AMD Radeon RX 6800M vs AMD Radeon RX 7700S Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear, consistent advantage for the AMD Radeon RX 6800M across all three shared benchmark tests, even though the RX 7700S carries a newer architecture. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RX 6800M scores 2238 against the RX 7700S’s 2185, a margin of 2.4%. This is the closest contest between the two, and the only test where the gap is in single digits.

The separation widens dramatically in compute-oriented workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6800M records 87621 points versus 62983 for the RX 7700S, a deficit of 28.1% for the newer part. The Vulkan result is even more lopsided: the RX 6800M reaches 94766, while the RX 7700S manages only 36380, meaning the RX 6800M outperforms it by 61.6%. That Vulkan gap is not a marginal difference; it represents a fundamental throughput disparity that appears across the entire test suite.

The head-to-head tally reflects this dominance: the RX 6800M wins all three recorded comparisons, with the RX 7700S recording zero victories. Notably, the RX 7700S is not the faster GPU in any single metric where both have data, despite its newer RDNA 3.0 design. The RX 6800M’s advantage is not confined to one API or workload type, it shows up in DX12, OpenCL, and Vulkan alike.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6800M wins in every category where direct comparison data exists. For DX12 gaming workloads, its 2238 Steel Nomad score edges out the RX 7700S’s 2185, making it the stronger choice for modern DirectX 12 titles, even if only by a small amount. The RX 6800M’s OpenCL performance at 87621 is 28.1% ahead, which indicates a substantial lead for compute-heavy applications that rely on OpenCL acceleration. Its Vulkan result at 94766 is 61.6% ahead, a massive advantage for Vulkan-based games and applications.

The RX 7700S does not have a single benchmark win, but it does hold a distinct efficiency profile. Its 100 W TDP is lower than the RX 6800M’s 145 W, and the data shows the RX 7700S still delivers competitive DX12 performance (within 2.4%) despite that power difference. The RX 7700S also carries a 78th percentile ranking among all GPUs, versus the RX 6800M’s 74th, which reflects its overall standing in the broader database even though it loses this head-to-head. Its average benchmark score of 33849 also exceeds the RX 6800M’s 28874, a counterintuitive result driven by the fact that the two cards are tested across different benchmark sets in the database.

For users prioritizing raw performance in any tested workload, the RX 6800M is the clear winner. For users prioritizing lower power draw, the RX 7700S offers a more modest package, but that advantage does not translate into any performance win in the recorded benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different generations of AMD’s Radeon mobile architecture. The RX 7700S uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The RX 6800M uses the Navi 22 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 7 nm process, also at TSMC. The newer process node gives the RX 7700S a smaller die at 204 mm² versus 335 mm² for the RX 6800M, and fewer transistors at 13,300 million versus 17,200 million. Transistor density is higher on the RX 7700S at 65.2M per mm², compared to 51.3M per mm² on the RX 6800M.

The RX 6800M compensates with a larger overall chip and more execution resources. It packs 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 40 ray tracing cores, while the RX 7700S has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 RT cores. Both GPUs have 64 ROPs, so pixel output capability is similar, with the RX 7700S slightly ahead at 160.0 GPixel/s versus 153.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate favors the RX 6800M at 382.4 GTexel/s against 320.0 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The RX 6800M has a higher base clock at 2116 MHz versus 1500 MHz for the RX 7700S, but the RX 7700S has a higher boost clock at 2500 MHz versus 2390 MHz. The game clock is 2200 MHz on the RX 7700S and 2300 MHz on the RX 6800M. Raw FP32 throughput tells a surprising story: the RX 7700S is rated at 20.48 TFLOPS, well above the RX 6800M’s 12.24 TFLOPS, and FP16 figures follow the same pattern at 40.96 TFLOPS versus 24.47 TFLOPS. Despite this theoretical compute advantage, the RX 7700S loses all real-world benchmark comparisons, indicating that memory bandwidth and other factors dominate actual performance.

Memory configurations differ sharply. The RX 7700S has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s, while the RX 6800M has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s. Memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) on the RX 7700S versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on the RX 6800M, but the wider bus gives the older card a 33% bandwidth advantage. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16 and support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7700S is listed as Active production status, while the RX 6800M is End-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster overall?

A: The recorded data shows the RX 6800M wins all three head-to-head benchmarks. It leads by 2.4% in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, by 28.1% in Geekbench OpenCL, and by 61.6% in Geekbench Vulkan.

Q: Why does the RX 7700S have higher TFLOPS but lose in benchmarks?

A: The RX 7700S is rated at 20.48 TFLOPS FP32 versus 12.24 TFLOPS for the RX 6800M, but the RX 6800M has more shading units (2560 versus 2048) and substantially more memory bandwidth (384.0 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s). Benchmark results indicate that bandwidth and execution resource count matter more than theoretical FLOP ratings in these workloads.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The RX 7700S offers 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6800M offers 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RX 7700S has a TDP of 100 W, while the RX 6800M has a TDP of 145 W. The RX 7700S uses 45 W less power but still trails in every benchmark.

Q: Which GPU has a better percentile ranking?

A: The RX 7700S ranks in the 78th percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 6800M ranks in the 74th percentile. The RX 7700S also has a higher average benchmark score of 33849 versus 28874 for the RX 6800M, though these averages draw from different test suites.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. The RX 7700S is listed as Active, while the RX 6800M is listed as End-of-life.

The Verdict

The data points to a decisive choice for most use cases. The AMD Radeon RX 6800M is the faster GPU in every single recorded benchmark, and the margins are often large. In Vulkan workloads, it is more than 60% ahead of the RX 7700S, which is a massive performance gap that cannot be ignored. Its DX12 lead is smaller but still consistent, and its OpenCL advantage of 28.1% makes it the better option for compute tasks. The 12 GB memory capacity and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth also give it a practical edge for higher resolution textures and memory-heavy workloads.

The RX 7700S does have virtues, but they are not performance virtues. Its 100 W TDP is 45 W lower, which is meaningful for thinner, cooler laptop designs. Its higher FP32 throughput and smaller die suggest architectural efficiency, and its 78th percentile ranking is higher than the RX 6800M’s 74th. However, none of these advantages appear in the benchmark results. The RX 7700S wins no head-to-head tests.

A user who prioritizes raw frame rates, compute throughput, or memory capacity should select the RX 6800M. A user who needs a lower-power GPU and accepts a performance deficit, particularly in Vulkan, could consider the RX 7700S, but the data does not support choosing it on performance grounds. The RX 6800M is the performance winner, and the RX 7700S is the efficiency-focused alternative that sacrifices measurable performance for power savings.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7700S | AMD Radeon RX 6800M |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Chip | Navi 33 | Navi 22 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 17,200 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 335 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 51.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1500 MHz | 2116 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2500 MHz | 2390 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2200 MHz | 2300 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 384.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 128 | 160 |

| RT Cores | 32 | 40 |

| Pixel Rate | 160.0 GPixel/s | 153.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 320.0 GTexel/s | 382.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 20.48 TFLOPS | 12.24 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 40.96 TFLOPS (2:1) | 24.47 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 100 W | 145 W |

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

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2021-05-30 |

| Codename | Hotpink Bonefish | None |