Radeon RX 6600 XT vs Vega 8 Efficient

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot rated90
Place by popularitynot in top-10093
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data63.07
Power efficiencyno data18.36
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameRavenNavi 23
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date23 April 2018 (6 years ago)30 July 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$379

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 cores5122048
Core clock speed300 MHz1968 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz2589 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate35.20331.4
Floating-point processing power1.126 TFLOPS10.6 TFLOPS
ROPs864
TMUs32128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data190 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data256.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.2

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 April 2018 30 July 2021
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 160 Watt

Vega 8 Efficient has 357.1% lower power consumption.

RX 6600 XT, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Vega 8 Efficient and Radeon RX 6600 XT. We've got no test results to judge.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT
Radeon RX 6600 XT

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.8 57 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 8 Efficient on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 4324 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6600 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.