Radeon RX 6900 XT vs R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) and Radeon RX 6900 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
2014
2.81

6900 XT outperforms R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) by a whopping 2171% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking82837
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data30.43
Power efficiencyno data16.30
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameKaveri SpectreNavi 21
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date14 January 2014 (11 years ago)28 October 2020 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$999

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 cores5125120
Core clock speed720 MHz1825 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2250 MHz
Number of transistorsno data26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data300 Watt
Texture fill rateno data720.0
Floating-point processing powerno data23.04 TFLOPS
ROPsno data128
TMUsno data320
Ray Tracing Coresno data80
L0 Cacheno data1.3 MB
L1 Cacheno data1 MB
L2 Cacheno data4 MB
L3 Cacheno data128 MB

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data16 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data512.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectorsno data1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkan-1.3

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 2.81
RX 6900 XT 63.82
+2171%

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.

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 2302
RX 6900 XT 59119
+2468%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 1616
RX 6900 XT 50587
+3030%

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 HD18
−989%
196
+989%
1440p5−6
−2580%
134
+2580%
4K3−4
−2667%
83
+2667%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data5.10
1440pno data7.46
4Kno data12.04

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−3311%
300−350
+3311%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−2583%
160−170
+2583%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−1825%
150−160
+1825%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 10−11
−1850%
195
+1850%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−3311%
300−350
+3311%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−2583%
160−170
+2583%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−2300%
190−200
+2300%
Fortnite 14−16
−1913%
300−350
+1913%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−1921%
283
+1921%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
−2657%
190−200
+2657%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−1825%
150−160
+1825%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−1238%
170−180
+1238%
Valorant 45−50
−689%
350−400
+689%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 10−11
−1860%
196
+1860%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−3311%
300−350
+3311%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
−415%
270−280
+415%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−2583%
160−170
+2583%
Dota 2 29
−483%
160−170
+483%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−2300%
190−200
+2300%
Fortnite 14−16
−1913%
300−350
+1913%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−1893%
279
+1893%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
−2657%
190−200
+2657%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
−1778%
160−170
+1778%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−1825%
150−160
+1825%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−3180%
164
+3180%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−1238%
170−180
+1238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
−3130%
323
+3130%
Valorant 45−50
−689%
350−400
+689%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−11
−1870%
197
+1870%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−2583%
160−170
+2583%
Dota 2 26
−550%
160−170
+550%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−2300%
190−200
+2300%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−1671%
248
+1671%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−1825%
150−160
+1825%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−1238%
170−180
+1238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
−2633%
164
+2633%
Valorant 45−50
−793%
411
+793%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 14−16
−1913%
300−350
+1913%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−3167%
190−200
+3167%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
−2305%
500−550
+2305%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 130−140
Metro Exodus 1−2
−10100%
102
+10100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
−573%
170−180
+573%
Valorant 27−30
−1559%
400−450
+1559%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−4500%
90−95
+4500%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−3200%
160−170
+3200%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−3200%
231
+3200%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
−2733%
85−90
+2733%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−3750%
150−160
+3750%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
−2920%
150−160
+2920%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−940%
150−160
+940%
Valorant 14−16
−2250%
300−350
+2250%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 40−45
Dota 2 8−9
−1888%
150−160
+1888%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−10300%
100−110
+10300%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−8000%
162
+8000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−3100%
95−100
+3100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
−2533%
75−80
+2533%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 196
+0%
196
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 67
+0%
67
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 122
+0%
122
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 134
+0%
134
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

This is how R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) and RX 6900 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6900 XT is 989% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6900 XT is 2580% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6900 XT is 2667% faster in 4K

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

  • in Far Cry 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6900 XT is 10300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6900 XT performs better in 56 tests (88%)
  • there's a draw in 8 tests (13%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.81 63.82
Recency 14 January 2014 28 October 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm

RX 6900 XT has a 2171.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6900 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 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 R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT
Radeon RX 6900 XT

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.


3.4 16 votes

Rate Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 4244 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6900 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) or Radeon RX 6900 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.