At this time, we’re taking our first have a look at AMD’s new Radeon RX 7600 XT, which is mainly an RX 7600 with a 16 GB VRAM buffer. It in all probability might have, and maybe ought to have, been named the 7600 16GB. Luckily, it isn’t an inferior product sharing the identical title. The bar is low, we all know, however through the years, we have witnessed some doubtful practices.
For now, we’re keen to find what the 16GB 7600 has to supply. As earlier than, the 7600 XT is basically a 7600 with double the VRAM, with the one different alteration being a minor 4% improve within the core clocks, from 2,655 MHz to 2,755 MHz. This adjustment is one thing that might be manually utilized to any 7600, so it is hardly a novel characteristic of the 7600 XT.
So, just like the 7600, the XT mannequin consists of 2,048 cores, 128 texture mapping items, and 64 ROPs. It additionally boasts 32 TR cores, 2 MB of L2 cache, and 32 MB of L3 cache. The reminiscence subsystem stays unchanged, other than the reminiscence capability, that means the 7600 XT makes use of a 128-bit broad reminiscence bus with 18 Gbps reminiscence for a bandwidth of 288 GB/s.
To double the VRAM capability, AMD adopted a clamshell design, just like Nvidia’s method with the 16GB RTX 4060 Ti. Nevertheless, whereas Nvidia charged a $100 premium for the additional reminiscence, AMD is charging $60, elevating the MSRP from $270 for the RX 7600 to $330 for the 7600 XT.
Potential patrons are seemingly questioning whether or not the 7600 XT is price the additional $60 over the usual mannequin. Addressing this query is difficult, as measuring the advantages of 16 GB of VRAM will be advanced for a number of causes.
First, even when a recreation exceeds 8 GB of VRAM utilization, and there are lots of examples, it isn’t at all times obvious within the body fee counter. To keep away from efficiency points, most video games merely do not load textures that exceed the graphics reminiscence capability, resulting in a visible downgrade with blurry textures, lacking particulars, or noticeable pop-ins.
For recreation builders, that is preferable to options comparable to crashing or severely impaired efficiency, which can frustrate avid gamers. Curiously, most avid gamers do not attribute these points to inadequate VRAM.
Nonetheless, we’ve witnessed situations the place recreation efficiency dramatically decreases, and even crash resulting from VRAM shortages, however that is much less widespread. It is essential to notice that benchmarking an 8 GB and 16 GB graphics card and solely trying on the FPS counter does not inform the entire story, so concentrate on that as we go over the numbers.
For a visible comparability of how 8 GB and 16 GB reminiscence buffers carry out in trendy video games, we advocate trying out our 16 GB RTX 4060 Ti overview. The findings there are relevant to all 8 GB and 16 GB graphics playing cards, so it is pointless to repeat all that testing.
For our assessments, we’re utilizing a Ryzen 7 7800X3D take a look at system with 32 GB of DDR5-6000 reminiscence, and the newest show drivers. All knowledge has been validated and up to date for this overview. We have examined 12 video games, some with and with out ray tracing, specializing in 1080p and 1440p resolutions. Let’s have a look…
Benchmarks
First up, we’ve Resident Evil 4 and at 1080p, we’re taking a look at a surprisingly massive 16% uplift for the 7600 XT over the usual 7600, making it simply 6% slower than the RTX 4060. It is a important enchancment, and it seems that the additional VRAM is useful right here.
Oddly, the margin is decreased to 9% at 1440p, suggesting that there are different limitations impacting the Navi 33 GPU greater than VRAM capability. In any case, the 7600 XT now matches the RTX 4060 with a median of 71 fps.
Transferring on to A Plague Story: Requiem, at 1080p the 7600 XT is simply 3% sooner than the 7600, with the distinction right here being purely the manufacturing unit overclock. Nevertheless, because of this the 7600 XT is now 11% sooner than the RTX 4060.
Then, at 1440p, the 7600 XT is simply 2% sooner than the usual mannequin, and 6% sooner than the RTX 4060, displaying related efficiency throughout the board. An essential comparability to notice is with the 6700 XT, which at the moment prices round $330, the identical because the 7600 XT. Right here, the newer Radeon GPU is 24% slower, which is kind of disappointing.
Subsequent, we’ve Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty, the place we observe a modest 8% uplift for the 7600 XT over the 7600, making the XT 6% sooner than the RTX 4060.
At 1440p, there is a 6% improve for the 7600 XT, making it 8% sooner than the RTX 4060, although additionally it is 7% slower than the 6700 XT.
Efficiency in Dying Mild 2 is comparable. Right here, we discover a mere 2% uplift when shifting from the 7600 to the brand new XT mannequin. With a median of 96 fps, it matches the RTX 4060 precisely.
The story is comparable at 1440p, the place the 7600 XT averages 63 fps, one body greater than the 7600, however one lower than the RTX 4060, and considerably lower than the 6700 XT, being 17% slower than the earlier technology GPU.
The efficiency uplift in Watch Canine: Legion at 1080p is barely higher, however not extraordinary, with a 6% improve. This makes the 7600 XT 9% sooner than the RTX 4060.
At 1440p, the margins stay the identical; the 7600 XT continues to be simply 6% sooner than the usual 7600. It is also 11% slower than the 6700 XT, which is kind of underwhelming.
In Forza Horizon 5 at 1080p, the 7600 XT supplied a further 10% efficiency, averaging 114 fps. This additionally meant it was 13% sooner than the RTX 4060, and simply 3% slower than the 6700 XT.
The extra VRAM turns into much more advantageous at 1440p, with the 7600 XT now 13% sooner than the usual 7600 and a substantial 22% sooner than the RTX 4060.
Warhammer III is not a really demanding title when it comes to VRAM, a minimum of not by trendy requirements, so 8 GB of VRAM is greater than adequate. Due to this fact, the 7600 XT’s solely benefit is its core overclock, offering a mere 3% improve in comparison with the 7600.
At 1440p, it is simply 2% sooner, averaging 55 fps, mainly matching the efficiency of the RTX 4060.
Transferring on to Spider-Man Remastered, we’re seeing extra of the identical. The 7600 XT exhibits only a 5% improve over the usual mannequin, making it 13% slower than the RTX 4060.
Rising the decision to 1440p additional narrows the already small margin, with the XT providing solely a 3% enchancment, although now it is simply 6% slower than the RTX 4060.
In Hogwarts Legacy, once more at 1080p, the 7600 XT is 5% sooner than each the 7600 and the RTX 4060.
Stepping as much as 1440p reveals a mere 4% efficiency improve, however that was sufficient to surpass the RTX 4060 by double digits, providing 13% better efficiency.
Halo Infinite is an fascinating title to incorporate on this overview as a result of it is an ideal instance of the issue in testing VRAM capability. As an example, utilizing the extremely high quality preset requires greater than 8 GB of VRAM. Nevertheless, the 7600 XT is simply 2% sooner than the 7600. On this recreation, inadequate reminiscence does not impression efficiency, however leads to lacking textures, a distinction we have demonstrated between 8 GB and 16 GB GPUs up to now.
The lacking texture subject is much more noticeable at 1440p, however once more, the body counter exhibits virtually no distinction between the 7600 XT and 7600.
The Final of Us Half I, however, does endure a efficiency hit when working out of VRAM. At 1080p, the 7600 XT is 20% sooner than the 7600 and an enormous 58% sooner when evaluating 1% lows. Due to this fact, the elevated VRAM capability is of great profit right here, even at 1080p.
Then, at 1440p, the 8 GB playing cards are a stuttery mess within the recreation space we use for testing. The 7600 XT resolves this subject, and whereas the body charges aren’t excellent (sub-optimal, we might say), the sport is definitely nonetheless playable at 47 fps.
Lastly, we’ve Hitman 3, the place the 7600 XT gives a good 10% efficiency uplift, attaining 142 fps in comparison with 129 fps with the usual 7600. That additionally made it an enormous 30% sooner than the RTX 4060.
At 1440p, we’re nonetheless taking a look at a ten% enchancment for the XT over the usual mannequin, which meant it was 28% sooner than the RTX 4060.
One draw back to including extra VRAM is elevated energy utilization, and we see this in Hitman 3, the place complete system utilization elevated by 16%. In comparison with the RTX 4060, complete system utilization is 33% better for the 7600 XT. Nevertheless, because the 7600 XT was 28% sooner on this take a look at, efficiency per watt finally ends up being very related.
Nevertheless, effectivity is far worse in a recreation like Spider-Man Remastered. Right here, the 7600 XT pushed complete system utilization 33% increased than that of the RTX 4060, whereas delivering 6% much less efficiency. This isn’t a great outcome.
12 Sport Common
Now, it is time to overview the 12-game common knowledge, beginning with the 1080p outcomes. Right here, the Radeon 7600 XT was, on common, 8% sooner than the usual RX 7600 and 6% sooner than the RTX 4060. That is roughly what we’d count on to see throughout a variety of video games.
At 1440p, the 7600 XT was simply 5% sooner than the 7600 when evaluating common body charges, however a way more substantial 19% margin will be seen when evaluating 1% lows. That is a formidable set of outcomes for the 7600 XT, although it was additionally 12% slower than the 6700 XT.
Though we did not give attention to the 4K knowledge as this GPU is not designed for 4K gaming, we do have that knowledge. Let’s rapidly overview the 12-game common at 4K. Right here, the 7600 XT was 9% sooner on common and 25% sooner when evaluating 1% lows. It additionally considerably outperformed the RTX 4060, rising the common body fee by 23%.
Ray Tracing Efficiency
Subsequent, we’re inspecting ray tracing efficiency, beginning with Resident Evil 4. Utilizing the ray tracing high quality preset at 1080p, the 7600 XT was actually no sooner than the 7600, making it 18% slower than the RTX 4060. It is a disappointing outcome.
A Plague Story: Requiem severely challenges 8 GB GPUs when utilizing the extremely high quality preset with ray tracing enabled. The 7600 is totally unusable, and the RTX 4060 is not a lot better. The 4060 Ti 8 GB appears okay based mostly on the 41 fps common body fee, however the 1% lows reveal a poor expertise. The truth that the 1% lows of the 7600 XT are 56% better is important, nevertheless it’s the discrepancy between the 1% lows and the common body fee that really illustrates the difficulty.
As an example, there is a 43% margin between the 1% lows and the common body fee of the 7600 XT, however a 128% distinction for the 8 GB 4060 Ti. Nonetheless, the 7600 XT is kind of gradual right here, so you would need to use upscaling, which considerably degrades visible high quality at 1080p, or simply disable ray tracing altogether. In that case, the 8 GB fashions carry out adequately.
Now, Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty has been examined utilizing the ‘ray tracing medium’ preset at 1080p. Regardless of this, body charges are very low on these extra entry-level GPUs. Even the RTX 4060 was good for simply 38 fps on common, and once more, utilizing DLSS to spice up efficiency is not an optimum answer given the poor upscaling high quality at 1080p.
The 7600 XT was 17% sooner than the 7600 but additionally 26% slower than the RTX 4060. Whereas ray tracing assist on the GeForce GPU is questionable right here, it is virtually ineffective on the Radeon GPUs.
Spider-Man Remastered has been examined utilizing the high-quality preset with high-quality ray tracing, and at 1080p, the efficiency is great. The 7600 XT delivered 104 fps on common, which is excellent. Nevertheless, it is actually no higher than the usual 7600. This additionally meant that it was 17% slower than the RTX 4060.
The 7600 XT fell simply wanting 60 fps in Star Wars Jedi: Survivor utilizing ray tracing with the Epic preset, making it simply 5% slower than the RTX 4060. It was 10% sooner than the usual 7600 but additionally 11% slower than the 6700 XT.
Lastly, we’ve Fortnite, and the Epic high quality settings with {hardware} ray tracing enabled are a bit an excessive amount of for the 7600 XT, because it managed simply 35 fps on common. It is a 9% improve from the 7600, however 20% slower than the RTX 4060.
Ray Tracing Common Efficiency
Throughout the six video games we examined utilizing ray tracing, the Radeon 7600 XT was on common 30% sooner than the usual 7600 or an enormous 64% sooner when evaluating 1% lows.
That is a severe efficiency uplift by merely doubling the VRAM, however in fact, as we noticed in “A Plague Story: Requiem” that was the distinction between playable and utterly unplayable efficiency.
Nonetheless, regardless of having simply 8GB of VRAM, the GeForce RTX 4060 was sooner total, delivering 13% better efficiency on common, although the 1% lows have been a lot the identical.
Value noting is also that the Intel Arc A770 was as quick or usually sooner than the 7600 XT throughout these ray tracing titles, making it not simply cheaper, but additionally higher for ray tracing.
Price Per Body (MSRP)
Now, it is time to take a look at the fee per body knowledge, beginning with an MSRP comparability. Sadly, with an additional $60 tacked onto the worth, the Radeon 7600 XT is far worse worth than the unique 7600, rising the fee per body based mostly on our 1440p knowledge by 17%.
That mentioned, the additional benefit of doubling the VRAM is not at all times realized in these benchmarks, as famous in Halo Infinite, for instance. So, the truth that the 7600 XT and RTX 4060 signify related worth when it comes to price per body is noteworthy. In video games like Halo, the 7600 XT can allow a a lot increased visible expertise as it may load all required textures.
Furthermore, in order for you 16 GB from the present Nvidia lineup, you need to purchase the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB, which is barely 20% sooner than the 7600 XT, regardless of costing 36% extra on the new $450 MSRP. Anyway, MSRPs do not at all times replicate real-world pricing, so let’s check out present retail costs.
Price Per Body (Retail)
Within the present market, the Radeon 7600 XT does not look nice, and that is as a result of for roughly the identical cash, you should purchase the Radeon 6700 XT, which nonetheless packs 12 GB of VRAM however was on common 13% sooner.
Even perhaps higher is the Radeon RX 6800, a 16 GB graphics card which at the moment prices 27% extra however can be 42% sooner, and far more viable in conditions the place you need to allow ray tracing, for instance. There’s additionally Intel’s Arc A770, packing 16 GB of VRAM for simply $300, making it higher worth than the 7600 XT.
Temps and Clocks
Sapphire Pulse 7600 XT
Subsequent, let’s check out some customized board accomplice designs, noting that there is not a reference mannequin model of the 7600 XT. The mannequin we used for testing is Sapphire’s Pulse, a fairly compact dual-fan mannequin powered by twin 8-pin PCIe energy connectors. Sadly, it does not assist twin BIOS performance.
For testing, it was put in inside an ATX case with a room temperature of 21°C and was positioned underneath gaming load for an hour. After an hour, the junction temperature peaked at 69°C with a GPU hotspot temperature of 87°C. This was achieved with a fan pace of simply 1,300 RPM, so a really spectacular outcome. The reminiscence additionally peaked at 86°C, which is appropriate, and clocked at 2,238 MHz with the cores usually working at 2,595 MHz.
XFX Speedster Qick 309 7600 XT
Additionally readily available is the XFX Speedster Qick 309 7600 XT, a a lot bigger, higher-end-looking mannequin. The Qick 308 RX 7600 is an MSRP mannequin, obtainable for $270, so it is attainable the Qick 309 RX 7600 XT can even be an MSRP mannequin, promoting for $330. If that’s the case, it is a formidable mannequin for that worth, packing twin BIOS assist, a triple fan cooler, an enormous heatsink, and a full-size aluminum backplate.
Efficiency-wise, it is superb. The junction temperature peaked at simply 62°C, and the hotspot hit 83°C, each barely decrease than the Sapphire Pulse, although the fan pace was barely increased at 1,600 RPM. We additionally noticed an analogous reminiscence temperature at 85°C, however the important distinction was the working clock pace, because the cores usually clocked at 2,750 MHz, 6% increased than the Sapphire mannequin, yielding a great outcome for XFX.
Gigabyte Gaming OC 7600 XT
Lastly, we’ve the Gigabyte Gaming OC 7600 XT, and these Gaming OC fashions have been considerably inconsistent in efficiency. This 7600 XT model seems fairly promising; it is a comparatively massive mannequin outfitted with a triple fan cooler, has a really massive heatsink, and features a full-size aluminum backplate.
Sadly, it was fairly loud with a fan pace of two,000 RPM, and regardless of this, the working temperatures weren’t distinctive. The junction temperature of 56°C was commendable, however the GPU hotspot nonetheless reached 84°C, a level increased than that of the XFX mannequin. The reminiscence temperature, nevertheless, was passable, peaking at simply 78°C, which is a 7°C enchancment over the Speedster Qick 309. Total, it is a first rate product, however missing twin BIOS assist for a characteristic like a silent BIOS, it does not supply essentially the most optimum out-of-the-box expertise. The temperature will seemingly be affected if the fan pace is decreased to 1,600 or 1,300 RPM.
What We Discovered
There you’ve it: AMD’s new Radeon RX 7600 XT. We have simply examined a mess of benchmarks, so what can we make of it? Evaluating this product is difficult as a result of the fee per body knowledge does not inform the complete story, and that is as a result of the body fee knowledge is not at all times apples to apples, and we hate that.
Sadly, resulting from how most video games deal with inadequate VRAM, cautious evaluation of picture high quality is important. Nevertheless, this may be troublesome, as many video games require prolonged intervals of play to fill the VRAM buffer. For instance, Halo can take 15-Half-hour earlier than 8 GB playing cards encounter points. After they do, the FPS counter does not replicate this; as an alternative, you may discover blurry textures and lacking particulars.
With out query, having 16 GB of VRAM at your disposal is best than 8 GB. Nevertheless, the Navi 33 GPU is not tremendous highly effective, so that you’re much less prone to run at resolutions and high quality settings that can saturate an 8 GB buffer. Though it definitely can and does occur, the frequency will rely upon the video games you play.
There’s additionally the future-proofing side. How effectively will the 8 GB Radeon 7600 age over the following few years in comparison with the 7600 XT? Most likely not very effectively, despite the fact that these are lower-end GPUs. As an example, the 8 GB model of the RX 580 performs considerably higher than the 4 GB mannequin utilizing medium to low high quality settings in trendy video games, and you may flip texture high quality up for a a lot improved visible expertise.
So, naturally, we will count on the identical development with 8 GB vs. 16 GB graphics playing cards, and we’ll in all probability see that come to gentle over the following few years. We’re already seeing indicators of it, however we count on it to develop into extra widespread quickly.
We expect a $60 premium for an additional 8 GB of VRAM is cheap, however the beginning worth is problematic. After we reviewed the Radeon RX 7600 about 8 months in the past, we acknowledged it ought to price not more than $230, and we stand by that evaluation.
Our hope was that the 16 GB model would worth match the RTX 4060, successfully eliminating the GeForce competitors at that worth level. Nevertheless, at $330, it is a relatively costly entry-level GPU, and one might argue that the previous-gen Radeon 6700 XT, priced round $340, is a greater deal. It does not considerably problem the RTX 4060 both, which stays a viable choice, providing related efficiency and worth, with typically higher ray tracing efficiency – although the utility of RT assist at this efficiency degree is debatable.
The Arc A770 16 GB at $300 is a superb deal, too, although it could include some points, as we have but to check an Arc GPU in a variety of video games with out encountering a minimum of one drawback. However issues are bettering on that entrance.
In the end, the Radeon RX 7600 XT is one other irritating launch from AMD as they narrowly miss the mark once more. Had they priced this GPU at $300, it could have matched the worth of the 6700 XT, coming in a bit slower, but additionally a bit cheaper, and with extra VRAM. It will have eradicated the RTX 4060 from rivalry – and whereas probably doing the identical to a $270 RX 7600 – AMD might have discounted or discontinued that product. Ideally, AMD ought to have launched the Radeon RX 7600 at $300 eight months in the past, however with 16 GB of reminiscence. It will have been a a lot clearer and more sensible choice for everybody, everybody however Nvidia.
Whereas it is good to have extra choices, and we do desire the 16 GB 7600 XT over the 8 GB 7600, it isn’t a product we will extremely advocate, and it is a shut name between this and the RTX 4060.
Buying Shortcuts:
- AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT on Amazon
- Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 on Amazon
- AMD Radeon RX 7600 on Amazon
- Intel Arc A770 on Amazon
- Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Tremendous on Amazon
- Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Tremendous on Amazon
- AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT on Amazon
- Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 on Amazon
- AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D on Amazon