AMD Radeon RX 7600M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct head-to-head comparison between the AMD Radeon RX 7600M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER, and the result is decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 4080 SUPER scored 219,065 points, while the RX 7600M managed 63,775 points. That represents a 70.9% advantage for the NVIDIA card, a massive gap that underscores the fundamental performance chasm between these two products.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the RTX 4080 SUPER does not just beat the RX 7600M; it operates in a different performance tier entirely. The RTX 4080 SUPER's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 54,209, which is comparable to its nearest rivals: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 at 54,247 (-0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X at 54,828 (-1.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB at 55,698 (-2.7%), and the AMD Radeon 8060S at 55,757 (-2.8%). Meanwhile, the RX 7600M's average score of 63,775 places it near the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63,830 (-0.1%) and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX at 63,842 (-0.1%), with the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 at 63,693 (0.1%) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 at 64,212 (-0.7%) as its closest competitors.

The percentile rankings tell a similar story, though with a twist. The RX 7600M sits at the 89th percentile among all GPUs in the database, which is actually higher than the RTX 4080 SUPER's 86th percentile. This is a useful reminder that percentile placement is influenced by the entire distribution of scores, not just raw performance. The RX 7600M's single benchmark result is more concentrated, while the RTX 4080 SUPER's average is dragged down by a wider spread of test results, including lower scores in legacy DirectX tests like PassMark DirectX 9 (381 points) and PassMark DirectX 10 (193 points). Still, in the only test where both cards appear together, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the clear winner by a margin that is difficult to overstate.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4080 SUPER wins the only head-to-head benchmark, which means it takes the single victory in the direct comparison. But the available data also reveals where each card excels in its own right.

For the RTX 4080 SUPER, its strongest results come from modern, compute-heavy workloads. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 260,075 is the highest single benchmark result recorded for this card, indicating that it thrives in applications that leverage Vulkan's low-overhead API. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 219,065 is also exceptionally high, reinforcing its strength in general-purpose GPU compute tasks. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6,600 points shows solid DirectX 12 performance, which is the API used by most contemporary games. The card also posts a PassMark G3D score of 34,245 and a PassMark GPU Compute score of 19,822, both of which are respectable for a high-end GPU. In terms of raw throughput, the RTX 4080 SUPER delivers 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and the same 52.22 TFLOPS for FP16, meaning it handles both precision formats at a 1:1 ratio.

For the RX 7600M, the data is more limited. Its only recorded benchmark is the Geekbench OpenCL score of 63,775, which is the same result used in the head-to-head comparison. This places it in a competitive position relative to its nearest rivals, all of which score within about 1% of each other. The RX 7600M's FP32 throughput is 17.27 TFLOPS, while its FP16 output is 34.55 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it can double its FP16 performance compared to FP32. This characteristic makes it potentially useful for workloads that can take advantage of reduced precision, though the overall compute ceiling is far lower than the RTX 4080 SUPER's.

Where the RX 7600M does have an edge is in efficiency and form factor, which are not directly measured by the benchmarks but are reflected in the specification data. The RX 7600M has a thermal design power of 90 W, which is dramatically lower than the RTX 4080 SUPER's 320 W. The RX 7600M is also designed as an integrated graphics package (IGP) with no power connectors required, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is a triple-slot card that requires a 16-pin connector and a suggested power supply of 700 W. These factors make the RX 7600M suitable for thin-and-light portable devices, whereas the RTX 4080 SUPER is clearly aimed at desktop towers with ample cooling and power headroom.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different architectural lineages, which explains the performance gap. The RX 7600M is built on AMD's RDNA 3.0 architecture, using the Navi 33 chip with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish." It belongs to the Navi Mobile generation within the RX 7000M series. The RTX 4080 SUPER, by contrast, uses NVIDIA's Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD103 chip and is part of the GeForce 40-series.

The manufacturing process is a key differentiator. The RX 7600M is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the RTX 4080 SUPER uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The smaller node allows the RTX 4080 SUPER to pack significantly more transistors: 45,900 million versus 13,300 million for the RX 7600M. The die size also differs substantially, with the RTX 4080 SUPER at 379 mm² compared to 204 mm² for the RX 7600M. This results in a much higher transistor density for the NVIDIA chip at 121.1 million transistors per mm², versus 65.2 million for the AMD chip.

The compute resources are vastly different in scale. The RTX 4080 SUPER features 10,240 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 112 render output units, along with 80 ray tracing cores and 320 tensor cores. The RX 7600M has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 28 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores at all. These numbers translate directly into the fill rate and throughput figures: the RTX 4080 SUPER achieves a pixel rate of 285.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 816.0 GTexel/s, while the RX 7600M manages 154.2 GPixel/s and 269.9 GTexel/s, respectively.

Memory configuration is another major divergence. The RTX 4080 SUPER comes with 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, which provides 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The effective memory clock speeds also differ: 23 Gbps for the RTX 4080 SUPER versus 16 Gbps for the RX 7600M. Clock speeds for the GPU cores themselves show the RTX 4080 SUPER running at a base of 2,295 MHz and a boost of 2,550 MHz, while the RX 7600M operates at a base of 1,500 MHz and a boost of 2,410 MHz, with a game clock of 2,070 MHz.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so they are on par for modern API support. The RTX 4080 SUPER includes dedicated tensor cores, which are absent from the RX 7600M, giving NVIDIA a hardware advantage in AI-accelerated workloads. The RX 7600M, however, benefits from being a mobile-focused part with a much lower power envelope.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER scored 219,065 points, which is 70.9% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 7600M's 63,775 points.

Q: How do these GPUs compare in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER provides 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth from 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, while the RX 7600M offers 256.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 7600M has a thermal design power of 90 W, while the RTX 4080 SUPER has a 320 W TDP and requires a 700 W suggested power supply.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which card has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has 80 ray tracing cores, while the RX 7600M has 28.

Q: What is the release timeline for these products?

A: The RX 7600M was released on January 3, 2023, and the RTX 4080 SUPER was released on January 30, 2024.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7600M | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER |

|:---------------|:--------------------|:-------------------------------|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 45,900 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 379 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 121.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1500 MHz | 2295 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2410 MHz | 2550 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1438 MHz (23 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 736.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 10240 |

| TMUs | 112 | 320 |

| ROPs | 64 | 112 |

| RT Cores | 28 | 80 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 320 |

| Pixel Rate | 154.2 GPixel/s | 285.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 269.9 GTexel/s | 816.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 17.27 TFLOPS | 52.22 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 34.55 TFLOPS (2:1) | 52.22 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 90 W | 320 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Triple-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 700 W |

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

| Dimensions | Not specified | 310 mm x 140 mm x 61 mm |

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

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2024-01-30 |

| Predecessor | Polaris Mobile | GeForce 30 |

| Successor | None | GeForce 50 |