Radeon RX 6600 XT vs R9 M290X Crossfire

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire with Radeon RX 6600 XT, including specs and performance data.

R9 M290X Crossfire
2014
2x 4 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
19.08

RX 6600 XT outperforms R9 M290X Crossfire by a whopping 125% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking29488
Place by popularitynot in top-10079
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data62.66
Power efficiency6.5718.48
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameNeptune CFNavi 23
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 March 2014 (10 years ago)30 July 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores25602048
Core clock speed850 MHz1968 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHz2589 MHz
Number of transistors2x 2800 Million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rateno data331.4
Floating-point processing powerno data10.6 TFLOPS
ROPsno data64
TMUsno data128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data190 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2x 4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width2x 256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed4800 MHz2000 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 data1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 11_1)12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkan-1.2

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.

R9 M290X Crossfire 19.08
RX 6600 XT 42.96
+125%

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.

R9 M290X Crossfire 14147
RX 6600 XT 39051
+176%

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.

R9 M290X Crossfire 32792
RX 6600 XT 88163
+169%

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.

R9 M290X Crossfire 10551
RX 6600 XT 28342
+169%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

R9 M290X Crossfire 71977
RX 6600 XT 156297
+117%

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 HD62
−116%
134
+116%
1440p30−35
−157%
77
+157%
4K18−20
−150%
45
+150%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.83
1440pno data4.92
4Kno data8.42

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−253%
120
+253%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−108%
79
+108%
Elden Ring 60−65
−108%
125
+108%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
−78.7%
100−110
+78.7%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−171%
90−95
+171%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−97.4%
75
+97.4%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−221%
257
+221%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−157%
131
+157%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−88.6%
80−85
+88.6%
Valorant 75−80
−126%
170−180
+126%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
−78.7%
100−110
+78.7%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−171%
90−95
+171%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−97.4%
75
+97.4%
Dota 2 65−70
−116%
147
+116%
Elden Ring 60−65
−163%
158
+163%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
−78.4%
180−190
+78.4%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−161%
209
+161%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
−101%
135
+101%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−96.1%
100
+96.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−59.2%
200−210
+59.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−88.6%
80−85
+88.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
−158%
150−160
+158%
Valorant 75−80
−126%
170−180
+126%
World of Tanks 220−230
−23.5%
270−280
+23.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
−78.7%
100−110
+78.7%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−97.1%
67
+97.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−73.7%
66
+73.7%
Dota 2 65−70
−76.5%
120
+76.5%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−55.4%
100−110
+55.4%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−129%
183
+129%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−59.2%
200−210
+59.2%
Valorant 75−80
−126%
170−180
+126%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 30−33
−127%
68
+127%
Elden Ring 30−35
−158%
80
+158%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
−127%
68
+127%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
−3.6%
170−180
+3.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−159%
40−45
+159%
World of Tanks 130−140
−109%
270−280
+109%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
−97.4%
75−80
+97.4%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−144%
39
+144%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−153%
38
+153%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−176%
130−140
+176%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−141%
118
+141%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−128%
98
+128%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−200%
75−80
+200%
Valorant 45−50
−186%
140−150
+186%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−207%
45−50
+207%
Dota 2 30−35
−100%
64
+100%
Elden Ring 14−16
−143%
34
+143%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
−100%
64
+100%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−143%
34
+143%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
−147%
140−150
+147%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−133%
27−30
+133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−100%
64
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
−168%
50−55
+168%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−207%
45−50
+207%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−117%
13
+117%
Dota 2 30−35
−169%
86
+169%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−175%
65−70
+175%
Fortnite 21−24
−174%
60−65
+174%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−118%
61
+118%
Valorant 21−24
−241%
75−80
+241%

This is how R9 M290X Crossfire and RX 6600 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6600 XT is 116% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6600 XT is 157% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6600 XT is 150% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RX 6600 XT is 253% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6600 XT is ahead in 62 tests (98%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.08 42.96
Recency 1 March 2014 30 July 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 160 Watt

RX 6600 XT has a 125.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire is a notebook 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.

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 R9 M290X Crossfire
Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire
AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT
Radeon RX 6600 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.


2.7 11 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 4457 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6600 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.