AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT sit remarkably close in overall average benchmark scores, with the RTX 3070 at 17208 and the RX 7600 XT at 17083—a difference of just 0.7%. Despite this statistical tie, their performance profiles diverge sharply across specific workloads. The RTX 3070 wins 8 of the 10 head-to-head tests, while the RX 7600 XT takes 2 decisive victories. This split means the right choice depends heavily on which applications you prioritize, rather than on raw aggregate performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RTX 3070 dominates the traditional rasterization and compute workloads. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX 3070 scores 3162 against 2348 for the RX 7600 XT, a 34.7% margin—the largest single-test gap in either direction. PassMark G3D tells a similar story: 22214 versus 17132, a 29.7% advantage for NVIDIA. The GeForce card also leads in PassMark GPU Compute by 24.6% (11195 vs 8987), and in Geekbench OpenCL by 22.1% (112821 vs 92426). Older DirectX API tests favor NVIDIA even more heavily: PassMark DX10 shows a 76.5% lead (150 vs 85), while DX12 yields a 30.8% edge (85 vs 65). Even the closer DX11 and DX9 tests go NVIDIA's way, with 9% (182 vs 167) and 8.3% (247 vs 228) margins respectively.

The RX 7600 XT's wins are concentrated but emphatic. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 48366 versus 21022 for the RTX 3070—a 56.5% reversal that completely flips the OpenCL result. The AMD card also takes PassMark G2D by a slim 2.8% (1030 vs 1001), indicating slightly better 2D acceleration. These two victories show that the RX 7600 XT is not merely competitive in certain APIs; it is dramatically faster in Vulkan compute tasks, which matters for specific games and productivity tools that leverage that API.

The average benchmark scores confirm the head-to-head parity. The RTX 3070 sits at the 61st percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 7600 XT sits at the 60th. Their nearest rival lists are nearly identical, with both cards within 1.5% of the same group of competitors including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 and AMD Radeon HD 7970M. The deltaPct between the two cards in each other's rival lists is a mirror-image -0.7% from AMD's perspective and +0.7% from NVIDIA's, underscoring how close the aggregate picture is.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The RTX 3070 uses the GA104 chip built on Samsung's 8 nm process, featuring 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die—a transistor density of 44.4M per mm². The RX 7600 XT uses Navi 33 on TSMC's 6 nm node, packing 13,300 million transistors into a much smaller 204 mm² die, achieving 65.2M per mm² density. This means AMD fits nearly 47% more transistors per square millimeter, though NVIDIA has 30.8% more total transistors.

The compute layout diverges radically. The RTX 3070 fields 5888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, while the RX 7600 XT has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. NVIDIA also includes 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores; AMD has 32 RT cores and no tensor cores at all. Despite having fewer shading units, the RX 7600 XT achieves higher peak FP32 throughput at 22.57 TFLOPS versus 20.31 TFLOPS, thanks to its much higher boost clock of 2755 MHz versus 1725 MHz for the RTX 3070. The AMD card also wins in pixel rate (176.3 GPixel/s vs 165.6 GPixel/s) and texture rate (352.6 GTexel/s vs 317.4 GTexel/s).

Memory configuration is another major split. The RTX 3070 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600 XT offers double the capacity at 16 GB, but on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth—a 35.7% reduction in bandwidth. The RTX 3070's memory runs at 14 Gbps effective, while the RX 7600 XT's runs at 18 Gbps, but the narrower bus still limits total throughput. Power draw differs too: the RTX 3070 is rated at 220 W TDP with a 550 W suggested PSU, while the RX 7600 XT draws 190 W with a 450 W suggested PSU.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3070 is the clear choice for DirectX-based gaming and general compute. Its wins in DX11, DX12, and DX10 tests, plus OpenCL, cover the majority of modern PC games and productivity applications. The 34.7% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad is particularly telling for future DirectX 12 titles, as is the 29.7% advantage in PassMark G3D. For users running CUDA-accelerated workloads or tensor-core-dependent applications, the RTX 3070's 184 tensor cores provide capabilities the RX 7600 XT lacks entirely.

The RX 7600 XT wins in Vulkan-specific scenarios and 2D tasks. The 56.5% Vulkan lead suggests it handles Vulkan-based games and compute workloads substantially better, which is relevant for titles built on Vulkan or for emulators and certain professional tools. The 16 GB memory capacity also gives it a practical advantage for texture-heavy modding or workloads that exceed 8 GB, even if the bandwidth is lower. Its smaller 204 mm die and lower 190 W TDP make it a more efficient physical package, and the 6 nm process node indicates a more modern manufacturing approach.

For users prioritizing raw frame rates in DirectX games, the RTX 3070's benchmark dominance is unambiguous. For those running Vulkan-heavy workloads or needing 16 GB of VRAM, the RX 7600 XT's specific strengths matter more than its aggregate deficit. The PassMark G2D win, while small, also points to slightly better desktop and 2D application performance.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 averages 17208, while the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT averages 17083—a 0.7% difference favoring NVIDIA.

Q: How large is the RTX 3070's lead in DirectX 12 performance?

A: In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RTX 3070 scores 3162 versus 2348 for the RX 7600 XT, a 34.7% advantage. In PassMark DX12, the lead is 30.8% (85 vs 65).

Q: Where does the RX 7600 XT beat the RTX 3070 by the largest margin?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 7600 XT scores 48366 versus 21022, a 56.5% lead. It also wins PassMark G2D by 2.8% (1030 vs 1001).

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The RTX 3070 has 8 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600 XT has 16 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the transistor density differences?

A: The RX 7600 XT's Navi 33 on 6 nm achieves 65.2M transistors per mm², while the RTX 3070's GA104 on 8 nm achieves 44.4M per mm².

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RTX 3070 has 5888 shading units, compared to 2048 for the RX 7600 XT, despite the AMD card having higher peak FP32 throughput.

The Verdict

The data supports picking the RTX 3070 for most gaming scenarios. Its wins in 8 of 10 benchmarks, including all DirectX variants and OpenCL, make it the safer choice for standard PC gaming. The 34.7% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad and 29.7% lead in PassMark G3D show a consistent rasterization advantage that will translate to higher frame rates in most modern titles. The tensor cores are a bonus for AI workloads, though the card is end-of-life with a 2020 release date.

The RX 7600 XT is the pick for specific use cases. The 56.5% Vulkan advantage makes it compelling for Vulkan-native games and compute, and the 16 GB memory capacity is double the RTX 3070's 8 GB, which matters for large textures or datasets. Its active production status and 2024 release date mean it is current hardware, and the lower 190 W TDP with a 450 W PSU requirement makes it easier to integrate into existing systems. The smaller 204 mm² die also indicates a more efficient physical design.

The aggregate scores are nearly identical—17208 versus 17083—so neither card is categorically superior. The RTX 3070 wins on DirectX performance and compute breadth; the RX 7600 XT wins on Vulkan performance, memory capacity, and efficiency. Choose based on your dominant API and VRAM needs, not on average scores.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 | AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 17,400 million | 13,300 million |

| Die Size | 392 mm² | 204 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 44.4M / mm² | 65.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1500 MHz | 1980 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1725 MHz | 2755 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 5888 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 184 | 128 |

| ROPs | 96 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 46 | 32 |

| Tensor Cores | 184 | None |

| FP32 | 20.31 TFLOPS | 22.57 TFLOPS |

| Pixel Rate | 165.6 GPixel/s | 176.3 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 317.4 GTexel/s | 352.6 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 220 W | 190 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 12-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| Length | 242 mm (9.5 inches) | 204 mm (8 inches) |

| Height | 112 mm (4.4 inches) | 115 mm (4.5 inches) |

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

| Release Date | 2020-08-31 | 2024-01-23 |

| Launch MSRP | 499 USD | 329 USD |