AMD Radeon RX 7600S vs NVIDIA T400 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 7600S and NVIDIA T400 occupy opposite ends of the graphics hardware spectrum, yet benchmark data places them in close proximity. The RX 7600S, a mobile RDNA 3.0 part, and the T400, a desktop Turing-era workstation card, share the same 60th percentile ranking among all GPUs. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the RX 7600S at 16696 and the T400 at 16508, a difference of just 1.1%. This statistical closeness belies the massive architectural and generational gaps between them, which the head-to-head tests reveal in stark detail.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between these two cards is limited to two compute-oriented tests, and the results are decisively one-sided. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 7600S scores 68012, while the NVIDIA T400 manages only 17039. This represents a 299.2% advantage for the AMD part. The margin is even wider in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 7600S achieves 73868 against the T400's 15976, a 362.4% lead. These are not marginal wins; they are overwhelming generational leaps.

The RX 7600S's Vulkan result is particularly telling. A 362.4% delta indicates that the AMD architecture is not just faster in raw throughput but also far more efficient at translating its hardware capabilities through modern graphics APIs. The T400, built on Turing, was never designed for this level of compute performance, and its scores reflect a fundamental limitation rather than a tuning issue.

Across the two head-to-head benchmarks, the RX 7600S claims 2 wins and the T400 claims 0. Neither card shows a countervailing strength in this direct comparison. The data does not support any scenario where the T400 outperforms the RX 7600S in compute workloads. However, the T400's average score of 16508 is boosted by its inclusion in the nearestRivals list, where it sits just 1.1% behind the RX 7600S's 16696 average. This is a function of the RX 7600S having a broader benchmark suite, including older DirectX tests where it scores lower, pulling its average down toward the T400's level.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX 7600S in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RX 7600S scores 73868, which is 362.4% higher than the NVIDIA T400's 15976 in the same test.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 7600S has an average benchmark score of 16696, while the T400 averages 16508. The RX 7600S leads by 1.1%, according to its nearestRivals data.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor count?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600S contains 13,300 million transistors, compared to 4,700 million in the NVIDIA T400.

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: No. The RX 7600S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the T400 only supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each card?

A: The RX 7600S has a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s, while the T400 provides 80.00 GB/s.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The RX 7600S achieves 140.8 GPixel/s, compared to the T400's 22.80 GPixel/s.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast, spanning multiple generations and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 7600S is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, using the Navi 33 chip with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish." It belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation. In contrast, the NVIDIA T400 uses the Turing architecture with the TU117 chip, part of the Quadro Turing (Tx000) generation. The RX 7600S was released on 2023-01-03, while the T400 came earlier on 2021-05-05.

Process technology is a major differentiator. The RX 7600S uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the T400 uses a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. This node advantage allows AMD to pack 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The T400, by comparison, crams 4,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, for a density of just 23.5M per mm². The RX 7600S is not just denser; it has nearly three times the transistor count in a similar physical area.

Ray tracing capabilities also differ. The RX 7600S includes 28 dedicated ray tracing cores, while the T400 has none listed. This is a direct consequence of the RDNA 3.0 architecture's modern feature set versus Turing's entry-level positioning. The RX 7600S also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes features like variable rate shading and mesh shaders, whereas the T400 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal a fundamental disparity in almost every measurable category. The RX 7600S has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The T400 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. These are not incremental differences; the AMD card has over 4.6 times the shading units and 4 times the ROPs.

Clock speeds tell a more nuanced story. The RX 7600S has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz, with a game clock of 1865 MHz. The T400 has a much lower base clock of 420 MHz but boosts to 1425 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: the RX 7600S runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the T400 runs at 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective). The RX 7600S uses an 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s. The T400 has just 2 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 80.00 GB/s.

Compute throughput is where the gap is most pronounced. The RX 7600S delivers 15.77 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the T400 manages only 1,094.4 GFLOPS (approximately 1.09 TFLOPS). The RX 7600S also leads in pixel rate (140.8 GPixel/s vs 22.80 GPixel/s) and texture rate (246.4 GTexel/s vs 34.20 GTexel/s). Power draw differs significantly too: the RX 7600S is rated at 75 W TDP, while the T400 draws only 30 W. The T400 is a single-slot card with 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the RX 7600S is an IGP with no power connectors and uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The RX 7600S is still in active production, while the T400 is end-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data gives the AMD Radeon RX 7600S a clean sweep in compute performance. Its OpenCL score of 68012 and Vulkan score of 73868 are dominant, and its FP32 throughput of 15.77 TFLOPS dwarfs the T400's 1,094.4 GFLOPS. This makes the RX 7600S the clear choice for any compute-heavy workload, including machine learning inference, scientific simulation, or content creation tasks that leverage GPU acceleration. Its higher memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s vs 80.00 GB/s) also supports larger and more complex datasets.

The NVIDIA T400 does not win in any benchmark category from the head-to-head data. Its strengths lie elsewhere, in its physical and power profile. At 30 W TDP with no power connectors, it is a low-power, single-slot solution that can be installed in virtually any desktop system with a PCIe 3.0 slot. Its 200 W suggested PSU requirement is minimal. The T400's 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs make it suitable for multi-display professional setups, whereas the RX 7600S's display outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning they vary by laptop implementation.

For legacy DirectX workloads, the RX 7600S still leads. Its PassMark DirectX 9 score is 211, DirectX 10 is 74, DirectX 11 is 140, and DirectX 12 is 65. The T400 has no PassMark scores listed, so no direct comparison is possible, but the RX 7600S's average benchmark score of 16696 versus the T400's 16508 suggests overall parity in aggregate, despite the RX 7600S's massive wins in modern APIs.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear picture: the AMD Radeon RX 7600S is the superior performer in every measurable benchmark category where both cards overlap. Its 299.2% lead in OpenCL and 362.4% lead in Vulkan are not close calls. For any user prioritizing raw compute power, modern API support, or ray tracing, the RX 7600S is the only choice. Its 8 GB of memory, 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 15.77 TFLOPS FP32 performance put it in a different class entirely.

The NVIDIA T400, however, is not without a rationale for existence. Its 30 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it a unique low-power solution. It can run on a 200 W PSU and fits into compact systems where the RX 7600S, as an IGP, cannot be installed at all. The T400 is also end-of-life, but its Turing architecture still supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, making it functional for basic workstation tasks.

The production status further separates them: the RX 7600S is active, while the T400 is end-of-life. This means the T400 is a legacy purchase, while the RX 7600S is a current product. For new systems, the RX 7600S is the rational choice if it can be integrated, given its overwhelming benchmark wins. The T400 is only justifiable for specific low-power, desktop-only scenarios where an integrated GPU is not an option and where compute performance is not a priority. In every head-to-head metric, the AMD card wins, and the data leaves no room for a different verdict.