AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT vs AMD Radeon RX 7800M Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 7800M and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT represent two distinct generations of AMD graphics technology, with the mobile-focused 7800M squaring off against a desktop-class 6700 XT. Across the ten head-to-head benchmarks, the RX 7800M secures six wins while the RX 6700 XT takes four, but the margin of victory tells a more complex story than the raw win count. The RX 7800M dominates in modern compute and API-heavy workloads, whereas the RX 6700 XT retains advantages in legacy DirectX tests and 2D performance, making the choice highly dependent on the target application.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory for the RX 7800M comes in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 120,778 against the RX 6700 XT’s 44,152, a staggering 173.6% lead. This is not a marginal improvement; it reflects a fundamental architectural shift in compute throughput. The RX 7800M nearly triples the raw compute score of its predecessor-generation rival, indicating that for OpenCL workloads, the newer part is in a different performance class entirely.

In the Vulkan API benchmark, the RX 7800M also shows clear superiority, posting 126,668 points compared to 93,500 for the RX 6700 XT, a 35.5% advantage. This gap is substantial and suggests that the RDNA 3.0 architecture has significantly improved its low-level API efficiency. Similarly, in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), the RX 7800M scores 2,994 versus 2,435, a 23% lead, confirming that modern DirectX 12 titles will run noticeably faster on the newer mobile chip.

The RX 7800M also edges out the RX 6700 XT in Passmark DirectX 11 (176 vs 173, +1.7%) and DirectX 12 (89 vs 77, +15.6%). The DX12 result is particularly telling, as it reinforces the trend seen in 3DMark. In Passmark GPU Compute, the two are virtually tied, with the RX 7800M at 9,342 and the RX 6700 XT at 9,336, a negligible 0.1% difference. This near-parity in compute suggests that while the RX 7800M excels in certain API paths, raw compute throughput in this specific benchmark is nearly identical.

The RX 6700 XT fights back in legacy and 2D workloads. Its biggest win is in Passmark DirectX 9, where it scores 242 against the RX 7800M’s 174, a 28.1% advantage. This is a significant margin and indicates that older DirectX 9 titles, which are still common in esports and legacy libraries, run considerably better on the RX 6700 XT. In Passmark DirectX 10, the RX 6700 XT leads 124 to 99, a 20.2% gap. The RX 6700 XT also wins Passmark G3D (19,786 vs 17,613, +11%) and Passmark G2D (951 vs 892, +6.2%), showing that in the overall 3D graphics score and 2D operations, the desktop card retains a competitive edge.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The RX 7800M uses the Navi 32 chip on RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 5 nm process. This is a significant manufacturing advantage over the RX 6700 XT, which utilizes the Navi 22 chip on RDNA 2.0 architecture and TSMC’s 7 nm node. The 5 nm process allows the RX 7800M to pack 28,100 million transistors into a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2 million per mm². In contrast, the RX 6700 XT houses 17,200 million transistors on a slightly smaller 335 mm² die, with a density of just 51.3 million per mm². This density advantage is a direct result of the newer process node and enables the RX 7800M to deliver higher performance in a more compact footprint.

The compute resources differ substantially. The RX 7800M features 3,840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 96 raster operation pipelines (ROPs). It also includes 60 ray tracing cores. The RX 6700 XT, by comparison, has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores. This means the RX 7800M has 50% more shading units, 50% more TMUs, and 50% more ROPs, a near-uniform scaling of execution resources. The FP32 performance reflects this: the RX 7800M delivers 35.87 TFLOPS, while the RX 6700 XT manages only 13.21 TFLOPS, making the newer part 2.7 times more powerful in single-precision floating-point math.

The memory subsystems are similar in capacity and bus width but differ in bandwidth. Both GPUs carry 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus. However, the RX 7800M operates its memory at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), yielding 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6700 XT runs its memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), providing 384.0 GB/s. This 12.5% bandwidth advantage for the RX 7800M is modest but contributes to its higher performance in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The FP16 capabilities also diverge: the RX 7800M offers 35.87 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the RX 6700 XT provides 26.43 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning the RX 7800M has greater raw FP16 throughput despite the different ratio.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7800M is the clear winner for modern compute-heavy applications and next-generation gaming. Its 173.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and 35.5% lead in Vulkan make it the superior choice for machine learning inference, scientific computing, or any workload leveraging OpenCL or Vulkan compute. The 23% advantage in 3DMark Steel Nomad, which is a modern DX12 benchmark, indicates that current AAA titles running on DirectX 12 will favor the RX 7800M. The 15.6% lead in Passmark DirectX 12 further solidifies this, showing that the newer architecture handles the latest API features more efficiently. The RX 7800M is also the better option for workloads that stress raw FP32 throughput, given its 35.87 TFLOPS versus 13.21 TFLOPS.

The RX 6700 XT, conversely, is the winner for legacy API compatibility and 2D desktop workloads. Its 28.1% lead in DirectX 9 and 20.2% lead in DirectX 10 make it the better choice for older game titles, many of which still rely on these APIs. The 11% advantage in Passmark G3D suggests that in the aggregate 3D performance metric, which may weight legacy APIs, the RX 6700 XT holds its ground. The 6.2% win in G2D indicates faster 2D operations, which can matter for desktop rendering or 2D applications. For users who play older games or run applications that are not fully optimized for DirectX 12 or Vulkan, the RX 6700 XT offers a more balanced performance profile.

The Passmark GPU Compute result, showing a 0.1% difference, means that in at least one specific compute benchmark, the two GPUs are functionally equivalent. This suggests that for some compute tasks, the architectural advantages of the RX 7800M are not always realized, and the older card can keep pace. However, the overall trend is clear: the RX 7800M is designed for the future, while the RX 6700 XT excels in backward compatibility.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification difference is the process node: the RX 7800M uses 5 nm TSMC technology, while the RX 6700 XT uses 7 nm. This leads to a transistor count of 28,100 million for the RX 7800M versus 17,200 million for the RX 6700 XT. The die size is slightly larger on the RX 7800M at 346 mm² compared to 335 mm², but the transistor density is 81.2M / mm² versus 51.3M / mm², showing the efficiency of the newer node.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The RX 7800M has a base clock of 1295 MHz, a boost clock of 2335 MHz, and a game clock of 2145 MHz. The RX 6700 XT runs much higher clocks, with a base of 2321 MHz, boost of 2581 MHz, and game clock of 2424 MHz. Despite the higher clocks on the RX 6700 XT, the RX 7800M still outperforms it in most modern benchmarks due to its superior architecture and resource count.

Memory bandwidth is another differentiator: the RX 7800M provides 432.0 GB/s versus 384.0 GB/s for the RX 6700 XT, although both use 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The power profiles are reversed in terms of efficiency: the RX 7800M has a TDP of 180 W and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, while the RX 6700 XT is a dual-slot card with a 230 W TDP and requires a 550 W power supply, using 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin connectors. The RX 6700 XT has physical dimensions of 267 mm length, 110 mm height, and 40 mm width, whereas the RX 7800M’s dimensions are listed as portable device dependent.

The RX 6700 XT offers display outputs of 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the RX 7800M’s outputs are portable device dependent. The RX 6700 XT has a launch MSRP of 479 USD, while the RX 7800M has no listed launch MSRP. Finally, the RX 6700 XT is end-of-life with a release date of 2021-03-02, while the RX 7800M is active with a release date of 2024-09-10.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800M scores 2,994 points, which is 23% higher than the RX 6700 XT’s 2,435 points, making it the faster card in this modern DirectX 12 test.

Q: How do the two compare in OpenCL compute performance?

A: The RX 7800M delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 120,778, which is 173.6% ahead of the RX 6700 XT’s 44,152, indicating a massive advantage in OpenCL-based compute workloads.

Q: Is the RX 6700 XT better in any benchmark?

A: Yes, the RX 6700 XT wins four benchmarks: Passmark DirectX 9 (242 vs 174, +28.1%), Passmark DirectX 10 (124 vs 99, +20.2%), Passmark G3D (19,786 vs 17,613, +11%), and Passmark G2D (951 vs 892, +6.2%).

Q: What are the memory specifications of both cards?

A: Both cards have 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus. The RX 7800M operates at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 6700 XT runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for 384.0 GB/s.

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The RX 7800M has a 180 W TDP and is an IGP with no power connectors, while the RX 6700 XT has a 230 W TDP, uses 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin connectors, and requires a 550 W power supply.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The RX 7800M is built on TSMC’s 5 nm process, while the RX 6700 XT uses TSMC’s 7 nm process, which contributes to the RX 7800M’s higher transistor density of 81.2M / mm² versus 51.3M / mm².