AMD Radeon RX 7600M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7600M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104 occupy different segments of the mobile and desktop GPU spectrum, and the recorded data shows a clear split in their intended use cases. The RX 7600M is a mobile-focused part from the Radeon RX 7000 series, built on the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture. It carries a 90 W TDP, an IGP slot width, and no power connectors, which places it firmly in thin-and-light gaming laptops where thermal and power budgets are constrained. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104, by contrast, is a GeForce 40-series desktop card with a 160 W TDP, a dual-slot cooler, and a single 16-pin power connector, indicating it is designed for conventional desktop chassis with adequate cooling and power delivery.

The benchmark data in the database shows the RX 7600M achieving a Geekbench OpenCL score of 63775, which places it at the 89th percentile among all GPUs. This is a strong result for a mobile part, and its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63830 (a 0.1 percent advantage over the RX 7600M), the NVIDIA CMP 30HX at 63842 (also 0.1 percent ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 at 63693 (0.1 percent behind), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 at 64212 (0.7 percent ahead). The RX 7600M essentially trades blows with these cards, sitting within a narrow band of roughly one percent of all four rivals. This indicates that in raw compute workloads, the mobile RX 7600M delivers performance comparable to a set of desktop and workstation cards from previous generations and current low-profile designs.

The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, and its average benchmark score is listed as zero, with a 50th percentile ranking. Without measured performance data, the database cannot confirm a direct compute performance comparison between the two cards. The absence of benchmark entries for the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 means the analysis must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than head-to-head measured results. The wins for each product are therefore defined by their respective design contexts: the RX 7600M wins on mobility and power efficiency, while the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 wins on raw specification counts, such as shading units, texture units, and tensor cores, as well as its desktop-oriented feature set.

For use-case segmentation, the RX 7600M is the part for portable gaming systems where the 90 W TDP and absence of external power connectors are decisive advantages. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 is the part for desktop builds where the dual-slot cooler, 160 W TDP, and 450 W suggested PSU are acceptable trade-offs for higher peak specification ceilings. The data shows no overlap in their physical design targets: one is an integrated mobile solution, the other is a discrete desktop card with a 240 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge sharply at the architectural level. The RX 7600M uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 uses the AD104 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. This chip contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, for a density of 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 therefore packs more than two and a half times the transistor count of the RX 7600M on a die that is roughly 44 percent larger, and its transistor density is nearly double that of the AMD part.

The compute resources differ substantially. The RX 7600M has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 raster operation units, and 28 ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has 4352 shading units, 136 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 34 ray tracing cores, and 136 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 2.4 times the shading units, 1.2 times the TMUs, and 1.2 times the ray tracing cores, while having fewer ROPs than the AMD part. The presence of 136 tensor cores on the NVIDIA card is a significant architectural distinction, as it enables dedicated AI acceleration hardware that the AMD card lacks entirely.

Clock behavior also differs. The RX 7600M has a base clock of 1500 MHz, a boost clock of 2410 MHz, and a game clock of 2070 MHz. Its memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has a base clock of 2310 MHz and a boost clock of 2535 MHz, with memory at 2250 MHz and 18 Gbps effective speed. The NVIDIA card operates at higher base and boost clocks, and its memory runs at a higher effective speed.

The memory subsystems are configured identically in capacity and bus width: both cards have 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. However, the bandwidth differs because of the higher memory clock on the NVIDIA part. The RX 7600M delivers 256.0 GB/s, while the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 delivers 288.0 GB/s, a 12.5 percent advantage for the NVIDIA card.

The PCIe interface also differs. The RX 7600M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The AMD mobile part has the full 16 lanes available, whereas the NVIDIA desktop card operates with half the lane count, which is a common trade-off for desktop GPUs that rely on higher clock speeds and larger caches to compensate.

The API support is identical: both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The production status differs, with the RX 7600M listed as Active and the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 listed as End-of-life. The release dates also differ, with the RX 7600M released on 2023-01-03 and the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 released on 2024-03-31.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two GPUs, and the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has an empty benchmark array. The only recorded measurement in the entire comparison is the RX 7600M's Geekbench OpenCL score of 63775. This score places the RX 7600M at the 89th percentile among all GPUs in the database.

The nearest rival data for the RX 7600M provides context for interpreting this score. The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP scores 63830, which is 0.1 percent higher than the RX 7600M. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX scores 63842, also 0.1 percent higher. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 scores 63693, which is 0.1 percent lower. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 scores 64212, which is 0.7 percent higher. These deltas are all within one percent, indicating that the RX 7600M's compute performance is tightly clustered with these four cards. The RX 7600M sits between the Pro Vega 56 on the low side and the RX 9060 XT LP, CMP 30HX, and Pro WX 9100 on the high side.

Because the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has no benchmark data, the database cannot confirm any direct performance comparison in compute workloads. The specification analysis shows that the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has higher peak FP32 throughput at 22.06 TFLOPS compared to the RX 7600M's 17.27 TFLOPS, a 27.7 percent advantage for the NVIDIA part in raw single-precision compute. The texture rate also favors the NVIDIA card, with 344.8 GTexel/s versus 269.9 GTexel/s, a 27.7 percent advantage. The pixel rate, however, favors the AMD card: 154.2 GPixel/s versus 121.7 GPixel/s, a 26.7 percent advantage for the RX 7600M. This is explained by the AMD card's higher ROP count of 64 versus 48.

The FP16 performance reveals a striking architectural difference. The RX 7600M delivers 34.55 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, meaning it doubles its throughput when using reduced precision. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 delivers 22.06 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput matches its FP32 throughput. The AMD card has a 56.6 percent advantage in FP16 peak throughput, despite having lower FP32 throughput. This indicates that the RDNA 3.0 architecture in the RX 7600M is designed with dedicated FP16 acceleration that the Ada Lovelace card does not match in this configuration.

FAQ

Q: How does the RX 7600M's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 7600M scores 63775 in Geekbench OpenCL. It is 0.1 percent behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63830, 0.1 percent behind the NVIDIA CMP 30HX at 63842, 0.1 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 at 63693, and 0.7 percent behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 at 64212.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has higher FP32 throughput at 22.06 TFLOPS, compared to the RX 7600M's 17.27 TFLOPS. This gives the NVIDIA card a 27.7 percent advantage in single-precision compute.

Q: Does the RX 7600M have any compute advantage over the RTX 4060 Ti AD104?

A: Yes, the RX 7600M delivers 34.55 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, while the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 delivers 22.06 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. The AMD card has a 56.6 percent advantage in FP16 peak throughput.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for both cards?

A: The RX 7600M has 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has 288.0 GB/s. Both use 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, but the NVIDIA card has a higher effective memory speed of 18 Gbps versus 16 Gbps.

Q: What is the pixel rate difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 7600M has a pixel rate of 154.2 GPixel/s, which is 26.7 percent higher than the RTX 4060 Ti AD104's 121.7 GPixel/s. This is due to the AMD card's higher ROP count of 64 versus 48.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two architectures?

A: The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has a transistor density of 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter, while the RX 7600M has 65.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip is fabricated on a 5 nm process, while the AMD chip uses 6 nm.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7600M | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 35,800 million |

| Die size | 204 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor density | 65.2M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1500 MHz | 2310 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2410 MHz | 2535 MHz |

| Memory clock | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1792 | 4352 |

| TMUs | 112 | 136 |

| ROPs | 64 | 48 |

| Ray tracing cores | 28 | 34 |

| Tensor cores | None | 136 |

| Pixel rate | 154.2 GPixel/s | 121.7 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 269.9 GTexel/s | 344.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 throughput | 17.27 TFLOPS | 22.06 TFLOPS |

| FP16 throughput | 34.55 TFLOPS (2:1) | 22.06 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 90 W | 160 W |

| Slot width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 450 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 240 mm length, 111 mm height, 40 mm width |

| Production status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release date | 2023-01-03 | 2024-03-31 |

| Predecessor | Polaris Mobile | GeForce 30 |

| Successor | None | GeForce 50 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 399 USD |