AMD Radeon RX 7600M vs NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile and AMD Radeon RX 7600M represent two different philosophies for mobile graphics. Data from the FACT PACK shows the RTX A3000 Mobile holds a 24% lead in the single shared benchmark, but the RX 7600M counters with a more modern architecture, higher clock speeds, and double the memory capacity. The comparison is not a simple winner-takes-all affair; it is a study in contrasting design priorities, where raw compute, rasterization throughput, and memory configuration each tell a different story about intended workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile leads with an average benchmark score of 70,140, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 7600M’s 63,775. This places the RTX A3000 Mobile in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 7600M sits in the 89th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RTX A3000 Mobile scores 79,091 versus the RX 7600M’s 63,775, a difference of 24%. This is the only head-to-head benchmark available in the data.

Q: What are the memory configurations of the two GPUs?

A: The RTX A3000 Mobile has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 264.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a more advanced manufacturing process?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600M is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile uses an 8 nm process from Samsung. The smaller node allows for higher transistor density: 65.2M per mm² for the RX 7600M versus 44.4M per mm² for the RTX A3000 Mobile.

Q: How do the boost clock speeds compare?

A: The RX 7600M boosts to 2410 MHz, nearly double the RTX A3000 Mobile’s 1230 MHz boost clock. The RX 7600M also has a higher base clock at 1500 MHz versus 600 MHz.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile has 4096 shading units, more than double the RX 7600M’s 1792. However, the RX 7600M achieves higher FP32 throughput at 17.27 TFLOPS versus 10.08 TFLOPS for the RTX A3000 Mobile.

Architecture Differences

The architectures are fundamentally different generations. The RTX A3000 Mobile is based on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture, specifically the GA104 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm Samsung process. The AMD part uses RDNA 3.0, with the Navi 33 chip, built on TSMC’s 6 nm node. The process advantage is clear: the RX 7600M packs 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, resulting in a density of 65.2M per mm². The RTX A3000 Mobile has more transistors overall (17,400 million) but on a much larger 392 mm² die, yielding a lower density of 44.4M per mm².

The compute architectures diverge sharply. NVIDIA’s Ampere design uses 4096 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, supported by 32 RT cores and 128 tensor cores. AMD’s RDNA 3.0 takes a different path with only 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, plus 28 RT cores. Notably, the RX 7600M does not list tensor cores at all, indicating a focus on traditional shader work rather than AI-accelerated features. The FP16 throughput also reveals a philosophical split: the RTX A3000 Mobile offers 10.08 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the RX 7600M provides 34.55 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, showing a much stronger investment in half-precision compute.

Memory architecture also differs. The RTX A3000 Mobile uses a 192-bit memory bus with 6 GB of GDDR6, while the RX 7600M uses a narrower 128-bit bus but compensates with 8 GB of GDDR6. Bandwidth is nearly identical (264.0 GB/s vs 256.0 GB/s), but the effective memory speed differs: 11 Gbps for the RTX A3000 Mobile versus 16 Gbps for the RX 7600M. The RX 7600M’s higher base and boost clocks (1500 MHz and 2410 MHz) contrast with the RTX A3000 Mobile’s relatively low 600 MHz base and 1230 MHz boost, suggesting very different power and thermal envelopes. The TDP confirms this: 90 W for the RX 7600M versus 70 W for the RTX A3000 Mobile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is a decisive win for the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile. The score of 79,091 versus 63,775 represents a 24% advantage for the older Ampere chip. This is a significant margin, especially considering the RTX A3000 Mobile has lower clock speeds and a larger process node. The result suggests that NVIDIA’s investment in more shading units (4096 vs 1792) and a wider memory bus (192-bit vs 128-bit) pays off in this particular compute workload, despite the RX 7600M’s higher FP32 theoretical throughput of 17.27 TFLOPS versus 10.08 TFLOPS.

The deltaPct values against nearest rivals provide context. The RTX A3000 Mobile sits 0.2% above the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 and 1.7% above the NVIDIA CMP 90HX, showing it is competitive with desktop-class parts. Meanwhile, the RX 7600M is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (-0.1%) and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (-0.1%). This indicates that the RTX A3000 Mobile’s 24% lead in the head-to-head is not a fluke; it is performing well above its class, while the RX 7600M is more aligned with mid-range expectations.

The Geekbench Vulkan test was only run on the RTX A3000 Mobile, scoring 61,189. While there is no direct comparison, this data point shows NVIDIA’s API support is robust. The absence of a Vulkan score for the RX 7600M in the FACT PACK is a notable gap, leaving questions about its performance in cross-platform workloads unanswered.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification. The RTX A3000 Mobile uses the GA104 chip on an 8 nm Samsung process, while the RX 7600M uses Navi 33 on a 6 nm TSMC process. Transistor counts are 17,400 million versus 13,300 million, but die size is dramatically different: 392 mm² for NVIDIA versus 204 mm² for AMD. This leads to the density gap of 44.4M per mm² versus 65.2M per mm².

Clock speeds are a major differentiator. The RTX A3000 Mobile has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost of 1230 MHz, with memory running at 1375 MHz (11 Gbps effective). The RX 7600M has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost of 2410 MHz, with a game clock of 2070 MHz and memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). Memory capacity and bus width also differ: 6 GB on a 192-bit bus for NVIDIA versus 8 GB on a 128-bit bus for AMD. Bandwidth is close (264.0 GB/s vs 256.0 GB/s), but the distribution is different.

Compute resources show NVIDIA’s advantage in raw count: 4096 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 32 RT cores, and 128 tensor cores. AMD counters with 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed. The pixel rate is nearly double for AMD (154.2 GPixel/s versus 78.72 GPixel/s), while the texture rate is also higher for AMD (269.9 GTexel/s versus 157.4 GTexel/s). FP32 performance favors AMD at 17.27 TFLOPS versus 10.08 TFLOPS, and FP16 is even more lopsided at 34.55 TFLOPS versus 10.08 TFLOPS.

Power consumption differs, with the RX 7600M rated at 90 W TDP versus 70 W for the RTX A3000 Mobile. The RTX A3000 Mobile is end-of-life, released in April 2021, while the RX 7600M is active, released in January 2023. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16 and support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has a launch MSRP listed in the data.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A3000 Mobile wins in the benchmark that matters most for this comparison: the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it is 24% ahead. It also wins on memory bandwidth (264.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s), shading unit count, and the presence of tensor cores, which could be valuable for AI-accelerated tasks. Its higher average benchmark score (70,140 versus 63,775) and better percentile ranking (91st versus 89th) reinforce its overall compute advantage. The 6 GB memory capacity, while smaller, is paired with a wider bus, which may benefit certain memory-latency-sensitive workloads.

The RX 7600M wins on raw specification sheet advantages. It has more memory (8 GB versus 6 GB), higher clock speeds (2410 MHz boost versus 1230 MHz), and significantly higher FP32 and FP16 throughput (17.27 TFLOPS and 34.55 TFLOPS versus 10.08 TFLOPS for both on NVIDIA). The pixel rate of 154.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 269.9 GTexel/s are both well ahead of the RTX A3000 Mobile’s 78.72 GPixel/s and 157.4 GTexel/s. This suggests the RX 7600M could excel in fill-rate-bound scenarios, such as traditional rasterization at high resolutions, even if its compute benchmark score lags.

The nearest rival data offers additional insight. The RTX A3000 Mobile’s rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE, which scores 70,829 and is 1% ahead. This places the RTX A3000 Mobile in the upper tier of mobile GPUs. The RX 7600M’s rivals are all within 0.7% of its score, showing it is a more mainstream part. The RTX A3000 Mobile’s 91st percentile ranking versus the RX 7600M’s 89th percentile is a small but consistent gap.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear verdict for compute-heavy workloads: the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile is the stronger GPU. Its 24% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is substantial, and its 70,140 average score versus 63,775 for the RX 7600M is backed by a higher percentile ranking. For users running OpenCL-based applications, the RTX A3000 Mobile is the obvious choice, despite its older architecture and lower clock speeds. The presence of tensor cores and a 1:1 FP16/FP32 ratio suggests NVIDIA prioritized flexibility, which is reflected in its benchmark dominance.

However, the RX 7600M should not be dismissed. Its 8 GB memory capacity is larger, and its FP32 and FP16 throughput are significantly higher. The pixel and texture rates are nearly double those of the RTX A3000 Mobile, indicating that in rasterization-heavy tasks, the AMD part could outperform its benchmark score suggests. The 6 nm process and higher clock speeds point to a more efficient design at peak performance, even if its TDP is higher at 90 W versus 70 W.

The choice hinges on workload. For compute and professional applications where OpenCL performance is critical, the RTX A3000 Mobile is the data-backed winner. For gaming or tasks that benefit from higher fill rates and more memory, the RX 7600M presents a compelling alternative, especially considering its active production status versus NVIDIA’s end-of-life part. The 24% benchmark gap is significant, but it is a single data point. The RX 7600M’s architectural advantages in clock speed and memory capacity mean it could close that gap in different scenarios. The safest conclusion is that the RTX A3000 Mobile is the safer bet for raw compute performance, while the RX 7600M offers a more modern feature set with potential advantages in memory-heavy and fill-rate-bound tasks.