Radeon Steam Deck 8CU vs RX 6700 XT
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 6700 XT with Radeon Steam Deck 8CU, including specs and performance data.
6700 XT outperforms Steam Deck 8CU by a whopping 363% 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 | 80 | 480 |
| Place by popularity | 88 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 48.72 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 15.78 | no data |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) | RDNA 2 (2022−2023) |
| GPU code name | Navi 22 | RDNA 2 Sephiroth |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 March 2021 (4 years ago) | 9 November 2023 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $479 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 cores | 2560 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 2321 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2581 MHz | 1900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 17,200 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 230 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 413.0 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 13.21 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 64 | no data |
| TMUs | 160 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 40 | no data |
| L0 Cache | 640 KB | no data |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 1 MB |
| L3 Cache | 96 MB | no data |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | no 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 type | GDDR6 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 384.0 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | - |
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.
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.
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.
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 | 148
+429%
| 28
−429%
|
| 1440p | 81
+406%
| 16−18
−406%
|
| 4K | 46
+411%
| 9−10
−411%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 3.24 | no data |
| 1440p | 5.91 | no data |
| 4K | 10.41 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 349
+523%
|
55−60
−523%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 119
+467%
|
21−24
−467%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 140−150
+222%
|
45−50
−222%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 347
+520%
|
55−60
−520%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 99
+371%
|
21−24
−371%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 120−130
+188%
|
40−45
−188%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 178
+424%
|
30−35
−424%
|
| Fortnite | 200−210
+231%
|
60−65
−231%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 180−190
+307%
|
45−50
−307%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 224
+600%
|
30−35
−600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+362%
|
35−40
−362%
|
| Valorant | 260−270
+172%
|
95−100
−172%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 140−150
+222%
|
45−50
−222%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 206
+268%
|
55−60
−268%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+80.5%
|
150−160
−80.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 90
+329%
|
21−24
−329%
|
| Dota 2 | 175
+400%
|
35−40
−400%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 120−130
+188%
|
40−45
−188%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 169
+526%
|
27
−526%
|
| Fortnite | 200−210
+231%
|
60−65
−231%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 180−190
+307%
|
45−50
−307%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 200
+525%
|
30−35
−525%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 161
+1510%
|
10
−1510%
|
| Metro Exodus | 119
+467%
|
21−24
−467%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+362%
|
35−40
−362%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 223
+726%
|
27−30
−726%
|
| Valorant | 260−270
+172%
|
95−100
−172%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 140−150
+222%
|
45−50
−222%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85
+305%
|
21−24
−305%
|
| Dota 2 | 139
+363%
|
30−33
−363%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 120−130
+188%
|
40−45
−188%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 159
+591%
|
23
−591%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 180−190
+307%
|
45−50
−307%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+362%
|
35−40
−362%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 127
+370%
|
27−30
−370%
|
| Valorant | 260−270
+172%
|
95−100
−172%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 200−210
+231%
|
60−65
−231%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 126
+563%
|
18−20
−563%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 300−350
+330%
|
75−80
−330%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 102
+580%
|
14−16
−580%
|
| Metro Exodus | 71
+492%
|
12−14
−492%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+230%
|
50−55
−230%
|
| Valorant | 290−300
+161%
|
110−120
−161%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+350%
|
24−27
−350%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 56
+522%
|
9−10
−522%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 110−120
+450%
|
20−22
−450%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 137
+523%
|
21−24
−523%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140−150
+476%
|
24−27
−476%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 95−100
+600%
|
14−16
−600%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 130−140
+495%
|
21−24
−495%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 32
+540%
|
5−6
−540%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 102
+386%
|
21−24
−386%
|
| Metro Exodus | 43
+617%
|
6−7
−617%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 74
+517%
|
12−14
−517%
|
| Valorant | 280−290
+415%
|
55−60
−415%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+500%
|
12−14
−500%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60
+1060%
|
5−6
−1060%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 25
+733%
|
3−4
−733%
|
| Dota 2 | 106
+405%
|
21−24
−405%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 60−65
+600%
|
9−10
−600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 71
+610%
|
10−11
−610%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 95−100
+450%
|
18−20
−450%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 75−80
+650%
|
10−11
−650%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 65−70
+570%
|
10−11
−570%
|
This is how RX 6700 XT and Steam Deck 8CU compete in popular games:
- RX 6700 XT is 429% faster in 1080p
- RX 6700 XT is 406% faster in 1440p
- RX 6700 XT is 411% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6700 XT is 1510% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RX 6700 XT surpassed Steam Deck 8CU in all 61 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 46.62 | 10.08 |
| Recency | 3 March 2021 | 9 November 2023 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 6 nm |
RX 6700 XT has a 362.5% higher aggregate performance score.
Steam Deck 8CU, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6700 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Steam Deck 8CU in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX 6700 XT is a desktop graphics card while Radeon Steam Deck 8CU is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
