Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB vs RX 9070 GRE
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 9070 GRE and Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
9070 GRE outperforms 9060 XT 16 GB by a moderate 17% 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 | 48 | 75 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 47 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 60.87 | 82.80 |
| Power efficiency | 19.88 | 23.31 |
| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 (2025) | RDNA 4.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | Navi 48 | Navi 44 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 8 May 2025 (1 year ago) | 4 June 2025 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $549 | $349 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
RX 9060 XT 16 GB has 36% better value for money than RX 9070 GRE.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 3072 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 1420 MHz | 1700 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2790 MHz | 3130 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 53,900 million | 29,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 220 Watt | 160 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 535.7 | 400.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 34.28 TFLOPS | 25.64 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 96 | 64 |
| TMUs | 192 | 128 |
| Tensor Cores | 96 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 48 | 32 |
| L0 Cache | 768 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 8 MB | 4 MB |
| L3 Cache | 48 MB | 32 MB |
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 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |
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 | 12 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2250 MHz | 2518 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 432.0 GB/s | 322.3 GB/s |
| 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 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a |
| HDMI | + | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.8 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.2 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |
| DLSS | + | - |
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.
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.
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 | 160
+1.9%
| 157
−1.9%
|
| 1440p | 85
+21.4%
| 70
−21.4%
|
| 4K | 57
+32.6%
| 43
−32.6%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 3.43
−54.4%
| 2.22
+54.4%
|
| 1440p | 6.46
−29.5%
| 4.99
+29.5%
|
| 4K | 9.63
−18.7%
| 8.12
+18.7%
|
- RX 9060 XT 16 GB has 54% lower cost per frame in 1080p
- RX 9060 XT 16 GB has 30% lower cost per frame in 1440p
- RX 9060 XT 16 GB has 19% lower cost per frame in 4K
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 290−300
+13.2%
|
250−260
−13.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 140−150
+22.2%
|
110−120
−22.2%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 170−180
+25.4%
|
130−140
−25.4%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 160−170
+10%
|
150−160
−10%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 290−300
+13.2%
|
250−260
−13.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 140−150
+22.2%
|
110−120
−22.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 170−180
−52.5%
|
270
+52.5%
|
| Fortnite | 260−270
+27.3%
|
200−210
−27.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 220−230
+21%
|
180−190
−21%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 170−180
+17.2%
|
150−160
−17.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+1.2%
|
170−180
−1.2%
|
| Valorant | 300−350
+19%
|
260−270
−19%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 160−170
+10%
|
150−160
−10%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 290−300
+13.2%
|
250−260
−13.2%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 140−150
+22.2%
|
110−120
−22.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 170−180
−40.1%
|
248
+40.1%
|
| Fortnite | 260−270
+27.3%
|
200−210
−27.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 220−230
+21%
|
180−190
−21%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 170−180
+17.2%
|
150−160
−17.2%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 160−170
+5.8%
|
154
−5.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 140−150
+21.7%
|
120−130
−21.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+1.2%
|
170−180
−1.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 364
+33.3%
|
273
−33.3%
|
| Valorant | 300−350
+19%
|
260−270
−19%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 160−170
+10%
|
150−160
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 140−150
+22.2%
|
110−120
−22.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 170−180
−31.6%
|
233
+31.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 220−230
+21%
|
180−190
−21%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+1.2%
|
170−180
−1.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 197
+34.9%
|
146
−34.9%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 260−270
+27.3%
|
200−210
−27.3%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170−180
+27.6%
|
130−140
−27.6%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 400−450
+25%
|
300−350
−25%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 120−130
+50.6%
|
83
−50.6%
|
| Metro Exodus | 90−95
+25.3%
|
75−80
−25.3%
|
| Valorant | 350−400
+22.8%
|
300−350
−22.8%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 140−150
+20.2%
|
110−120
−20.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 75−80
+27.4%
|
60−65
−27.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 140−150
−8.1%
|
160
+8.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 180−190
+27%
|
140−150
−27%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 142
+39.2%
|
102
−39.2%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 150−160
+12.7%
|
130−140
−12.7%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 75−80
+25%
|
60−65
−25%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 140−150
+54.9%
|
91
−54.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+28.3%
|
45−50
−28.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 113
+34.5%
|
84
−34.5%
|
| Valorant | 300−350
+9%
|
290−300
−9%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
+26.3%
|
80−85
−26.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+31%
|
27−30
−31%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 90−95
+12.5%
|
80
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130−140
+35.3%
|
100−110
−35.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 95−100
+24.7%
|
75−80
−24.7%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 75−80
+14.5%
|
65−70
−14.5%
|
This is how RX 9070 GRE and RX 9060 XT 16 GB compete in popular games:
- RX 9070 GRE is 2% faster in 1080p
- RX 9070 GRE is 21% faster in 1440p
- RX 9070 GRE is 33% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Grand Theft Auto V, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 9070 GRE is 55% faster.
- in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 9060 XT 16 GB is 53% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX 9070 GRE performs better in 49 tests (91%)
- RX 9060 XT 16 GB performs better in 4 tests (7%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 56.95 | 48.55 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | 16 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 220 Watt | 160 Watt |
RX 9070 GRE has a 17% higher aggregate performance score.
RX 9060 XT 16 GB, on the other hand, has a 33% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 38% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 9070 GRE is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 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.
