Radeon RX 7600 XT vs R9 Nano

Place in the ranking	253	79
Place by popularity	not in top-100	83
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.44	78.12
Power efficiency	8.70	16.25
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Fiji	Navi 33
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	27 August 2015 (9 years ago)	8 January 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$649	$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 7600 XT has 1336% better value for money than R9 Nano.

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	4096	2048
Compute units	64	no data
Core clock speed	no data	1980 MHz
Boost clock speed	1000 MHz	2755 MHz
Number of transistors	8,900 million	13,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	256.0	352.6
Floating-point processing power	8.192 TFLOPS	22.57 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	64
TMUs	256	128
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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).

Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	152 mm	204 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	1x 8-pin
Bridgeless CrossFire	+	-

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	High Bandwidth Memory (HBM)	GDDR6
High bandwidth memory (HBM)	+	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	4096 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	500 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	512 GB/s	288.0 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 Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
Eyefinity	+	-
Number of Eyefinity displays	6	no data
HDMI	+	+
DisplayPort support	+	-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration	+	-
CrossFire	+	-
FRTC	+	-
FreeSync	+	-
HD3D	+	-
LiquidVR	+	-
PowerTune	+	-
TressFX	+	-
TrueAudio	+	-
ZeroCore	+	-
VCE	+	-
DDMA audio	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.3	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.2
Vulkan	+	1.3
Mantle	+	-

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 Nano 22.07

RX 7600 XT 44.76
+103%

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.

R9 Nano 8486

RX 7600 XT 17212
+103%

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	89 −102%	180−190 +102%
4K	50 −100%	100−110 +100%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	7.29 −299%	1.83 +299%
4K	12.98 −295%	3.29 +295%

RX 7600 XT has 299% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RX 7600 XT has 295% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −100%	80−85 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −93.2%	85−90 +93.2%
Elden Ring	70−75 −97.2%	140−150 +97.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −88.4%	130−140 +88.4%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −100%	80−85 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −93.2%	85−90 +93.2%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 −102%	190−200 +102%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −86.4%	110−120 +86.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 −100%	100−105 +100%
Valorant	85−90 −102%	180−190 +102%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −88.4%	130−140 +88.4%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −100%	80−85 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −93.2%	85−90 +93.2%
Dota 2	75−80 −94.8%	150−160 +94.8%
Elden Ring	70−75 −97.2%	140−150 +97.2%
Far Cry 5	70−75 −97.2%	140−150 +97.2%
Fortnite	110−120 −102%	230−240 +102%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 −102%	190−200 +102%
Grand Theft Auto V	75−80 −94.8%	150−160 +94.8%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −86.4%	110−120 +86.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 −101%	290−300 +101%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 −100%	100−105 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	34 −91.2%	65−70 +91.2%
Valorant	85−90 −102%	180−190 +102%
World of Tanks	240−250 −84.4%	450−500 +84.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −88.4%	130−140 +88.4%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −100%	80−85 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −93.2%	85−90 +93.2%
Dota 2	75−80 −94.8%	150−160 +94.8%
Far Cry 5	70−75 −97.2%	140−150 +97.2%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 −102%	190−200 +102%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 −101%	290−300 +101%
Valorant	85−90 −102%	180−190 +102%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	35−40 −94.4%	70−75 +94.4%
Elden Ring	35−40 −97.4%	75−80 +97.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −94.4%	70−75 +94.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −101%	350−400 +101%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 −100%	40−45 +100%
World of Tanks	140−150 −103%	300−310 +103%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −100%	90−95 +100%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −94.4%	35−40 +94.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −94.4%	35−40 +94.4%
Far Cry 5	60−65 −93.5%	120−130 +93.5%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −89.7%	110−120 +89.7%
Metro Exodus	50−55 −100%	100−105 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 −93.5%	60−65 +93.5%
Valorant	55−60 −89.7%	110−120 +89.7%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −84.2%	35−40 +84.2%
Dota 2	35−40 −97.4%	75−80 +97.4%
Elden Ring	16−18 −76.5%	30−33 +76.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −97.4%	75−80 +97.4%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −76.5%	30−33 +76.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 −94%	130−140 +94%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −92.9%	27−30 +92.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −97.4%	75−80 +97.4%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −81.8%	40−45 +81.8%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −84.2%	35−40 +84.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −100%	14−16 +100%
Dota 2	35−40 −97.4%	75−80 +97.4%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −89.7%	55−60 +89.7%
Fortnite	27−30 −85.2%	50−55 +85.2%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −97%	65−70 +97%
Valorant	27−30 −85.2%	50−55 +85.2%

This is how R9 Nano and RX 7600 XT compete in popular games:

RX 7600 XT is 102% faster in 1080p
RX 7600 XT is 100% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	22.07	44.76
Recency	27 August 2015	8 January 2024
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	190 Watt

R9 Nano has 8.6% lower power consumption.

RX 7600 XT, on the other hand, has a 102.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 Nano in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.