AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT vs AMD Radeon RX 6700M Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT and AMD Radeon RX 6700M share the same Navi 22 chip and RDNA 2.0 architecture, but they are engineered for entirely different environments. The desktop-oriented RX 6700 XT dominates the head-to-head record with 10 wins out of 11 benchmarks, while the mobile RX 6700M takes a single, significant victory. Their average benchmark scores sit close—27,425 for the XT against 25,633 for the M—but the distribution of wins reveals a clear performance hierarchy, with the desktop part leading by substantial margins in most tests.

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward choice for different use cases. The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is the unequivocal performance pick, winning 10 of 11 head-to-head tests with margins ranging from 3% to 79.8%. Its average benchmark score of 27,425 places it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, sitting essentially level with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (27,435, 0% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (27,565, -0.5%). For any workload where raw frame rates and compute throughput are paramount, the RX 6700 XT is the superior choice.

The AMD Radeon RX 6700M, despite its lower overall standing, is not without merit. Its average score of 25,633 puts it in the 71st percentile, just behind the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 (25,726, -0.4%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25,740, -0.4% delta). Crucially, the 6700M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test by a massive 43.2% margin, indicating a specific strength in that compute API. However, its 135 W TDP and integrated nature mean it exists for a different purpose entirely—mobile systems where the 6700 XT’s 230 W power draw and dual-slot cooler are physically impossible. The verdict hinges on platform: the XT for desktops demanding maximum performance, the M for laptops where its 135 W power envelope and IGP form factor are non-negotiable constraints.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same Navi 22 chip using TSMC’s 7 nm process, with identical transistor counts of 17,200 million and a die size of 335 mm². The architectural foundation—RDNA 2.0 with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support—is shared. The divergence begins with their generation classifications: the 6700 XT belongs to the Navi II (RX 6000) desktop generation, while the 6700M is part of the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) line, with the latter’s predecessor listed as Polaris Mobile.

The core configs differ meaningfully. The RX 6700 XT packs 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores, while the RX 6700M reduces those to 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 36 RT cores. This 10% reduction in shading units and 25% reduction in RT cores directly translates into lower theoretical throughput: the XT achieves 13.21 TFLOPS FP32 versus 11.06 TFLOPS for the M, and 26.43 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) versus 22.12 TFLOPS.

Memory is another clear differentiator. The 6700 XT features 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 6700M is cut down to 10 GB on a 160-bit bus, dropping bandwidth to 320.0 GB/s. Both run memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). Clock speeds tell the power story: the XT has a base clock of 2321 MHz, a game clock of 2424 MHz, and a boost of 2581 MHz, whereas the M runs at 1489 MHz base, 2300 MHz game, and 2400 MHz boost. The XT’s higher clocks and wider memory bus explain its rasterization rates of 165.2 GPixel/s and 413.0 GTexel/s, versus 153.6 GPixel/s and 345.6 GTexel/s for the M.

Physical and power characteristics are the final split. The 6700 XT is a dual-slot card, 267 mm long, requiring a 550 W suggested PSU and 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors. The 6700M is an IGP with no power connectors, no dimensions listed, and a 135 W TDP—less than 60% of the XT’s 230 W. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16, but display outputs differ: the XT offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the M’s outputs are listed as “Portable Device Dependent.”

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RX 6700 XT’s dominance is most pronounced in compute and legacy DirectX tests. In Passmark GPU Compute, it scores 9,336 against 5,191, a 79.8% advantage—the largest margin in the entire comparison. This aligns with the XT’s higher FP32 throughput and suggests substantial gains in non-gaming workloads like rendering or scientific compute. Similarly, Passmark G2D shows an 71.4% lead (951 vs 555), indicating faster 2D operations and desktop compositing.

In DirectX 9, the XT leads by 56.1% (242 vs 155), and in DirectX 10 by 34.8% (124 vs 92). These legacy API results suggest the desktop part handles older titles with far greater ease. DirectX 11 shows a 34.1% gap (173 vs 129), while DirectX 12 narrows to 18.5% (77 vs 65), hinting that the M closes some ground in modern, more efficient APIs. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test shows a 32% lead for the XT (2,435 vs 1,845), reinforcing a consistent advantage in current-generation gaming workloads.

Rasterization-focused tests further cement the XT’s position. Passmark G3D scores 19,786 for the XT versus 13,536 for the M, a 46.2% difference. Geekbench Metal shows a 42.4% lead (130,896 vs 91,911), while Geekbench Vulkan is far closer at just 3% (93,500 vs 90,816). This tight Vulkan result is notable—it suggests that in Vulkan-specific titles, the mobile part’s performance deficit shrinks dramatically, possibly due to driver optimizations or the benchmark’s workload characteristics.

The sole win for the RX 6700M comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 77,666 against the XT’s 44,152—a 43.2% reversal. This is a striking outlier. While the XT wins on raw compute specifications, the OpenCL benchmark clearly favors the mobile part, potentially due to different driver paths or memory access patterns in that specific test. It is the only data point where the M’s lower clocks and narrower memory bus do not translate into a loss.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT has an average benchmark score of 27,425, compared to 25,633 for the RX 6700M. The XT also holds a 72nd percentile ranking against all GPUs versus the M’s 71st.

Q: How much faster is the RX 6700 XT in the most demanding compute test?

A: In Passmark GPU Compute, the RX 6700 XT scores 9,336 versus 5,191 for the RX 6700M, a 79.8% advantage. This is the largest single-benchmark gap between the two.

Q: Does the RX 6700M win any benchmark at all?

A: Yes, the RX 6700M wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 77,666 against the XT’s 44,152, a 43.2% margin. This is its only victory in the 11-test head-to-head comparison.

Q: Are the memory configurations identical?

A: No. The RX 6700 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6700M has 10 GB on a 160-bit bus with 320.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both use 2000 MHz memory (16 Gbps effective).

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The RX 6700 XT has a 230 W TDP and requires a 550 W suggested PSU with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin connectors. The RX 6700M has a 135 W TDP, no power connectors, and is an IGP form factor.

Q: How close is the RX 6700 XT to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090?

A: The RX 6700 XT’s average score of 27,425 is 0.5% lower than the RTX 3090’s 27,565. It is effectively tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile, which scores 27,435 with a 0% delta.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6700 XT wins decisively in every category except one. Its largest victories come in compute-heavy and legacy API workloads: Passmark GPU Compute (79.8% lead), Passmark G2D (71.4%), and Passmark DirectX 9 (56.1%). For users running older games, 2D applications, or OpenCL-based compute tasks that follow the XT’s pattern, the desktop card is overwhelmingly superior. Its 12 GB memory and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth also give it a structural edge for high-resolution textures and bandwidth-sensitive workloads, while its 2581 MHz boost clock ensures higher sustained performance.

The RX 6700M’s single win in Geekbench OpenCL (43.2% ahead) is the standout exception. This makes the M the better choice specifically for OpenCL compute workloads that resemble that benchmark’s profile. Beyond that, its advantages are purely practical: at 135 W with no power connectors and an IGP form factor, it fits into laptops where the 230 W, dual-slot XT physically cannot. The M’s 10 GB memory and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth are lower, but its 36 RT cores still provide ray tracing capability, and its Vulkan score (90,816) trails the XT by only 3%, making it a viable option for Vulkan-based games where the power envelope is the primary constraint.

In summary, the RX 6700 XT is the pick for anyone building a desktop where performance is the sole metric. The RX 6700M is the pick for mobile systems requiring a capable GPU within a 135 W budget, with the caveat that its OpenCL strength is real but isolated. The 10-to-1 win record leaves little ambiguity about overall capability.