AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the architectural generation of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture on the Navi 32 chip, part of the Navi III (RX 7000) generation. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on the GB20B chip, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ between the two?

A: The RX 7700 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, which is lower throughput despite the larger capacity.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The RX 7700 XT boosts to 2544 MHz, while the N1 16SM boosts to 2346 MHz. The RX 7700 XT also has a higher base clock at 1435 MHz versus 741 MHz.

Q: What is the transistor count and die size for each chip?

A: The Navi 32 chip in the RX 7700 XT contains 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die. The N1 16SM's GB20B chip has an unknown transistor count but a 382 mm² die size.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: No. The RX 7700 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan in the database.

Q: What are the pixel and texture rates for each?

A: The RX 7700 XT achieves 244.2 GPixel/s and 549.5 GTexel/s. The N1 16SM achieves 56.30 GPixel/s and 300.3 GTexel/s.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is built on RDNA 3.0 with the Navi 32 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The NVIDIA N1 16SM is built on Blackwell 2.0 with the GB20B chip, also fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process, so the process node is identical. The RX 7700 XT belongs to the Navi III (RX 7000) generation with the codename Wheat Nas, while the N1 16SM belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation with no codename listed.

The compute resources diverge significantly. The RX 7700 XT contains 3456 shading units, 216 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operation units. The N1 16SM contains 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and only 24 ROPs. The RX 7700 XT has 54 ray tracing cores, while the N1 16SM has 16. The N1 16SM includes 64 tensor cores, a feature that is null for the RX 7700 XT, which suggests different compute priorities, but the database does not provide tensor core performance numbers for comparison.

Shader throughput shows a wide gap. The RX 7700 XT delivers 35.17 TFLOPS FP32 and the same 35.17 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS FP32 and 9.609 TFLOPS FP16, also at 1:1. That is a 3.66x difference in raw shader output. Texture rate tells a similar story: 549.5 GTexel/s versus 300.3 GTexel/s, a 1.83x gap. Pixel rate is even more lopsided at 244.2 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s, a 4.34x difference.

The memory architecture also differs. The RX 7700 XT uses 12 GB of GDDR6 at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) with a 192-bit bus and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X at 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) with a 256-bit bus but only 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The N1 16SM has more than ten times the memory capacity but 36.7% less bandwidth. The larger bus width does not compensate for the slower memory clock.

The N1 16SM is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a slot width of IGP and no power connectors. The RX 7700 XT is a dual-slot discrete card with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 245 W TDP. The N1 16SM has an unknown TDP. The RX 7700 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the N1 16SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs differ: the RX 7700 XT has 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C, while the N1 16SM has just 1x HDMI.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the RX 7700 XT and the N1 16SM. The wins count is zero for both sides in this specific pairing. Instead, the RX 7700 XT has a full set of individual benchmark scores, while the N1 16SM has an empty benchmark array.

The RX 7700 XT scores 3316 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 138383 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 46443 in Geekbench Vulkan. PassMark results include 119 for DirectX 10, 232 for DirectX 11, 79 for DirectX 12, 294 for DirectX 9, 1161 for G2D, 22547 for G3D, and 12912 for GPU compute. Its average benchmark score is 22549, and it sits at the 67th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

With no N1 16SM scores recorded, the data cannot support a direct numeric comparison. The nearest rivals for the RX 7700 XT provide context. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile has an average score of 22435, which is 0.5% behind the RX 7700 XT. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile averages 22729, putting it 0.8% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 averages 22895, 1.5% ahead. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 averages 22170, 1.7% behind. These deltas are all within a 3.2 percentage point band, indicating the RX 7700 XT sits in a tightly clustered performance tier.

The N1 16SM has an average benchmark score of 0 and a 50th percentile ranking, but with no tests run, that percentile is not derived from measured performance. The raw specification gap, such as the 3.66x FP32 difference, suggests the N1 16SM would trail substantially in compute workloads, but the absence of benchmark data means that remains an inference from specifications, not a measured result.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT | NVIDIA N1 16SM |

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

| Chip | Navi 32 | GB20B |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Generation | Navi III (RX 7000) | Blackwell IGP (N1x) |

| Die size | 346 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 28,100 million | unknown |

| Base clock | 1435 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2544 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Game clock | 2171 MHz | null |

| Memory clock | 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective | 1067 MHz 8.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 12 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | LPDDR5X |

| Bus width | 192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 432.0 GB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading units | 3456 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 216 | 128 |

| ROPs | 96 | 24 |

| Ray tracing cores | 54 | 16 |

| Tensor cores | null | 64 |

| Pixel rate | 244.2 GPixel/s | 56.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 549.5 GTexel/s | 300.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 35.17 TFLOPS | 9.609 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 35.17 TFLOPS (1:1) | 9.609 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 245 W | unknown |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | null |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C | 1x HDMI |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Length | 267 mm | null |

| Height | 135 mm | null |

| Width | 50 mm | null |

| Release date | 2023-09-05 | 2026-05-31 |

| Launch MSRP | 449 USD | null |

The RX 7700 XT is the only one with a launch MSRP, which the database lists at 449 USD. The N1 16SM has no published price. The release dates show the RX 7700 XT arriving in 2023 and the N1 16SM in 2026.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7700 XT wins on nearly every measured and specified performance dimension. Its FP32 throughput is 3.66x higher at 35.17 TFLOPS versus 9.609 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate is 4.34x higher, and its texture rate is 1.83x higher. Memory bandwidth favors the RX 7700 XT at 432.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s, which matters for high-resolution rendering and texture-heavy scenes. The RX 7700 XT also has more shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and ray tracing cores.

The N1 16SM wins on memory capacity with 128 GB versus 12 GB. That capacity advantage could matter for workloads that need to hold very large datasets locally, such as certain compute or AI inference tasks. The N1 16SM also has tensor cores, which the RX 7700 XT lacks entirely, and it uses the newer PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. Its 256-bit bus is wider than the RX 7700 XT's 192-bit bus, though the lower memory clock negates that advantage in bandwidth terms.

The N1 16SM is an IGP with no power connectors and unknown TDP, which implies a fundamentally different deployment scenario. It also has a larger die at 382 mm² versus 346 mm², even though its transistor count is unknown. The RX 7700 XT is a discrete dual-slot card requiring a 550 W suggested PSU.

In the database's percentile ranking, the RX 7700 XT sits at the 67th percentile of all GPUs, while the N1 16SM sits at the 50th percentile. However, the N1 16SM has no benchmark scores, so that 50th percentile is not grounded in measured results. The RX 7700 XT's nearest rivals all cluster within 1.7% of its average score, confirming it competes in a specific performance tier. The N1 16SM has no nearest rivals listed, so there is no comparative anchor for its position.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT as the stronger performer for graphics-intensive tasks. Its 35.17 TFLOPS FP32 output, 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 244.2 GPixel/s pixel rate give it decisive advantages in raw throughput. The 3.66x FP32 gap over the N1 16SM is the largest single specification difference, and the 4.34x pixel rate gap is even more pronounced. The RX 7700 XT also carries a full API stack with DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the N1 16SM lists N/A for all three.

The N1 16SM has its own strengths, but they point in a different direction. Its 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory is a massive capacity advantage, and its 64 tensor cores are a feature the RX 7700 XT does not offer. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface is newer than the RX 7700 XT's PCIe 4.0 x16. These features suggest the N1 16SM is oriented toward data-heavy or AI-adjacent workloads rather than traditional rasterization.

For gaming and conventional GPU compute, the RX 7700 XT is the clear choice from the data. It has measured benchmark scores across multiple suites, a 67th percentile ranking, and a launch MSRP of 449 USD. For workloads that require enormous memory capacity or tensor core acceleration, the N1 16SM is the only option with those capabilities, but the absence of any benchmark scores means its actual performance remains unquantified in the database. The RX 7700 XT's production status is Active, and so is the N1 16SM's, but the former has a release date in 2023 while the latter is dated 2026.