Radeon HD 7690M XT vs HD 6930

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
6230 6250 6250 IGP 6290 6350 6370D IGP 6390 6410D IGP 6450 6450 GDDR5 6450 OEM 6490 6510 6530 6530D IGP 6550D 6570 6570 OEM 6610 6670 6750 6770 6770 Green Edition 6790 6850 6850 1440SP Edition 6850 X2 6870 6870 1600SP Edition 6870 X2 6930 6950 6970 6970 X2 6990
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
7510M 7530M 7550M 7570M 7590M 7630M 7650M 7670M 7690M 7690M XT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6930 with Radeon HD 7690M XT, including specs and performance data.

HD 6930
2011, $180
1 GB GDDR5, 186 Watt
6.76
+180%

HD 6930 outperforms HD 7690M XT by a whopping 180% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
HD 6930 HD 6930
HD 7690M XT HD 7690M XT

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking602887
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.90no data
Power efficiency2.797.41
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameCaymanThames
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 December 2011 (14 years ago)7 January 2013 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$180 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores1280480
Core clock speed750 MHz725 MHz
Number of transistors2,640 million716 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)186 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate60.0017.40
Floating-point processing power1.92 TFLOPS0.696 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs8024
L1 Cache320 KB48 KB
L2 Cache512 KB256 KB

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 datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length220 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1200 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth153.6 GB/s57.6 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.05.0
OpenGL4.44.4
OpenCL1.21.2
VulkanN/AN/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:

900p55−60
+162%
21
−162%
Full HD60−65
+161%
23
−161%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how HD 6930 and HD 7690M XT compete in popular games:

  • HD 6930 is 162% faster in 900p
  • HD 6930 is 161% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 6.76 2.41
Recency 1 December 2011 7 January 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 186 Watt 25 Watt

HD 6930 has a 180.5% higher aggregate performance score.

HD 7690M XT, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 644% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 6930 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7690M XT in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6930 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon HD 7690M XT is a notebook one.

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 6930
Radeon HD 6930
AMD Radeon HD 7690M XT
Radeon HD 7690M XT
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

HD 6930 Radeon HD 6930
vs
HD 6970 Radeon HD 6970
HD 7690M XT Radeon HD 7690M XT
vs
HD Graphics 530 HD Graphics 530
HD 6930 Radeon HD 6930
vs
GTX 560 GeForce GTX 560
HD 6930 AMD Radeon HD 6930
vs
GTX 770M GTX 770M
HD 6930 AMD Radeon HD 6930
vs
GT 750M GT 750M
HD 6930 AMD Radeon HD 6930
vs
R7 M460 R7 M460
HD 6930 AMD Radeon HD 6930
vs
R7 M440 R7 M440
HD 6930 AMD Radeon HD 6930
vs
R7 M260 R7 M260
HD 6930 AMD Radeon HD 6930
vs
HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics
HD 6930 AMD Radeon HD 6930
vs
HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics
HD 6930 AMD Radeon HD 6930
vs
HD Graphics 5300 Graphics 5300
HD 6930 AMD Radeon HD 6930
vs
HD 6520G HD 6520G
HD 6930 AMD Radeon HD 6930
vs
HD Graphics 630 Graphics 630

Community ratings

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

3.9 67 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6930 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 5 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7690M XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 6930 or Radeon HD 7690M XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.