AMD Radeon RX 7600 vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon RX 7600 and the NVIDIA N1 16SM. The head-to-head array is empty, and the win counts for both sides are zero. This absence of comparative data means any direct performance assessment must rely on the individual benchmark scores recorded for the RX 7600 and the architectural specifications of both parts.

The RX 7600 has ten recorded benchmark scores across multiple test suites. Its strongest result appears in Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 88,051, while its Vulkan score in Geekbench reaches 34,401. In the Passmark suite, the GPU Compute score is 8,790, the G3D score is 16,634, and the DirectX 11 score is 172. Lower scores appear in DirectX 12 at 58, DirectX 10 at 84, and DirectX 9 at 226. The G2D score is 984, and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2,310. The average benchmark score across these ten tests is 15,171.

The N1 16SM has no recorded benchmarks in the database. Its average benchmark score is listed as 0, and its percentile versus all GPUs is 50. The RX 7600 sits at the 57th percentile, which places it slightly above the midpoint of all GPUs tracked. The N1 16SM's percentile of 50 indicates it is positioned at the median of the distribution, despite having no test scores to substantiate that placement.

The RX 7600's nearest rivals provide context for its performance tier. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM has an average score of 15,199, which is 0.2% higher than the RX 7600. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X scores 15,082, 0.6% lower. The AMD Radeon 680M integrated GPU scores 15,270, 0.7% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti scores 15,063, 0.7% lower. These deltas are all within one percentage point, indicating that the RX 7600 sits in a tightly clustered performance band where the four nearest rivals are virtually indistinguishable in aggregate score.

The N1 16SM has no nearest rivals listed, so no comparative deltas exist for it. The data shows that direct quantitative comparison between the two parts is impossible from recorded measurements alone. What remains is an architectural comparison, which reveals substantial differences in design philosophy and intended use.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It belongs to the Navi III generation within the RX 7000 series. The process node is 6 nm at TSMC, and the die size measures 204 mm². Transistor count is 13,300 million, giving a density of 65.2 million transistors per square millimeter.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip built on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, belonging to the Blackwell IGP generation under the N1x family. Its process node is 5 nm at TSMC, and the die size is 382 mm². Transistor count is listed as unknown, and transistor density is not recorded.

The RX 7600 has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units. It includes 32 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The N1 16SM also has 2,048 shading units and 128 TMUs, but only 24 ROPs. It includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. The SM count in the name likely refers to streaming multiprocessors, and with 16 SMs, the N1 16SM delivers its 2,048 shading units through that configuration.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The RX 7600 has a base clock of 1720 MHz, a boost clock of 2655 MHz, and a game clock of 2250 MHz. The N1 16SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz, with no game clock listed. The memory clocks also differ: the RX 7600 runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the N1 16SM runs at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective.

Memory configurations are starkly different. The RX 7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, yielding 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite the N1 16SM having twice the bus width and sixteen times the capacity, its bandwidth is actually lower due to the much slower memory clock.

Compute throughput favors the RX 7600 heavily. Its FP32 performance is 21.75 TFLOPS, and FP16 is also 21.75 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16. Pixel rate for the RX 7600 is 169.9 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s for the N1 16SM. Texture rate is 339.8 GTexel/s versus 300.3 GTexel/s.

The bus interface differs as well. The RX 7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the N1 16SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The RX 7600 is a dual-slot card with a 1x 8-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The N1 16SM is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and no suggested PSU listed. Display outputs are also different: the RX 7600 has 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, while the N1 16SM has only 1x HDMI.

API support differs substantially. The RX 7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists all three APIs as N/A. The RX 7600 has a release date of May 24, 2023, while the N1 16SM is dated May 31, 2026.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The RX 7600 delivers 21.75 TFLOPS in FP32, while the N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS. The RX 7600 is more than twice as fast in this metric.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600 has higher bandwidth despite a narrower bus and smaller capacity.

Q: What is the difference in pixel filling rate?

A: The RX 7600 achieves 169.9 GPixel/s, while the N1 16SM achieves 56.30 GPixel/s. The RX 7600 is approximately three times faster in pixel throughput.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RX 7600 has 32 ray tracing cores, while the N1 16SM has 16. The N1 16SM compensates with 64 tensor cores, which the RX 7600 lacks entirely.

Q: What are the production and release dates?

A: The RX 7600 was released on May 24, 2023, and is marked as Active. The N1 16SM has a release date of May 31, 2026, and is also marked as Active.

Q: How do the process nodes and die sizes compare?

A: The RX 7600 uses TSMC's 6 nm process with a 204 mm² die, while the N1 16SM uses TSMC's 5 nm process with a 382 mm² die. The N1 16SM's die is nearly twice as large, though its transistor count is unknown.

The Verdict

The data shows two parts aimed at fundamentally different segments. The RX 7600 is a discrete dual-slot graphics card with a 165 W TDP, a 450 W suggested PSU, and a launch MSRP of 269 USD. It has a full set of benchmark scores and sits at the 57th percentile across all GPUs. The N1 16SM is an integrated graphics processor with no power connectors, no TDP listed, and no benchmark scores recorded. It sits at the 50th percentile, but that percentile is unsubstantiated by any measurements.

For compute-heavy workloads, the RX 7600 is the clear choice. Its FP32 throughput of 21.75 TFLOPS dwarfs the N1 16SM's 9.609 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s means it can drive higher resolutions and refresh rates in rasterized content. Its texture rate of 339.8 GTexel/s versus 300.3 GTexel/s gives it a smaller but still meaningful edge in texture-bound scenes.

The N1 16SM has advantages in memory capacity and bus width. Its 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus is an order of magnitude more memory than the RX 7600's 8 GB. This capacity could benefit workloads that require large datasets resident in GPU memory, such as certain AI inference or large-scale data processing tasks. Its 64 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for matrix operations, which the RX 7600 lacks. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface also offers substantially more host bandwidth than the RX 7600's PCIe 4.0 x8.

The N1 16SM's lower clock speeds and reduced ROP count suggest it is not designed for high-fill-rate gaming. Its 741 MHz base clock and 2346 MHz boost clock are well below the RX 7600's 1720 MHz base and 2655 MHz boost. Its 24 ROPs versus 64 ROPs limit its ability to output pixels efficiently. The API support listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan further indicates it is not aimed at conventional gaming or graphics applications.

For gaming, the RX 7600's benchmark scores and nearest-rival deltas place it in a well-established performance tier. Its nearest rivals are all within 0.7% of its average score, showing consistent performance around the 15,000-point mark. The N1 16SM has no comparable data, so no gaming performance can be inferred from the database.

For non-graphics compute with tensor operations, the N1 16SM's 64 tensor cores and large memory pool could be relevant. But without benchmark scores, the database provides no evidence of actual performance. The RX 7600's recorded scores and percentile ranking give it a verified performance profile, while the N1 16SM remains an unknown quantity.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7600 | NVIDIA N1 16SM |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1720 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2655 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| ROPs | 64 | 24 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 32 | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 64 |

| FP32 Performance | 21.75 TFLOPS | 9.609 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 21.75 TFLOPS | 9.609 TFLOPS |

| Pixel Rate | 169.9 GPixel/s | 56.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 339.8 GTexel/s | 300.3 GTexel/s |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 | 1x HDMI |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2023-05-24 | 2026-05-31 |

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600 wins in raw graphics throughput. Its FP32 compute is 2.26 times higher than the N1 16SM, its pixel rate is 3.02 times higher, and its texture rate is 1.13 times higher. The RX 7600 also has double the ray tracing cores and more than double the ROPs. Its boost clock is 309 MHz higher, and its base clock is 979 MHz higher. Its memory bandwidth is 14.8 GB/s higher, which is a modest margin but still a win. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support make it suitable for modern gaming APIs, while the N1 16SM lists N/A for all three.

The N1 16SM wins in memory capacity and bus width. Its 128 GB is sixteen times the RX 7600's 8 GB, and its 256-bit bus is double the RX 7600's 128-bit bus. Its 64 tensor cores provide specialized hardware that the RX 7600 does not have at all. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface offers a newer and wider host connection than the RX 7600's PCIe 4.0 x8. Its 5 nm process node is one generation ahead of the 6 nm node used by the RX 7600. Its 382 mm² die is larger, though the transistor count is unknown. Its IGP form factor with no power connectors means it consumes no external power, whereas the RX 7600 requires a 1x 8-pin connector and a 450 W suggested PSU.

The RX 7600's benchmark record confirms it can perform in real-world test suites. The N1 16SM has no such record. The RX 7600's percentile of 57 versus the N1 16SM's 50 suggests the database places the RX 7600 higher in the overall GPU distribution, though the N1 16SM's percentile lacks supporting scores. The RX 7600's nearest rivals cluster within 0.7%, indicating consistent, predictable performance. The N1 16SM has no rivals listed, so no similar comparison exists.

The RX 7600 wins in gaming and traditional graphics workloads. The N1 16SM wins in memory-heavy and tensor-heavy applications, provided its unrecorded performance meets expectations. The database's inability to benchmark the N1 16SM leaves its actual capabilities unverified. For any user requiring confirmed graphics performance, the RX 7600 is the only part with supporting evidence. For users needing massive memory capacity or tensor acceleration in an integrated form factor, the N1 16SM offers specifications that the RX 7600 cannot match.