OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

AMD Radeon RX 6700S review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£350VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):80 W

AMD Radeon RX 6700S Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 1 expert reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

6.0/10

Overall score

Score
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components

40%

5.5

Technical score

25%

5.5

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

5.5

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 89% of graphics cards
6.8

Value for money

Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components

70%

6.0

Overall score

30%

8.7

Price

â–¼Worse than 82%
5.5

Technical score

Technical score
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
Score components

44%

4.4

Performance

24%

3.5

Memory

12%

8.8

Power

11%

9.0

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

9.2

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 78%
5.5

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 86% of models

5.5

Mark 7.6 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 86%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £350
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What owners say about the AMD Radeon RX 6700S

Based on 201 owners sharing their experience in online comments

72%positive15%mixed13%negative

Owners praise its strong value and gaming performance, though heat and occasional frame-rate problems frustrate some.

What owners dislike

  • Owners report hot spot or junction temperatures often reaching 90–105°C under load, even when the core stays around 70°C.19
  • Some owners find frame rates lower than expected, especially in demanding titles, and some compare it unfavorably with the 6700 XT.17
  • Owners report stuttering and frame drops in some games, especially at higher settings, and some found fixes in BIOS or SAM settings.13
  • Owners report driver crashes, timeout errors and overclock settings not saving, and some say removing MSI Afterburner fixed the problem.6

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card AMD Radeon RX 6700S

Technical score
Technical score
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
Score components:

44%

4.4

Performance

24%

3.5

Memory

12%

8.8

Power

11%

9.0

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

9.2

Connectivity

5.5
Reviews score
5.5
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components:

70%

6.0

Overall score

30%

8.7

Price

6.8
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
8,186 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 8,186 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 77.3% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
5,665 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 5,665 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 69.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
15,053 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 15,053 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 74.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
5,952 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 5,952 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 79.2% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
7.92 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 7.92 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 78.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 56.8% of graphics cards and equal to 25.7% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
224 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 224 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 83.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
14,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 14,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 69.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 11.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 75.9% of graphics cards and equal to 22.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.3
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.3, which is older than on 79.2% of graphics cards and equal to 15.6% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
?
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
8.1 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.1 Gbps, which is slower than on 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to 22.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
80 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 80 W, which is lower than that of 90% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
80 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 80 W under peak load, which is lower than 91.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
650 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 650 W PSU, which is lower than that of 39.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 13.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
100 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 100 W, which is lower than that of 90.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
80 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

AMD Radeon RX 6700S vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 62.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (80 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    80 W vs 215 W
  • 54.5% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (100 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    100 W vs 220 W
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 8x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (32 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    32 MB vs 4 MB
  • 7 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (30 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    30 °C vs 37 °C
  • 63.6% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (80 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    80 W vs 220 W
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 8x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (32 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    32 MB vs 4 MB
  • 62.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (80 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    80 W vs 215 W
  • 54.5% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (100 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    100 W vs 220 W
  • 63.6% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (80 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    80 W vs 220 W
  • 7 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (30 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    30 °C vs 37 °C
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 20.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 12 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    28 vs 40
  • 72 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (112 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    112 vs 184
  • 23.6% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.5/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 86% of models

    5.5

    Mark 7.6 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.5 vs 7.2
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 23.6% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.5/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 86% of models

    5.5

    Mark 7.6 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.5 vs 7.2
  • 29.5% lower sentiment score
    5.5 vs 7.8
  • 8.6% worse value for money
    AMD Radeon RX 6700S has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.83 vs 7.4).
    6.83 vs 7.41
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 20.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 12 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    28 vs 40
  • 72 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (112 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    112 vs 184
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 12 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    28 vs 40
  • 40.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (224 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    224 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 65% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (7.9 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    7.92 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 11.5% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,700 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,700 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 33.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (15,053 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    15,053 points vs 22,638 points
  • 44.6% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (8,186 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    8,186 points vs 14,779 points
  • 20.6% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (128 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    128 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 38.1% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (5,665 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    5,665 points vs 9,148 points
  • 1 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2022 vs 2023).
    January 2022
    2022 vs 2023
  • 50.7% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (5,952 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    5,952 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 97% lower INT8 performance
    This graphics card has a lower INT8 performance than the average graphics card (7.2 TOPS vs 242 TOPS). The average graphics card has INT8 performance of 242 TOPS.
    7.17 TOPS vs 242 TOPS
  • 2,560 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,792 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,792 vs 4,352
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 50% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (224 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    224 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 26.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 91.7% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (2 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    2 MB vs 24 MB
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • 40% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (7 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    7 nm vs 5 nm
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.3 vs 1.4).
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.6 vs 6.8).
    6.6 vs 6.8
  • 51.7% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (11,060 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    11,060 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 2.1a).
    2.1 vs 2.1a
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • 62.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 15 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (110 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    110 °C vs 95 °C
  • 18 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (85 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    85 °C vs 67 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
ultrabookreview.com
✓ explicit
24/04/2024
Hands-on test · Gaming laptop
Verdict
The Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ sustains full performance through long loads, but ASUS-only AMD drivers and a USB4 port still inactive at launch hold it back.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Radeon RX 6700S

  • Excellent battery life efficiency in gaming laptops
  • Solid 1080p and 1440p rasterization performance
  • Compact and power-efficient design (80W TDP)
  • Strong value for money compared to higher-tier GPUs
  • Supports modern features like AMD SmartShift and Smart Access Memory
  • Good thermal management in well-cooled chassis

What customers don't like about AMD Radeon RX 6700S

  • Significantly weaker ray tracing performance compared to Nvidia counterparts
  • Lacks support for Nvidia-exclusive technologies like DLSS
  • Can be loud and run hot under heavy gaming loads in certain laptop models
  • Lower performance ceiling compared to the non-S (6700M/XT) variants
  • Limited to 8GB of VRAM, which may struggle in some future 1440p/4K titles

Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 6700S is a high-end mobile graphics card launched in January 2022, built on the 7nm process with RDNA 2 architecture and the Navi 23 chip. It features 1,792 shading units, 28 raytracing acceleration cores, and 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit interface, delivering a peak performance of 7.92 TFLOPS with a boost clock up to 2,000 MHz. A major characteristic is its power efficiency, operating at a maximum TDP of 80W, which makes it ideal for thin-and-light gaming laptops. Main pros include its solid 1080p and 1440p gaming performance and 32 MB of Infinity Cache to reduce latency. However, some cons include a narrow 128-bit memory bus that limits bandwidth to 224 GB/s and hardware raytracing performance that typically falls behind competing NVIDIA RTX mobile GPUs.

Compare AMD Radeon RX 6700S with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Radeon RX 6700S and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found