GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA CMP 30HX and AMD Radeon RX 7600M occupy adjacent tiers in the benchmark database, separated by a single head-to-head test. The data shows the NVIDIA part holds a narrow but consistent lead in raw compute workloads, while the AMD part counters with a substantially different architectural profile and a much lower power envelope. The average benchmark scores place the CMP 30HX at 64,172 against the RX 7600M’s 63,505, a difference of 1.1% in favor of NVIDIA. In the sole head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL test, the CMP 30HX scores 67,007 versus 63,505, a 5.5% advantage. Both cards rank in the 90th and 91st percentiles of all GPUs, indicating they sit near the upper tier of performance, but the margin between them is small enough that other factors, power, memory, and feature support, become decisive for real-world selection.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are unambiguous. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX scores 67,007, while the AMD Radeon RX 7600M scores 63,505, giving NVIDIA a 5.5% victory. This is a meaningful margin in a compute-focused benchmark, though not a dominant one. The CMP 30HX also holds a 1.1% advantage in average benchmark score across all tests, at 64,172 versus 63,505. The nearest rival data reinforces this pattern: the CMP 30HX is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 (64,002) and 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon VII (64,356), placing it squarely between two high-end AMD workstation cards. The RX 7600M, meanwhile, is 0.8% behind the Pro WX 9100 and 1.3% behind the Radeon VII, showing it trails the same pair by slightly larger margins.

The 5.5% OpenCL delta is the largest single-test gap between the two cards, but it does not tell the whole story. The RX 7600M’s average score comes from only one benchmark, while the CMP 30HX’s average is derived from two (OpenCL and Vulkan). In Vulkan, the CMP 30HX scores 61,336, which is lower than its OpenCL result but still contributes to the 64,172 average. If the RX 7600M were tested in Vulkan, its standing could shift, but no such data exists in the pack. The absence of a Vulkan score for the AMD part means the head-to-head comparison is limited to a single workload, and the 5.5% lead should be read as a compute-specific result rather than a universal performance gap. The data shows the CMP 30HX wins the only direct test, but the RX 7600M’s higher boost clock and greater shader count suggest it may close the gap in other workloads, though no numbers support that speculation.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge sharply at the architectural level. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX is built on the Turing architecture with the TU116 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.2 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon RX 7600M uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, also from TSMC but on a 6 nm node. This smaller process allows AMD to pack 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter, nearly triple the density of the NVIDIA part. The die size difference is notable: AMD’s chip is 28% smaller than NVIDIA’s while holding twice the transistors.

The compute resources differ correspondingly. The RX 7600M has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, compared to the CMP 30HX’s 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. This gives AMD a 27% advantage in shader count, 27% in TMUs, and 33% in ROPs. The AMD card also includes 28 ray tracing cores, which the NVIDIA card lacks entirely. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the RX 7600M boosts to 2,410 MHz with a game clock of 2,070 MHz, versus the CMP 30HX’s 1,785 MHz boost. The base clocks are nearly identical (1,500 MHz for AMD, 1,530 MHz for NVIDIA), but the boost behavior diverges wildly. These differences translate into raw throughput: the RX 7600M delivers 17.27 TFLOPS FP32 against the CMP 30HX’s 5.027 TFLOPS, a 3.4x advantage. Pixel rate is 154.2 GPixel/s versus 85.68 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 269.9 GTexel/s versus 157.1 GTexel/s.

Memory configurations also differ. The CMP 30HX has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, producing 256.0 GB/s. NVIDIA’s wider bus gives it a 31% bandwidth advantage despite the smaller capacity. The RX 7600M’s memory runs at 2,000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the NVIDIA card, but the narrower bus undermines the higher clock. Power consumption is another major differentiator: the CMP 30HX is rated at 125 W TDP with a dual-slot cooler and 1x 8-pin power connector, while the RX 7600M is an integrated GPU (IGP) with a 90 W TDP and no power connectors. The AMD part is also smaller in physical footprint, it has no listed dimensions, whereas the NVIDIA card measures 229 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 35 mm in width.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX wins the only direct test, taking the OpenCL score by 5.5%, and it also has the higher average benchmark score by 1.1%. However, the RX 7600M holds substantial theoretical advantages in compute throughput, with 3.4x the FP32 performance, higher pixel and texture rates, and ray tracing support. These figures are not reflected in the available benchmarks, which only cover OpenCL for the AMD part. The CMP 30HX’s 91st percentile ranking versus the RX 7600M’s 90th percentile is a marginal difference, indicating both are high-performing parts.

For users prioritizing raw compute in OpenCL workloads, the CMP 30HX is the safer choice based on the data. Its 5.5% lead in the head-to-head test is consistent with its average score advantage, and its wider memory bus provides 336.0 GB/s bandwidth, which can benefit memory-bound tasks. For users who need a low-power, mobile-friendly solution, the RX 7600M’s 90 W TDP and IGP form factor are decisive advantages, but the lack of benchmark coverage beyond OpenCL limits any performance claims. The CMP 30HX is end-of-life, while the RX 7600M is active, which may affect availability but not the measured data. The verdict is straightforward: the CMP 30HX wins the compute benchmark, but the RX 7600M’s architectural advantages, more shaders, higher clocks, ray tracing, and far greater FP32 throughput, suggest it is the more capable part in workloads not represented in the data.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the NVIDIA CMP 30HX and AMD Radeon RX 7600M:

• Process node: 12 nm versus 6 nm
• Transistors: 6,600 million versus 13,300 million
• Die size: 284 mm² versus 204 mm²
• Transistor density: 23.2M / mm² versus 65.2M / mm²
• Base clock: 1530 MHz versus 1500 MHz
• Boost clock: 1785 MHz versus 2410 MHz
• Game clock: null versus 2070 MHz
• Memory clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 6 GB versus 8 GB
• Memory bus width: 192 bit versus 128 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 336.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 1408 versus 1792
• TMUs: 88 versus 112
• ROPs: 48 versus 64
• RT cores: null versus 28
• Pixel rate: 85.68 GPixel/s versus 154.2 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 157.1 GTexel/s versus 269.9 GTexel/s
• FP32: 5.027 TFLOPS versus 17.27 TFLOPS
• FP16: 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 34.55 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 125 W versus 90 W
• Slot width: Dual-slot versus IGP
• Power connectors: 1x 8-pin versus None
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus null
• Bus interface: PCIe 1.0 x4 versus PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display outputs: No outputs versus Portable Device Dependent
• DirectX version: 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• Dimensions: 229 mm x 111 mm x 35 mm versus null
• Production status: End-of-life versus Active
• Release date: 2021-02-24 versus 2023-01-03
• Launch MSRP: 799 USD versus null

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 30HX scores 64,172 on average, which is 1.1% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 7600M’s 63,505.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the head-to-head OpenCL test?

A: The CMP 30HX scores 67,007 versus 63,505 for the RX 7600M, a 5.5% difference in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: What are the memory capacities and bandwidths of the two cards?

A: The CMP 30HX has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does either GPU support ray tracing?

A: The RX 7600M has 28 ray tracing cores, while the CMP 30HX has none.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The CMP 30HX is rated at 125 W TDP, while the RX 7600M is rated at 90 W TDP.

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 performance?

A: The RX 7600M delivers 17.27 TFLOPS FP32, which is 3.4x the CMP 30HX’s 5.027 TFLOPS.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA CMP 30HX wins in the only benchmark where both are tested, taking the Geekbench OpenCL score by 5.5%. It also wins on average benchmark score by 1.1%, and it has a wider memory bus (192-bit versus 128-bit), which provides 336.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 256.0 GB/s. For compute workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, the CMP 30HX is the better choice. Its higher pixel rate (85.68 GPixel/s) and texture rate (157.1 GTexel/s) are lower than the RX 7600M’s, but the bandwidth advantage may compensate in certain scenarios. The CMP 30HX also has a higher base clock (1530 MHz versus 1500 MHz), though the boost clock is far lower.

The AMD Radeon RX 7600M wins on nearly every raw compute specification. It has 3.4x the FP32 throughput (17.27 TFLOPS versus 5.027 TFLOPS), 27% more shading units (1,792 versus 1,408), and 33% more ROPs (64 versus 48). Its boost clock of 2,410 MHz is 35% higher than the CMP 30HX’s 1,785 MHz. The RX 7600M also supports ray tracing with 28 RT cores, a feature entirely absent from the NVIDIA part. Pixel rate (154.2 GPixel/s) and texture rate (269.9 GTexel/s) are roughly 80% higher. For applications that leverage these features, modern games with ray tracing, high-resolution rendering, or compute tasks that scale with shader count, the RX 7600M is the stronger part. Its 8 GB memory capacity is also 33% larger, which helps with large