Quadro K600 vs Radeon RX 7600

Place in the ranking	85	913
Place by popularity	90	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	93.25	0.27
Power efficiency	18.03	3.20
Architecture	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Navi 33	GK107
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	24 May 2023 (1 year ago)	1 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$269	$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 7600 has 34437% better value for money than Quadro K600.

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	192
Core clock speed	1720 MHz	876 MHz
Boost clock speed	2655 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	13,300 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	6 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	165 Watt	41 Watt
Texture fill rate	339.8	14.02
Floating-point processing power	21.75 TFLOPS	0.3364 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	16
TMUs	128	16
Ray Tracing Cores	32	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 x8	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	204 mm	160 mm
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	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	GDDR6	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2250 MHz	891 MHz
Memory bandwidth	288.0 GB/s	28.51 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1	1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.7	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.3	+
CUDA	-	3.0

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.

RX 7600 42.65
+2169%

Quadro K600 1.88

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.

RX 7600 16604
+2175%

Quadro K600 730

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	143 +2283%	6−7 −2283%
1440p	67 +3250%	2−3 −3250%
4K	37 +3600%	1−2 −3600%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	1.88 +1663%	33.17 −1663%
1440p	4.01 +2378%	99.50 −2378%
4K	7.27 +2637%	199.00 −2637%

RX 7600 has 1663% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RX 7600 has 2378% lower cost per frame in 1440p
RX 7600 has 2637% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	135 +2600%	5−6 −2600%
Cyberpunk 2077	148 +2367%	6−7 −2367%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +2625%	4−5 −2625%
Counter-Strike 2	108 +2600%	4−5 −2600%
Cyberpunk 2077	59 +2850%	2−3 −2850%
Forza Horizon 4	284 +2267%	12−14 −2267%
Forza Horizon 5	110−120 +2650%	4−5 −2650%
Metro Exodus	161 +2200%	7−8 −2200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +2667%	3−4 −2667%
Valorant	170−180 +2400%	7−8 −2400%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +2625%	4−5 −2625%
Counter-Strike 2	90 +2900%	3−4 −2900%
Cyberpunk 2077	50 +2400%	2−3 −2400%
Dota 2	150 +2400%	6−7 −2400%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +2450%	4−5 −2450%
Fortnite	180−190 +2188%	8−9 −2188%
Forza Horizon 4	230 +2200%	10−11 −2200%
Forza Horizon 5	110−120 +2650%	4−5 −2650%
Grand Theft Auto V	150 +2400%	6−7 −2400%
Metro Exodus	119 +2280%	5−6 −2280%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210 +2200%	9−10 −2200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +2667%	3−4 −2667%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	150−160 +2500%	6−7 −2500%
Valorant	170−180 +2400%	7−8 −2400%
World of Tanks	270−280 +2225%	12−14 −2225%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +2625%	4−5 −2625%
Counter-Strike 2	81 +2600%	3−4 −2600%
Cyberpunk 2077	45 +4400%	1−2 −4400%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +2450%	4−5 −2450%
Forza Horizon 4	199 +2388%	8−9 −2388%
Forza Horizon 5	110−120 +2650%	4−5 −2650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210 +2200%	9−10 −2200%
Valorant	170−180 +2400%	7−8 −2400%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	77 +2467%	3−4 −2467%
Grand Theft Auto V	77 +2467%	3−4 −2467%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +2400%	7−8 −2400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +4300%	1−2 −4300%
World of Tanks	270−280 +2183%	12−14 −2183%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +2467%	3−4 −2467%
Cyberpunk 2077	28 +2700%	1−2 −2700%
Far Cry 5	130−140 +2217%	6−7 −2217%
Forza Horizon 4	129 +2480%	5−6 −2480%
Forza Horizon 5	70−75 +2333%	3−4 −2333%
Metro Exodus	118 +2260%	5−6 −2260%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	86 +2767%	3−4 −2767%
Valorant	140−150 +2267%	6−7 −2267%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	20−22	0−1
Dota 2	82 +2633%	3−4 −2633%
Grand Theft Auto V	82 +2633%	3−4 −2633%
Metro Exodus	38 +3700%	1−2 −3700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 +2267%	6−7 −2267%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +2800%	1−2 −2800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	82 +2633%	3−4 −2633%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +2450%	2−3 −2450%
Counter-Strike 2	11	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	12	0−1
Far Cry 5	65−70 +3200%	2−3 −3200%
Fortnite	60−65 +3100%	2−3 −3100%
Forza Horizon 4	69 +2200%	3−4 −2200%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 +4100%	1−2 −4100%
Valorant	75−80 +2433%	3−4 −2433%

This is how RX 7600 and Quadro K600 compete in popular games:

RX 7600 is 2283% faster in 1080p
RX 7600 is 3250% faster in 1440p
RX 7600 is 3600% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	42.65	1.88
Recency	24 May 2023	1 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	6 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	165 Watt	41 Watt

RX 7600 has a 2168.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro K600, on the other hand, has 302.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 7600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K600 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 7600 is a desktop card while Quadro K600 is a workstation one.

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