ATI Radeon X1600 PRO vs RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Place in the ranking	587	1360
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	27.86	0.42
Architecture	Vega (2017−2020)	R500 (2005−2007)
GPU code name	Vega Renoir	RV530
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	7 January 2020 (5 years ago)	1 October 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	384	no data
Core clock speed	400 MHz	500 MHz
Boost clock speed	1500 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	no data	157 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	41 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	2.000
ROPs	no data	4
TMUs	no data	4

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	no data	PCIe 1.0 x16
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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	no data	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	no data	256 MB
Memory bus width	no data	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	390 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	12.48 GB/s
Shared memory	+	-

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

no data

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12_1	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	no data	3.0
OpenGL	no data	2.0
OpenCL	no data	N/A
Vulkan	-	N/A

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	20	0−1
1440p	22	0−1
4K	17	0−1

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	11	0−1
Elden Ring	16−18	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	9	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	26 +2500%	1−2 −2500%
Metro Exodus	14	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	22	0−1
Valorant	25 +2400%	1−2 −2400%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	8	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3	0−1
Dota 2	24	0−1
Elden Ring	8	0−1
Far Cry 5	26 +2500%	1−2 −2500%
Fortnite	35−40 +3500%	1−2 −3500%
Forza Horizon 4	21	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	15	0−1
Metro Exodus	14−16	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	39 +3800%	1−2 −3800%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20	0−1
Valorant	12	0−1
World of Tanks	56 +2700%	2−3 −2700%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14	0−1
Dota 2	40 +3900%	1−2 −3900%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +2700%	1−2 −2700%
Forza Horizon 4	18	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +2400%	2−3 −2400%
Valorant	19	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	6−7	0−1
Elden Ring	7−8	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	6−7	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +3600%	1−2 −3600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6	0−1
World of Tanks	40−45 +4300%	1−2 −4300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Far Cry 5	12−14	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−11	0−1
Metro Exodus	7−8	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8	0−1
Valorant	16−18	0−1

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18	0−1
Elden Ring	3−4	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18	0−1
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	19	0−1
Far Cry 5	7−8	0−1
Fortnite	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	5−6	0−1
Valorant	6−7	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.07	0.25
Recency	7 January 2020	1 October 2007
Chip lithography	7 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	41 Watt

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 2328% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 1185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 173.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1600 PRO in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook card while Radeon X1600 PRO is a desktop one.

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