Radeon RX 7600M vs HD 6320

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6320 and Radeon RX 7600M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 6320
2011
18 Watt
0.38

RX 7600M outperforms HD 6320 by a whopping 6134% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1277241
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.4618.16
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)
GPU code nameLovelandNavi 33
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 August 2011 (13 years ago)4 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$554.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores801792
Core clock speed508 MHz1500 MHz
Boost clock speed600 MHz2410 MHz
Number of transistors450 million13,300 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt90 Watt
Texture fill rate4.064269.9
Floating-point processing power0.08128 TFLOPS17.27 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs8112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data256.0 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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.7
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.2
VulkanN/A1.3

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.

HD 6320 0.38
RX 7600M 23.69
+6134%

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.

HD 6320 147
RX 7600M 9161
+6132%

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.

HD 6320 302
RX 7600M 35101
+11523%

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.

HD 6320 892
RX 7600M 77136
+8552%

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 HD1−2
−7500%
76
+7500%
1440p-0−129
4K-0−118

Cost per frame, $

1080p554.99no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2950%
60−65
+2950%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−1086%
83
+1086%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4700%
45−50
+4700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−4650%
95
+4650%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−914%
71
+914%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4700%
45−50
+4700%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2867%
85−90
+2867%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1129%
85−90
+1129%
Valorant 27−30
−485%
150−160
+485%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2800%
58
+2800%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−786%
62
+786%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
−1679%
240−250
+1679%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4700%
45−50
+4700%
Dota 2 10−11
−1080%
110−120
+1080%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2867%
85−90
+2867%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1129%
85−90
+1129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−3350%
138
+3350%
Valorant 27−30
−485%
150−160
+485%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−571%
47
+571%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4700%
45−50
+4700%
Dota 2 10−11
−1080%
110−120
+1080%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2867%
85−90
+2867%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1129%
85−90
+1129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−2250%
94
+2250%
Valorant 27−30
−485%
150−160
+485%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−8600%
170−180
+8600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 21−24
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−5600%
55−60
+5600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−3600%
35−40
+3600%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 50−55

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 18−20
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−173%
40−45
+173%
Valorant 3−4
−4200%
120−130
+4200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−2400%
24−27
+2400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−1050%
21−24
+1050%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 112
+0%
112
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 110
+0%
110
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 111
+0%
111
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 103
+0%
103
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21
+0%
21
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how HD 6320 and RX 7600M compete in popular games:

  • RX 7600M is 7500% faster in 1080p

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 7600M is 8600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 7600M is ahead in 33 tests (52%)
  • there's a draw in 31 test (48%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.38 23.69
Recency 15 August 2011 4 January 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 90 Watt

HD 6320 has 400% lower power consumption.

RX 7600M, on the other hand, has a 6134.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7600M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6320 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.


AMD Radeon HD 6320
Radeon HD 6320
AMD Radeon RX 7600M
Radeon RX 7600M

Other comparisons

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.


2.9 198 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 27 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7600M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 6320 or Radeon RX 7600M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.