Radeon Pro W6900X vs RX 7600
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 7600 with Radeon Pro W6900X, including specs and performance data.
Pro W6900X outperforms RX 7600 by a small 5% 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 | 95 | 82 |
| Place by popularity | 51 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 90.21 | 8.61 |
| Power efficiency | 17.82 | 10.28 |
| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024) |
| GPU code name | Navi 33 | Navi 21 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 24 May 2023 (1 year ago) | 3 August 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $269 | $4,999 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
RX 7600 has 948% better value for money than Pro W6900X.
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 | 5120 |
| Core clock speed | 1720 MHz | 1825 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2655 MHz | 2150 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 13,300 million | 26,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 6 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 165 Watt | 300 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 339.8 | 688.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 21.75 TFLOPS | 22.02 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 128 |
| TMUs | 128 | 320 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 32 | 80 |
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 4.0 x16 |
| Length | 204 mm | 267 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | Quad-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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 32 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2250 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | + | + |
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 HDMI, 4x Thunderbolt |
| HDMI | + | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.2 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 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.
- Passmark
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.
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 | 141
+0.7%
| 140−150
−0.7%
|
| 1440p | 71
+1.4%
| 70−75
−1.4%
|
| 4K | 37
+5.7%
| 35−40
−5.7%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 1.91
+1772%
| 35.71
−1772%
|
| 1440p | 3.79
+1785%
| 71.41
−1785%
|
| 4K | 7.27
+1865%
| 142.83
−1865%
|
- RX 7600 has 1772% lower cost per frame in 1080p
- RX 7600 has 1785% lower cost per frame in 1440p
- RX 7600 has 1865% lower cost per frame in 4K
FPS performance in popular games
- Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - Full HD
Epic Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 1440p
Epic Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset - 4K
Epic Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 348
−0.6%
|
350−400
+0.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 148
−1.4%
|
150−160
+1.4%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 161
+0.6%
|
160−170
−0.6%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
−3.7%
|
140−150
+3.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 336
−4.2%
|
350−400
+4.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 117
−2.6%
|
120−130
+2.6%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 183
−3.8%
|
190−200
+3.8%
|
| Fortnite | 170−180
−4.7%
|
180−190
+4.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 150−160
−3.9%
|
160−170
+3.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 120−130
−4.8%
|
130−140
+4.8%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 120
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
−2.6%
|
160−170
+2.6%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
−3.9%
|
240−250
+3.9%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
−3.7%
|
140−150
+3.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 179
−0.6%
|
180−190
+0.6%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
−4.3%
|
290−300
+4.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 100
+0%
|
100−105
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 174
−3.4%
|
180−190
+3.4%
|
| Fortnite | 170−180
−4.7%
|
180−190
+4.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 150−160
−3.9%
|
160−170
+3.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 120−130
−4.8%
|
130−140
+4.8%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 150
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 94
−1.1%
|
95−100
+1.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 113
+2.7%
|
110−120
−2.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
−2.6%
|
160−170
+2.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 210
−4.8%
|
220−230
+4.8%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
−3.9%
|
240−250
+3.9%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
−3.7%
|
140−150
+3.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 90
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 163
−4.3%
|
170−180
+4.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 150−160
−3.9%
|
160−170
+3.9%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 71
+1.4%
|
70−75
−1.4%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
−2.6%
|
160−170
+2.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 123
+2.5%
|
120−130
−2.5%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
−3.9%
|
240−250
+3.9%
|
| Fortnite | 170−180
−4.7%
|
180−190
+4.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
−4.7%
|
290−300
+4.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 77
−3.9%
|
80−85
+3.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 65
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
−2.9%
|
180−190
+2.9%
|
| Valorant | 260−270
−3.4%
|
270−280
+3.4%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
+1%
|
100−105
−1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 56
+1.8%
|
55−60
−1.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 115
−4.3%
|
120−130
+4.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
−4.3%
|
120−130
+4.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 50
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 86
−4.7%
|
90−95
+4.7%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
−3.8%
|
110−120
+3.8%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 22
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 82
−3.7%
|
85−90
+3.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 24−27
−3.8%
|
27−30
+3.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 38
+8.6%
|
35−40
−8.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 59
−1.7%
|
60−65
+1.7%
|
| Valorant | 240−250
−2.9%
|
250−260
+2.9%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
−1.6%
|
65−70
+1.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
−4.2%
|
50−55
+4.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 57
+3.6%
|
55−60
−3.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 75−80
−3.9%
|
80−85
+3.9%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 22
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 50−55
−3.8%
|
55−60
+3.8%
|
This is how RX 7600 and Pro W6900X compete in popular games:
- RX 7600 is 1% faster in 1080p
- RX 7600 is 1% faster in 1440p
- RX 7600 is 6% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 37.17 | 38.97 |
| Recency | 24 May 2023 | 3 August 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 32 GB |
| Chip lithography | 6 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 165 Watt | 300 Watt |
RX 7600 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 81.8% lower power consumption.
Pro W6900X, on the other hand, has a 4.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX 7600 and Radeon Pro W6900X.
Be aware that Radeon RX 7600 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro W6900X is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
