AMD Radeon RX 7600M vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data for these two GPUs is starkly asymmetrical. The AMD Radeon RX 7600M has a recorded average benchmark score of 63775, placing it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores, an average score of 0, and sits at the 50th percentile. This means the RX 7600M has a measurable OpenCL performance footprint, while the Rubin GPU has none in the database.

The RX 7600M's Geekbench OpenCL score of 63775 positions it within a tight competitive cluster. The database shows it is 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP, which scores 63830, and also 0.1% behind the NVIDIA CMP 30HX, which scores 63842. It is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56, which scores 63693, and 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100, which scores 64212. These are marginal differences, indicating the RX 7600M trades blows with a narrow band of desktop and professional cards. The Rubin GPU, lacking any benchmark entries, cannot be compared on these terms.

The absence of head-to-head benchmark entries for the pair means there are no direct delta percentages to cite. The only quantitative comparison available is the raw score disparity: the RX 7600M delivers a recorded 63775 points, whereas the Rubin GPU delivers 0. This is not a performance gap in the conventional sense; rather, it reflects the database's current lack of measured results for the Rubin part. The RX 7600M wins the only measurable category by default.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the AMD Radeon RX 7600M?

A: The RX 7600M has an average benchmark score of 63775, based on its Geekbench OpenCL result. This places it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Rubin GPU have any benchmark scores?

A: No. The Rubin GPU has no recorded benchmark entries, an average score of 0, and a 50th percentile rank. There are no nearest rivals listed for it either.

Q: How does the RX 7600M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 7600M is 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63830) and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63842), 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63693), and 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 (64212).

Q: What are the memory specifications of each GPU?

A: The RX 7600M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 on a 16384-bit bus with 22.1 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 7600M has a boost clock of 2410 MHz, while the Rubin GPU has a boost clock of 2267 MHz. The RX 7600M also has a higher base clock at 1500 MHz versus 700 MHz for the Rubin GPU.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The RX 7600M has a TDP of 90 W and uses no external power connectors, being an IGP part. The Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2300 W, uses an SXM Module slot, and the database lists a suggested PSU of 2700 W.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7600M wins in any scenario that relies on measured compute results, because it is the only one of the two with recorded data. Its 63775 OpenCL score and 89th percentile rank make it a functional, if unexceptional, performer relative to the wider GPU field. It also wins on clock speeds: its base clock of 1500 MHz and boost clock of 2410 MHz are both higher than the Rubin GPU's 700 MHz base and 2267 MHz boost. For portable systems, the RX 7600M's 90 W TDP, IGP slot width, and lack of power connectors make it suitable for integrated or low-power mobile configurations. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, 128-bit bus, and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth are modest but workable for mainstream workloads.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU wins decisively on raw hardware scale. Its 130.0 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarfs the RX 7600M's 17.27 TFLOPS. In FP16, the Rubin GPU delivers 260.0 TFLOPS versus 34.55 TFLOPS for the RX 7600M. Memory capacity is another clear win: 288 GB of HBM4 with 22.1 TB/s of bandwidth, compared to 8 GB of GDDR6 at 256.0 GB/s. The Rubin GPU's 16384-bit memory bus is 128 times wider than the RX 7600M's 128-bit bus. Texture rate also favors the Rubin GPU at 2,031.2 GTexel/s versus 269.9 GTexel/s. These figures indicate a server-class part built for massive parallel workloads, even though no benchmark scores are recorded.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measured specification. The RX 7600M is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The Rubin GPU is built on a 3 nm process, also at TSMC, with 336,000 million transistors on a 1456 mm² die, for a density of 230.8M per mm². The Rubin GPU has roughly 25 times the transistor count and a die over seven times larger.

Compute units diverge sharply. The RX 7600M has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores. The Rubin GPU has 28672 shading units, 896 TMUs, only 24 ROPs, and no listed RT core count. Instead, the Rubin GPU includes 896 tensor cores, while the RX 7600M has none listed. Pixel rate favors the RX 7600M at 154.2 GPixel/s versus 54.41 GPixel/s for the Rubin GPU. Texture rate favors the Rubin GPU at 2,031.2 GTexel/s versus 269.9 GTexel/s.

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The RX 7600M uses 8 GB GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Rubin GPU uses 288 GB HBM4 with a 16384-bit bus and 22.1 TB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks also differ: the RX 7600M runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective, while the Rubin GPU runs at 2695 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective.

Power and physical specifications set them apart completely. The RX 7600M has a 90 W TDP, is an IGP slot width, uses no power connectors, and has a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. The Rubin GPU has a 2300 W TDP, an SXM Module slot width, and a PCIe 6.0 x16 interface. The suggested PSU for the Rubin GPU is 2700 W. Display outputs are portable-device dependent for the RX 7600M, while the Rubin GPU has no outputs. API support also differs: the RX 7600M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Rubin GPU lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Architecture Differences

The RX 7600M uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture on the Navi 33 chip, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation and the Radeon RX 7000 series. Its predecessor is Polaris Mobile, and it was released on 2023-01-03. The Rubin GPU uses the Rubin architecture on the GR100 chip, with no codename listed. It belongs to the Server Rubin (Rxx) generation, has no series designation, and its predecessor is Server Blackwell. Its release date is listed as 2025-12-31.

The transistor density difference reflects the architectural gap: 65.2M per mm² for the RX 7600M versus 230.8M per mm² for the Rubin GPU. The RX 7600M's FP16 performance of 34.55 TFLOPS is listed at a 2:1 ratio to its FP32, and the Rubin GPU's FP16 of 260.0 TFLOPS is likewise 2:1. The presence of 896 tensor cores on the Rubin GPU indicates a compute-oriented design, whereas the RX 7600M's 28 RT cores and lack of tensor cores point toward a graphics-first mobile part. The RX 7600M supports modern graphics APIs across the board; the Rubin GPU reports no API support, consistent with a server accelerator that does not target conventional graphics workloads.

The Verdict

The data points to two completely different product categories. The AMD Radeon RX 7600M is a mobile graphics processor with a recorded benchmark score of 63775, a 89th percentile ranking, and a 90 W TDP. It is designed for portable devices, uses no external power connectors, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Any user needing a functional mobile GPU with measurable OpenCL performance should look to the RX 7600M, given its active production status and 2023 release date.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is a server-class accelerator with a 2300 W TDP, an SXM Module form factor, and a suggested PSU of 2700 W. It has no display outputs, no API support, and no recorded benchmarks. Its 288 GB of HBM4 memory, 22.1 TB/s bandwidth, 896 tensor cores, and 130.0 TFLOPS of FP32 performance indicate a part built for large-scale compute rather than graphics. A user deploying server accelerators would choose the Rubin GPU for its sheer throughput capacity, though the database currently lacks performance measurements to validate it.

The RX 7600M wins on clock speed, pixel rate, portability, and measurable compute scores. The Rubin GPU wins on transistor count, die size, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, FP32 and FP16 throughput, texture rate, and tensor core count. Neither part directly serves the other's intended use case. The choice rests entirely on whether the workload is mobile graphics, which the RX 7600M supports with real data, or server-scale parallel compute, where the Rubin GPU's specifications indicate capability despite zero recorded benchmark results.