RX Vega 3
vs
ATI X800 XT Platinum X800 XT Platinum
ATI 9800 PRO 9800 PRO
vs
ATI 9600 XT 9600 XT
RTX 4080 SUPER RTX 4080 SUPER
vs
ATI 9800 XT 9800 XT
RX 7900 GRE RX 7900 GRE
vs
ATI 9200 9200
RTX 5070 Mobile RTX 5070 Mobile
vs
ATI 9000 LE 9000 LE
GMA 950 GMA 950
vs
ATI 9700 PRO 9700 PRO

Community ratings

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

3.9 77 votes

Rate Radeon 9600 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 61 votes

Rate Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon 9600 PRO or Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.