AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT wins 9 of 10 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the only loss coming in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the RX 6500 XT takes the win.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the biggest benchmark win?

A: In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 7600M XT scores 2048 versus the RX 6500 XT's 235, a delta of 771.5% — the single largest margin in the comparison.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The RX 7600M XT has an average benchmark score of 12710, while the RX 6500 XT averages 11842, putting the mobile part about 7.3% higher overall.

Q: Which GPU has the higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RX 7600M XT sits at the 52nd percentile, while the RX 6500 XT sits at the 51st percentile — a nearly identical overall standing despite the benchmark score gap.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each GPU?

A: The RX 7600M XT's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (delta -0.5%), while the RX 6500 XT's closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A (delta -1.3%).

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory capacity?

A: The RX 7600M XT offers 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, double the 4 GB found on the RX 6500 XT.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The RX 7600M XT is built on RDNA 3.0 with the Navi 33 chip, codenamed "Hotpink Bonefish," and belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation. The RX 6500 XT uses RDNA 2.0 with the Navi 24 chip and is part of the Navi II (RX 6000) family. Both are manufactured on TSMC's 6 nm process, but the transistor counts diverge sharply: the RX 7600M XT packs 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, while the RX 6500 XT has 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 65.2M/mm² for the RDNA 3 part versus 50.5M/mm² for the RDNA 2 part.

The compute architecture differs substantially. The RX 7600M XT features 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, alongside 32 ray tracing cores. The RX 6500 XT halves those counts: 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores. The FP32 compute throughput reflects this: the RX 7600M XT delivers 20.23 TFLOPS versus 5.765 TFLOPS for the RX 6500 XT. FP16 performance also scales accordingly, with 40.45 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 11.53 TFLOPS (2:1).

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The RX 7600M XT uses an 8 GB GDDR6 pool on a 128-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6500 XT is limited to 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, with 143.9 GB/s — roughly half the bandwidth. Clock behavior differs too: the RX 6500 XT runs higher clocks (2310 MHz base, 2815 MHz boost, 2610 MHz game) compared to the RX 7600M XT (1280 MHz base, 2469 MHz boost, 2023 MHz game), but the mobile part's larger execution resources more than compensate. The RX 7600M XT is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with no power connectors, while the RX 6500 XT is a dual-slot card requiring one 6-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600M XT dominates across the board in raw 3D rendering and compute workloads. Its largest advantages appear in DirectX 12 workloads: the 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2048 versus 235 represents a 771.5% lead, and PassMark DirectX 12 shows a 52.6% advantage (58 vs 38). In DirectX 11, the margin is 52.2% (137 vs 90), and DirectX 9 shows a 62% lead (175 vs 108). The mobile part also wins in compute-heavy tasks: Geekbench OpenCL shows a 55% advantage (74869 vs 48289), and PassMark GPU Compute shows 60.2% (7140 vs 4456).

The RX 6500 XT's single win comes in Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 54724 against the RX 7600M XT's 27793 — a 49.2% margin in its favor. This suggests the RDNA 2 part has a particularly optimized Vulkan driver path or that the benchmark favors its higher clock speeds in this specific API. It also wins on 2D performance only marginally in the PassMark G2D test (815 vs 894, a 9.7% loss for the RX 6500 XT), but that still counts as a loss.

For practical use, the RX 7600M XT is the clear choice for modern gaming, especially DirectX 12 titles and compute-heavy applications. The RX 6500 XT remains relevant for Vulkan-specific workloads where its driver efficiency shines, but its smaller memory footprint and fewer compute units limit its long-term viability for high-resolution textures or ray tracing.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT | AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Chip | Navi 33 | Navi 24 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 5,400 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 107 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 50.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1280 MHz | 2310 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2469 MHz | 2815 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2023 MHz | 2610 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 143.9 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 128 | 64 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 158.0 GPixel/s | 90.08 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 316.0 GTexel/s | 180.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 20.23 TFLOPS | 5.765 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 40.45 TFLOPS (2:1) | 11.53 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 120 W | 107 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | — | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where the RX 7600M XT scores 2048 against the RX 6500 XT's 235. That 771.5% delta is not a close contest; it reflects the mobile part's 8 GB memory, 128-bit bus, and 3.5x larger transistor budget.

Geekbench OpenCL shows a 55% win for the RX 7600M XT (74869 vs 48289). The margin tracks the FP32 compute difference: 20.23 TFLOPS versus 5.765 TFLOPS is a 3.5x raw throughput advantage, though the benchmark only captures a 1.55x score gap — suggesting memory bandwidth or driver overhead limits the mobile part. In contrast, Geekbench Vulkan flips the script: the RX 6500 XT wins 54724 to 27793, a 49.2% margin. This is the only test where the desktop card wins, and it does so decisively, likely due to its higher boost clock (2815 MHz vs 2469 MHz) and the Vulkan API's sensitivity to clock speed over raw core count.

PassMark DirectX tests show consistent wins for the RX 7600M XT across all API generations. DirectX 10 shows a 26.7% lead (76 vs 60), DirectX 11 shows 52.2% (137 vs 90), and DirectX 12 shows 52.6% (58 vs 38). The DirectX 9 test shows a 62% margin (175 vs 108), and the G3D composite shows 44.7% (13907 vs 9608). The G2D test is the closest overall, with the RX 7600M XT winning 894 to 815, a 9.7% margin.

GPU compute performance reinforces the mobile part's advantage: PassMark GPU Compute shows 7140 versus 4456, a 60.2% delta. This aligns with the larger texture rate (316.0 GTexel/s vs 180.2 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (158.0 GPixel/s vs 90.08 GPixel/s). The RX 7600M XT also has double the ROPs and TMUs, which directly benefits both rasterization and compute workloads.

Overall, the benchmark data tells a clear story: the RX 7600M XT wins 9 of 10 tests with an average score of 12710 versus 11842 for the RX 6500 XT. The only exception is Vulkan, where the RX 6500 XT's higher clocks and efficient driver stack give it a 49.2% edge. For anyone choosing between these two, the RX 7600M XT is the stronger performer in every DirectX generation and in OpenCL, while the RX 6500 XT remains a niche pick for Vulkan-specific applications.