Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB vs RX 9060 XT 8 GB
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB and Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RX 9060 XT 16GB outperforms RX 9060 XT 8 GB by a moderate 11% 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 | 90 | 63 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 79.57 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 23.22 | no data |
| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 (2025) | RDNA 4 (2025) |
| GPU code name | Navi 44 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 4 June 2025 (recently) | 2 January 2025 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $299 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 | 2048 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 1700 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3130 MHz | 2530 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 29,700 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 400.6 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 25.64 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 64 | no data |
| TMUs | 128 | no data |
| 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 5.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2518 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 322.3 GB/s | no data |
| 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 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | no data |
| Shader Model | 6.8 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | 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 | 120−130
−15.8%
| 139
+15.8%
|
| 1440p | 55−60
−18.2%
| 65
+18.2%
|
| 4K | 35−40
−22.9%
| 43
+22.9%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 2.49 | no data |
| 1440p | 5.44 | no data |
| 4K | 8.54 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 260−270
+0%
|
260−270
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 260−270
+0%
|
260−270
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 220−230
+0%
|
220−230
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 260−270
+0%
|
260−270
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 220−230
+0%
|
220−230
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 260
+0%
|
260
+0%
|
| Valorant | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 133
+0%
|
133
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 220−230
+0%
|
220−230
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 350−400
+0%
|
350−400
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Valorant | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 98
+0%
|
98
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 85
+0%
|
85
+0%
|
| Valorant | 300−310
+0%
|
300−310
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
This is how RX 9060 XT 8 GB and RX 9060 XT 16GB compete in popular games:
- RX 9060 XT 16GB is 16% faster in 1080p
- RX 9060 XT 16GB is 18% faster in 1440p
- RX 9060 XT 16GB is 23% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 54 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 45.74 | 50.59 |
| Recency | 4 June 2025 | 2 January 2025 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 16 GB |
RX 9060 XT 8 GB has an age advantage of 5 months.
RX 9060 XT 16GB, on the other hand, has a 10.6% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
The Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB 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.
