AMD Radeon RX 6800M vs AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive pattern: the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE wins all ten recorded comparisons against the AMD Radeon RX 6800M. The margin varies widely by workload, from a modest 5.4% lead in Geekbench Vulkan to a commanding 198.4% advantage in Passmark GPU Compute. This is not a close contest; it is a generational and architectural gap expressed in nearly every measurable category.

The largest single win appears in Passmark GPU Compute, where the RX 7900 GRE scores 15016 against 5032 for the RX 6800M. That 198.4% delta suggests the compute-oriented capabilities of the newer card are vastly stronger, likely due to raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth advantages. For users running non-graphics workloads, OpenCL compute, or machine learning tasks, this gap is the headline number.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 7900 GRE scores 4814 versus 2238 for the RX 6800M, a 115.1% improvement. This is a modern DirectX 12 test, so it reflects contemporary gaming performance. The RX 7900 GRE more than doubles the mobile card’s result, which implies that at similar settings, frame rates would be roughly twice as high. The RX 6800M, while capable for a laptop GPU, cannot keep pace in this demanding workload.

Geekbench OpenCL shows a similar story: 175758 versus 87621, a 100.6% delta. The RX 7900 GRE doubles the OpenCL score of the RX 6800M. This test stresses general-purpose GPU compute, and the result aligns with the Passmark GPU Compute finding. The RX 7900 GRE is not merely faster in games; it is substantially faster in compute-heavy applications.

The Vulkan result is the closest margin. The RX 7900 GRE scores 99850, while the RX 6800M scores 94766, a 5.4% lead. Vulkan is a low-overhead API, and both cards support it fully (both list Vulkan 1.4). The smaller delta suggests that when the API overhead is minimal, the RX 6800M can get closer to the RX 7900 GRE. However, it still loses, and the gap, while narrow, is consistent.

Passmark DirectX 11 shows a 136.2% delta: 300 versus 127. DirectX 11 is older but still relevant for many games and applications. The RX 7900 GRE’s lead here is larger than in DirectX 12, which is interesting. It may reflect the higher shader count and texture units, which help in legacy rendering paths. DirectX 9 also shows a huge gap: 310 versus 147, a 110.9% delta. Even in older APIs, the RX 7900 GRE dominates.

Passmark DirectX 10 and DirectX 12 show smaller but still decisive margins. DirectX 10: 139 versus 101, a 37.6% delta. DirectX 12: 107 versus 65, a 64.6% delta. The DirectX 12 result is notable because it is lower than the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 delta. The two tests stress different aspects of the API, but both favor the RX 7900 GRE.

Passmark G2D (2D graphics) shows a 119.3% delta: 1180 versus 538. This is a less common metric for gamers but relevant for desktop productivity and multi-monitor setups. The RX 7900 GRE’s 2D performance is more than double that of the mobile card. Passmark G3D shows 27089 versus 13261, a 104.3% delta, which aligns closely with the overall 3D performance picture.

The average benchmark score in the database reflects this dominance. The RX 7900 GRE has an average score of 32456 across all its recorded tests, while the RX 6800M averages 28874. That is a 12.4% difference in the aggregate, though the head-to-head deltas are much larger because they compare the same tests directly. The RX 7900 GRE also sits at the 77th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the RX 6800M sits at the 74th. Both are above average, but the RX 7900 GRE is clearly higher.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different generations and node processes. The RX 7900 GRE is built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Plum Bonito, and uses the Navi 31 chip. The RX 6800M uses RDNA 2.0 architecture on the Navi 22 chip. The process node differs: the RX 7900 GRE is on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 6800M is on a 7 nm process, also at TSMC. This node shrink is a major factor in the performance gap, as it allows for higher transistor density.

Transistor counts confirm the scale difference. The RX 7900 GRE has 57,700 million transistors on a die size of 529 mm², giving a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The RX 6800M has 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die, with a density of 51.3M per mm². The RX 7900 GRE has more than three times the transistor count and more than double the density. That means more compute units, more cache, and more memory controllers in a similar physical footprint.

The memory subsystem also diverges. The RX 7900 GRE has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256 bit bus, with a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The RX 6800M has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus, with 384.0 GB/s. The RX 7900 GRE offers 33% more memory capacity and 50% more bandwidth. The effective memory clock is 18 Gbps versus 16 Gbps. For high-resolution textures and memory-heavy workloads, the RX 7900 GRE has a clear edge.

Compute resources are heavily scaled. The RX 7900 GRE has 5120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 160 render output units. The RX 6800M has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. That is exactly double the shaders and TMUs, and 2.5 times the ROPs. Ray tracing cores follow the same pattern: 80 on the RX 7900 GRE versus 40 on the RX 6800M. The pixel rate is 359.2 GPixel/s versus 153.0 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 718.4 GTexel/s versus 382.4 GTexel/s.

FP32 and FP16 throughput reflect the shader count. The RX 7900 GRE delivers 45.98 TFLOPS FP32 and 91.96 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The RX 6800M delivers 12.24 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.47 TFLOPS FP16. The RX 7900 GRE is 3.75 times faster in FP32 and 3.76 times faster in FP16. These are raw compute numbers, and they explain the massive Passmark GPU Compute delta.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The RX 6800M has a higher base clock (2116 MHz versus 1287 MHz) and a higher boost clock (2390 MHz versus 2245 MHz). The game clock is also higher: 2300 MHz versus 1880 MHz. This is typical for mobile parts, which often run at higher frequencies to compensate for fewer cores. Despite the clock advantage, the RX 6800M cannot overcome the RX 7900 GRE’s core count and memory bandwidth.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API support is identical, so software compatibility is not a differentiator. The RX 7900 GRE supports PCIe 4.0 x16, as does the RX 6800M. The bus interface is the same.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE has a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s, while the AMD Radeon RX 6800M has 384.0 GB/s. The RX 7900 GRE is 50% higher.

Q: How do the two cards compare in ray tracing performance?

A: The RX 7900 GRE has 80 ray tracing cores, while the RX 6800M has 40. The RX 7900 GRE has double the ray tracing hardware.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 6800M has a boost clock of 2390 MHz, while the RX 7900 GRE has a boost clock of 2245 MHz. The mobile card runs 145 MHz faster at boost.

Q: Are both cards based on the same architecture?

A: No. The RX 7900 GRE uses RDNA 3.0 (Navi 31), while the RX 6800M uses RDNA 2.0 (Navi 22). They are from different generations.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RX 7900 GRE has a density of 109.1M transistors per mm², while the RX 6800M has 51.3M per mm². The RX 7900 GRE is more than double.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RX 7900 GRE has 5120 shading units, exactly double the 2560 shading units on the RX 6800M.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 versus RDNA 2.0
• Process node: 5 nm versus 7 nm
• Transistors: 57,700 million versus 17,200 million
• Die size: 529 mm² versus 335 mm²
• Transistor density: 109.1M / mm² versus 51.3M / mm²
• Base clock: 1287 MHz versus 2116 MHz
• Boost clock: 2245 MHz versus 2390 MHz
• Game clock: 1880 MHz versus 2300 MHz
• Memory clock: 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 16 GB versus 12 GB
• Memory bus width: 256 bit versus 192 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 576.0 GB/s versus 384.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 5120 versus 2560
• TMUs: 320 versus 160
• ROPs: 160 versus 64
• RT cores: 80 versus 40
• Pixel rate: 359.2 GPixel/s versus 153.0 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 718.4 GTexel/s versus 382.4 GTexel/s
• FP32: 45.98 TFLOPS versus 12.24 TFLOPS
• FP16: 91.96 TFLOPS versus 24.47 TFLOPS
• TDP: 260 W versus 145 W
• Slot width: Dual-slot versus IGP
• Power connectors: 2x 8-pin versus None
• Suggested PSU: 600 W versus not specified
• Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C versus Portable Device Dependent
• Dimensions: 276 mm length, 110 mm height, 51 mm width versus not specified
• Production status: Active versus End-of-life
• Release date: 2023-07-26 versus 2021-05-30
• Predecessor: Navi II versus Polaris Mobile
• Successor: Navi IV versus not specified
• Launch MSRP: 549 USD versus not specified

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7900 GRE wins every recorded benchmark, so the division is about which workloads see the largest advantage. The biggest wins are in GPU compute (198.4% delta), DirectX 11 (136.2%), and G2D (119.3%). These are workloads that benefit from raw shader throughput, memory bandwidth, and large caches. For users doing OpenCL compute, video encoding, or 2D desktop acceleration, the RX 7900 GRE is dramatically better.

In gaming, the RX 7900 GRE leads by 115.1% in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and 104.3% in Passmark G3D. This means that at the same settings, the RX 7900 GRE can deliver roughly double the frame rate in modern titles. The smallest win is in Vulkan (5.4%), which suggests that if a game is heavily optimized for Vulkan and is CPU-bound, the RX 6800M can get closer. But it still loses.

The RX 6800M has no wins in the recorded data. Its advantages are limited to physical characteristics: it has a lower TDP (145 W versus 260 W), no external power connectors, and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) form factor. It is designed for laptops, where power draw and size matter. The RX 6800M is also end-of-life, while the RX 7900 GRE is active. For a portable system, the RX 6800M is the only choice of the two, simply because the RX 7900 GRE is a dual-slot desktop card with a 276 mm length.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE is the faster card in every single recorded benchmark, with margins ranging from 5.4% to 198.4%. Its average benchmark score of 32456 is higher than the RX 6800M’s 28874, and its percentile rank (77th versus 74th) confirms the aggregate advantage. The RX 7900 GRE has double the shading units, double the ray tracing cores, 50% more memory bandwidth, and 33% more memory capacity. It also uses a newer architecture on a smaller process node.

The RX 6800M should be selected only for portable applications where the desktop form factor and 260 W TDP of the RX 7900 GRE are not feasible. The RX 6800M is an IGP with no power connectors and a 145 W TDP, making it suitable for laptops. Its release date of 2021 also makes it an older product, now end-of-life. The RX 7900 GRE, released in 2023, is the current-generation part.

For any workload that can accommodate a desktop GPU, the RX 7900 GRE is the correct choice. Its compute performance is nearly three times higher in Passmark GPU Compute, its gaming performance is more than double in modern DirectX 12 tests, and its 2D performance is more than double. The only scenario where the RX 6800M makes sense is when the system must be portable and power-efficient. In that case, the RX 6800M is the only viable option, but it will deliver roughly half the performance in most workloads. The launch MSRP of the RX 7900 GRE is 549 USD, but the RX 6800M has no listed MSRP. The verdict is clear: for desktop users, the RX 7900 GRE is the superior product by a wide margin.