Radeon RX 7600M XT vs R9 M295X Mac Edition
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition and Radeon RX 7600M XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
7600M XT outperforms R9 M295X Mac Edition by a whopping 184% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 436 | 161 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.79 | 22.44 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) | RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) |
| GPU code name | Amethyst | Navi 33 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 23 November 2014 (11 years ago) | 4 January 2023 (2 years 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 cores | 2048 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 1280 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2469 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,000 million | 13,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 108.8 | 316.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 3.482 TFLOPS | 20.23 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 64 |
| TMUs | 128 | 128 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 32 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 512 KB |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 2 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 32 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).
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1362 MHz | 2250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 174.3 GB/s | 288.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.3 |
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 | 40−45
−190%
| 116
+190%
|
| 1440p | 21−24
−186%
| 60
+186%
|
| 4K | 10−12
−230%
| 33
+230%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 331
+0%
|
331
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 116
+0%
|
116
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 317
+0%
|
317
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 96
+0%
|
96
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 127
+0%
|
127
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 245
+0%
|
245
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 192
+0%
|
192
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 164
+0%
|
164
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 81
+0%
|
81
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 127
+0%
|
127
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 237
+0%
|
237
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 179
+0%
|
179
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 133
+0%
|
133
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 98
+0%
|
98
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 186
+0%
|
186
+0%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 74
+0%
|
74
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 120
+0%
|
120
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 180
+0%
|
180
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 105
+0%
|
105
+0%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 84
+0%
|
84
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 240−250
+0%
|
240−250
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70
+0%
|
70
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 58
+0%
|
58
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 240−250
+0%
|
240−250
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 48
+0%
|
48
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 102
+0%
|
102
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 142
+0%
|
142
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 76
+0%
|
76
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21
+0%
|
21
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 74
+0%
|
74
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35
+0%
|
35
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 53
+0%
|
53
+0%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 25
+0%
|
25
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 22
+0%
|
22
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 51
+0%
|
51
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90
+0%
|
90
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
This is how R9 M295X Mac Edition and RX 7600M XT compete in popular games:
- RX 7600M XT is 190% faster in 1080p
- RX 7600M XT is 186% faster in 1440p
- RX 7600M XT is 230% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 12.35 | 35.10 |
| Recency | 23 November 2014 | 4 January 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 120 Watt |
RX 7600M XT has a 184.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 108.3% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 7600M XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
