AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT occupy very different corners of the GPU landscape, yet their average benchmark scores land nearly on top of each other: the RTX 3090 averages 27,565, while the RX 6700 XT averages 27,425, a difference of just 0.5%. That statistical tie, however, hides a starkly divergent set of strengths and weaknesses. The data shows a 9-to-1 split in head-to-head wins favoring NVIDIA, but the single AMD victory comes in a workload where the margin is enormous. This is a classic case of a specialized heavyweight versus a balanced middleweight, and the right choice depends entirely on the target application.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RTX 3090 dominates the raw compute and modern API tests. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 5,118 against the RX 6700 XT's 2,435, a crushing 110.2% advantage. That is not a marginal win; it is a doubling of performance in a demanding DirectX 12 workload. The gap widens further in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RTX 3090 posts 172,758 versus 44,152, a 291.3% lead. This reflects the sheer scale of the NVIDIA chip: 10,496 shading units and 35.58 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, versus 2,560 shading units and 13.21 TFLOPS on the AMD side.

The pattern holds across legacy DirectX tests. PassMark DirectX 10 shows the RTX 3090 ahead by 46.8% (182 vs. 124), DirectX 11 by 27.2% (220 vs. 173), and DirectX 12 by 42.9% (110 vs. 77). Even DirectX 9, where the margin is smallest, still favors NVIDIA at 268 vs. 242, a 10.7% lead. The RTX 3090 also wins the 2D and general 3D categories: PassMark G2D at 1,063 vs. 951 (11.8% ahead) and PassMark G3D at 26,645 vs. 19,786 (34.7% ahead). Compute-heavy PassMark GPU Compute goes to NVIDIA at 15,356 vs. 9,336, a 64.5% margin.

The one AMD win is striking. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6700 XT scores 93,500 against the RTX 3090's 53,927, meaning AMD is 42.3% ahead. This is a massive reversal, suggesting that AMD's RDNA 2.0 architecture handles Vulkan's low-level driver overhead more efficiently, or that the test scales better with the RX 6700 XT's architecture. It is notably NVIDIA still wins the overall average, but this single result prevents a shutout and hints at real architectural differences in API efficiency.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different processes and designs. The RTX 3090 uses NVIDIA's Ampere architecture on an 8 nm Samsung node, packing 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die. The RX 6700 XT uses AMD's RDNA 2.0 on a 7 nm TSMC process, with 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die. Despite the smaller transistor count, the AMD chip has a higher transistor density at 51.3M per mm² versus 45.1M per mm² for NVIDIA. Clock speeds tell the opposite story: the RX 6700 XT runs a base of 2321 MHz and boost of 2581 MHz, while the RTX 3090 sits at 1395 MHz base and 1695 MHz boost. AMD's higher frequencies help close the gap in some tests, but they cannot overcome the RTX 3090's nearly 4x shading unit count.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The RTX 3090 features 24 GB of GDDR6X across a 384-bit bus, delivering 936.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6700 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 384.0 GB/s. That is a 2.4x bandwidth advantage for NVIDIA, which directly impacts high-resolution textures and compute workloads. The RTX 3090 also brings 328 tensor cores and 82 RT cores; AMD offers 40 RT cores and no tensor core equivalent. Interestingly, the FP16 output is identical on NVIDIA at 35.58 TFLOPS (1:1), while AMD's FP16 runs at 26.43 TFLOPS (2:1), meaning AMD's FP16 is actually higher relative to its FP32.

Power and physical size reflect their positioning. The RTX 3090 is a 350 W triple-slot card requiring a 750 W PSU and a single 12-pin connector. The RX 6700 XT is a 230 W dual-slot card on a 550 W PSU, using one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector. Physically, the RTX 3090 measures 336 mm long, 140 mm tall, and 61 mm wide, while the RX 6700 XT is 267 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. The NVIDIA card is a serious case-fitting exercise; the AMD card fits far more easily.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 averages 27,565, while the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT averages 27,425, a 0.5% difference in favor of NVIDIA. Both sit in the 72nd-73rd percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Why does the RX 6700 XT win in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RX 6700 XT scores 93,500 versus the RTX 3090's 53,927, a 42.3% advantage. This suggests RDNA 2.0's Vulkan driver implementation is more efficient, despite the NVIDIA card having far more raw compute resources.

Q: How big is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 3090 has 936.2 GB/s bandwidth from 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus. The RX 6700 XT offers 384.0 GB/s from 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. NVIDIA's bandwidth is roughly 2.4x higher.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference?

A: The RTX 3090 delivers 35.58 TFLOPS FP32, while the RX 6700 XT delivers 13.21 TFLOPS. That is a 2.7x advantage for NVIDIA in single-precision floating-point throughput.

Q: Do both cards support the same modern APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. They also have identical display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Q: Which card is easier to fit in a typical PC case?

A: The RX 6700 XT is 267 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, fitting a dual-slot bracket. The RTX 3090 is 336 mm long, 140 mm tall, and 61 mm wide, requiring a triple-slot bracket and significantly more clearance.

Specification Differences

The most glaring differences are in core configuration and memory. The RTX 3090 has 10,496 shading units, 328 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, versus the RX 6700 XT's 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. NVIDIA also includes 328 tensor cores and 82 RT cores; AMD has 40 RT cores and no tensor cores. Pixel rate is 189.8 GPixel/s on NVIDIA versus 165.2 GPixel/s on AMD, while texture rate is 556.0 GTexel/s versus 413.0 GTexel/s.

Memory is a stark differentiator: 24 GB GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus versus 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. Bandwidth is 936.2 GB/s versus 384.0 GB/s. Clock speeds favor AMD: base 2321 MHz and boost 2581 MHz versus NVIDIA's 1395 MHz and 1695 MHz. Power draw is 350 W versus 230 W, and the PSU recommendation is 750 W versus 550 W. The cards use different connectors: 1x 12-pin on NVIDIA, 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin on AMD.

Physical dimensions differ substantially: 336 mm x 140 mm x 61 mm for the RTX 3090, versus 267 mm x 110 mm x 40 mm for the RX 6700 XT. Slot width is triple-slot on NVIDIA and dual-slot on AMD. The RTX 3090 launched on 2020-08-31, while the RX 6700 XT launched on 2021-03-02. Both are end-of-life. The RTX 3090's launch MSRP is 1,499 USD; the RX 6700 XT's launch MSRP is 479 USD.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3090 is the clear winner in any workload that stresses raw compute or large memory pools. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5,118 versus 2,435 shows it is built for next-generation rendering, and its 291.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL makes it the obvious pick for GPU compute tasks like rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference. The 24 GB frame buffer and 936.2 GB/s bandwidth give it headroom for 4K texture packs and large dataset processing that would exhaust the RX 6700 XT's 12 GB. PassMark results across DirectX 10, 11, and 12 all favor NVIDIA, so it is the safer choice for a broad library of older and current games.

The RX 6700 XT wins in exactly one measured scenario: Geekbench Vulkan, where it leads by 42.3%. For users running Vulkan-based games or applications that leverage that API's lower overhead, this could translate to real-world advantages, especially at lower resolutions where CPU-bound scenarios favor AMD's higher clocks. The RX 6700 XT also wins on efficiency in a practical sense: it draws 230 W versus 350 W, runs dual-slot versus triple-slot, and fits in far smaller cases. It is the better choice for compact builds or systems with modest power supplies, though the data does not show it winning any other benchmark.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. If you need maximum compute throughput, NVIDIA's RTX 3090 is the winner in 9 of 10 head-to-head tests, often by massive margins. Its 110.2% lead in Steel Nomad and 291.3% lead in OpenCL are not minor edges; they represent a fundamentally higher performance ceiling. The 24 GB memory and 936.2 GB/s bandwidth make it the only card here that can handle very large workloads without hitting a wall. This is a card for serious rendering, AI, and high-end 4K gaming where every frame counts and texture memory is a limiting factor.

If your priority is Vulkan performance specifically, or if you need a card that fits in a smaller chassis and draws less power, the RX 6700 XT is the data-backed pick. Its 42.3% Vulkan advantage is significant, and its 230 W TDP and dual-slot profile make it far more manageable in real-world builds. The average scores are nearly identical, so the deciding factor should be the workload. For general gaming across multiple APIs, NVIDIA wins more tests. For Vulkan-focused applications and compact builds, AMD holds the edge. The RTX 3090 is the performance king; the RX 6700 XT is the efficiency specialist. Choose accordingly.