AMD Radeon RX 580 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 580 has an average benchmark score of 12,928, while the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT scores 12,710. The RX 580 is ahead by roughly 1.7% in this aggregate measure, despite winning only 1 of the 10 head-to-head tests.

Q: How do the two cards compare in overall GPU percentile ranking?

A: The RX 580 sits in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 7600M XT sits in the 52nd percentile. Despite the RX 7600M XT dominating individual benchmarks, its percentile ranking is essentially tied with the older card.

Q: Which GPU wins in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test?

A: The RX 7600M XT scores 2,048 versus the RX 580's 1,005. That is a 50.9% advantage for the RX 7600M XT, making it one of the largest deltas in the entire head-to-head comparison.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the RX 580 beats the RX 7600M XT?

A: Yes, in Geekbench Vulkan the RX 580 scores 45,173 against the RX 7600M XT's 27,793. The RX 580 leads by 62.5% in that specific test, which is the only win for the older card across all 10 benchmarks.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU based on average score?

A: The RX 580's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile at 12,940 (0.1% higher), followed by the GTX 1660 SUPER at 12,986 (0.4% higher). The RX 7600M XT's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 at 12,773 (0.5% higher), with the Tesla K20Xm at 12,625 (0.7% lower).

Q: How does memory bandwidth differ between the two?

A: The RX 580 has a 256-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 7600M XT has a narrower 128-bit bus but faster GDDR6 memory, achieving 288.0 GB/s. The RX 7600M XT delivers 12.5% more bandwidth despite half the bus width.

Architecture Differences

The RX 580 and RX 7600M XT represent two distinct generations of AMD GPU architecture, separated by roughly six years of design evolution. The RX 580 uses the Polaris 20 chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The RX 7600M XT uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC.

The transistor counts reveal the scale of change. The RX 580 packs 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, giving a density of 24.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The RX 7600M XT crams 13,300 million transistors onto a smaller 204 mm² die, achieving 65.2 million per square millimeter — nearly 2.7 times the density. This density advantage comes despite the RX 7600M XT having fewer shading units (2,048 versus 2,304) and fewer texture mapping units (128 versus 144).

The RX 7600M XT doubles the render output units to 64 versus 32 on the RX 580, which directly contributes to its much higher pixel rate of 158.0 GPixel/s versus 42.88 GPixel/s. The newer card also adds 32 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RX 580. Memory technology advances from GDDR5 to GDDR6, with the RX 7600M XT using 18 Gbps effective memory speed versus 8 Gbps on the RX 580.

Clock speeds tell a similar story of generational improvement. The RX 580 boosts to 1340 MHz, while the RX 7600M XT boosts to 2469 MHz with a game clock of 2023 MHz. This nearly doubled boost clock, combined with architectural efficiency, produces dramatically higher compute throughput: 20.23 TFLOPS FP32 versus 6.175 TFLOPS. The FP16 ratio also differs — the RX 580 runs at 1:1 (6.175 TFLOPS), while the RX 7600M XT runs at 2:1 (40.45 TFLOPS).

API support shows the newer card's forward-looking design. The RX 580 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 7600M XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface also advances from PCIe 3.0 x16 to PCIe 4.0 x16.

Power characteristics differ substantially. The RX 580 is a dual-slot card with a 185 W TDP, requiring a 450 W suggested PSU and a single 8-pin connector. The RX 7600M XT is an integrated-class part (IGP form factor) with a 120 W TDP and no power connectors, reflecting its mobile-oriented design. The RX 580's production status is end-of-life with a launch MSRP of 229 USD, while the RX 7600M XT remains active in production.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear performance hierarchy, but the overall averages tell a more nuanced story. The RX 7600M XT wins 9 of 10 head-to-head benchmarks, often by substantial margins. Its wins range from 14% in Passmark G2D to 56.2% in Passmark DirectX 11. The only exception is Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 580 leads by 62.5%.

However, the average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 12,928 for the RX 580 versus 12,710 for the RX 7600M XT. This apparent contradiction stems from the massive Vulkan outlier favoring the RX 580, which offsets many of the newer card's wins in the aggregate calculation. The percentile rankings reflect this near-parity, with the RX 580 at the 53rd percentile and the RX 7600M XT at the 52nd.

For users prioritizing modern DirectX 12 workloads, the RX 7600M XT is the clear choice — it leads by 50.9% in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and by 25.9% in Passmark DirectX 12. For Vulkan-centric applications, the RX 580's 62.5% advantage is decisive and cannot be ignored.

The RX 7600M XT also offers architectural benefits that don't appear in raw benchmark scores: ray tracing support, PCIe 4.0, and DirectX 12 Ultimate. These features make it the more future-proof option despite the near-identical average scores. The RX 580's end-of-life status and lack of modern feature support suggest it should only be chosen when Vulkan performance is the sole priority.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. The RX 580 uses a 14 nm Polaris 20 chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, while the RX 7600M XT uses a 6 nm Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0. Transistor counts are 5,700 million versus 13,300 million, and die sizes are 232 mm² versus 204 mm².

Clock specifications show the RX 7600M XT's advantage: base clocks are 1257 MHz versus 1280 MHz (nearly identical), but boost clocks are 1340 MHz versus 2469 MHz. The RX 7600M XT also has a defined game clock of 2023 MHz, which the RX 580 lacks. Memory clocks differ dramatically: 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) on the RX 580 versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) on the RX 7600M XT.

Memory configuration is a mixed picture. Both have 8 GB capacity, but the RX 580 uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus for 256.0 GB/s, while the RX 7600M XT uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus for 288.0 GB/s. Compute units differ in composition: the RX 580 has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the RX 7600M XT has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Only the RX 7600M XT has 32 ray tracing cores.

Performance rates favor the RX 7600M XT substantially: pixel rate is 158.0 GPixel/s versus 42.88 GPixel/s, texture rate is 316.0 GTexel/s versus 193.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 20.23 TFLOPS versus 6.175 TFLOPS. The FP16 rates are 40.45 TFLOPS versus 6.175 TFLOPS.

Physical and power specifications also diverge. The RX 580 is dual-slot with a 185 W TDP, one 8-pin connector, and a 450 W suggested PSU. The RX 7600M XT is IGP form factor with 120 W TDP and no power connectors. The RX 580 measures 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length; the RX 7600M XT has no listed dimensions. Display outputs differ: the RX 580 offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the RX 7600M XT is portable-device dependent. API support includes DirectX 12 (12_0) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2), and Vulkan 1.3 versus 1.4. Release dates are 2017-04-17 versus 2023-01-03.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RX 7600M XT dominates the head-to-head results with 9 wins out of 10 tests. The largest margin comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 7600M XT scores 74,869 against the RX 580's 37,453 — a 50% advantage. Passmark GPU Compute shows a similar pattern: 7,140 versus 3,488, a 51.1% lead for the newer card.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 7600M XT scores 2,048 versus 1,005, a 50.9% advantage. This benchmark likely reflects the architectural efficiency of RDNA 3.0 in modern DirectX 12 workloads. Passmark DirectX 11 shows the RX 7600M XT at 137 versus 60, a 56.2% lead — the largest percentage win in the entire comparison.

The RX 7600M XT also wins across legacy DirectX tests: DirectX 10 at 76 versus 46 (39.5% lead), DirectX 9 at 175 versus 124 (29.1% lead), and DirectX 12 at 58 versus 43 (25.9% lead). Passmark G3D shows 13,907 versus 8,813, a 36.6% advantage. Even the 2D test favors the RX 7600M XT: 894 versus 769, a 14% lead.

The RX 580's sole victory comes in Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 45,173 against the RX 7600M XT's 27,793. This 62.5% margin is the largest win for either card in any test. This benchmark anomaly significantly impacts the average score comparison, pulling the RX 580's aggregate close to parity despite losing 9 of 10 tests.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600M XT wins in compute-heavy and modern API workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 74,869 is double the RX 580's 37,453, making it the superior choice for OpenCL compute tasks. Passmark GPU Compute shows a similar pattern with 7,140 versus 3,488. For DirectX 11 gaming, the 56.2% advantage in Passmark DirectX 11 (137 versus 60) is the strongest single win. Modern DirectX 12 titles also favor the RX 7600M XT, as shown by the 50.9% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12.

The RX 580 wins exclusively in Vulkan workloads. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 45,173 versus 27,793 represents a 62.5% advantage. For applications built on Vulkan, the older card is surprisingly competitive and even dominant. This is the sole scenario where the RX 580 is the recommended choice based on benchmark data.

The RX 7600M XT also wins across all legacy DirectX tests (9, 10, 11, and 12), making it the better all-around option for backward compatibility. Its 64 ROPs contribute to a pixel rate of 158.0 GPixel/s, nearly four times the RX 580's 42.88 GPixel/s, which likely explains its strong performance in fill-rate-bound scenarios.

For users who need ray tracing, the RX 7600M XT is the only option with 32 ray tracing cores. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility offer modern feature sets that the RX 580 cannot match. The RX 580's higher average benchmark score (12,928 versus 12,710) and 53rd percentile ranking provide a statistical edge, but this is driven almost entirely by the Vulkan outlier rather than consistent performance.