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 6800S review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,400VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):100 W

AMD Radeon RX 6800S Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 3 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Radeon RX 6800S
6.7/10

Overall score

Score
6.7/ 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 77% of models
Score components

40%

5.9

Technical score

25%

5.9

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

9.6

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 77% of graphics cards
5.6

Value for money

Value for money
5.6/ 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 99% of models
Score components

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

3.1

Price

â–¼Worse than 99%
5.9

Technical score

Technical score
5.9/ 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 74% of models
Score components

44%

4.8

Performance

24%

3.8

Memory

12%

9.1

Power

11%

9.0

Features

5%

8.7

Design

4%

9.1

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 74%
5.9

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.9/ 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 84% of models

5.9

Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.8

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
2 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 84%
?

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
  • amd-radeon-rx-6800s
  • amd-radeon-rx-6800s
  • amd-radeon-rx-6800s
  • amd-radeon-rx-6800s
  • amd-radeon-rx-6800s
  • amd-radeon-rx-6800s
amd-radeon-rx-6800s
amd-radeon-rx-6800s
amd-radeon-rx-6800s
amd-radeon-rx-6800s
amd-radeon-rx-6800s
amd-radeon-rx-6800s
Where to buy
    N/A~ £1,400
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Radeon RX 6800S

Based on 2 · 1

Reviewers agree gaming performance is strong, but ray tracing is a clear weak spot.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the AMD Radeon RX 6800S

Based on 209 owners sharing their experience in online comments

88%positive5%mixed7%negative

Owners praise strong gaming performance, generous VRAM and efficient power use; weak ray tracing and occasional driver issues frustrate some.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say ray tracing is the card's weakest area, roughly on par with an RTX 3060 Ti in RT performance.3
  • Some owners report artifacts and driver crashes after months of use. One reports a DisplayPort monitor shutting off when a TV is connected over HDMI.3
  • Some owners get lower frame rates than reviews show, such as about 40 to 70 fps in Spider-Man at 1080p high, with clocks dropping well below boost.3

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card AMD Radeon RX 6800S

Technical score
Technical score
5.9/ 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 74% of models
Score components:

44%

4.8

Performance

24%

3.8

Memory

12%

9.1

Power

11%

9.0

Features

5%

8.7

Design

4%

9.1

Connectivity

5.9
Reviews score
5.9
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
5.6/ 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 99% of models
Score components:

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

3.1

Price

5.6
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
8,527 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 8,527 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 76.3% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
4,289 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 4,289 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 74.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
15,822 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 15,822 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 73.7% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
6,112 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 6,112 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 78.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
8.6 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 8.6 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 77.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
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
256 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 256 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 80% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.8% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
16,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 16,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 63.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.3% 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
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% 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
What reviewers say
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
1.4
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4, which is older than on 80.8% of graphics cards and equal to 13.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
32.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 32.4 Gbps, which is faster than on 56.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
100 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 100 W, which is lower than that of 88.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.6% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
100 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 100 W under peak load, which is lower than 90.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% 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
100 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

AMD Radeon RX 6800S vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 53.5% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (100 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    100 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
  • 14.3% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 23.1% higher sentiment score
    9.6 vs 7.8
  • 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
  • 3 more monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports more monitors per output type than the average graphics card (6 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    6 vs 3
  • 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
  • 58.3% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (5 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    5 W vs 12 W
  • 23.1% higher sentiment score
    9.6 vs 7.8
  • 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
  • 14.3% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 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
  • 3 more monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports more monitors per output type than the average graphics card (6 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    6 vs 3
  • 53.5% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (100 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    100 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
  • 58.3% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (5 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    5 W vs 12 W
  • 54.5% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (100 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    100 W vs 220 W
  • 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
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 16.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2100 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,100 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 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
  • 42.9% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 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
  • 18.1% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.9/ 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 84% of models

    5.9

    Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    2 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.9 vs 7.2
  • 32.4% worse value for money
    AMD Radeon RX 6800S has worse value for money than the average graphics card (5.6 vs 7.4).
    5.6 vs 7.41
  • 2.69x more expensive
    AMD Radeon RX 6800S is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,400 vs £520).
    £1,400 vs £520
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 16.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2100 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,100 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 56 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (128 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    128 vs 184
  • 8 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (32 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    32 vs 40
  • 116 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (28 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    28 vs 144
  • 61.9% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (8.6 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    8.6 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 28.9% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (268.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    268.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 8 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (32 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    32 vs 40
  • 30.1% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (15,822 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    15,822 points vs 22,638 points
  • 42.3% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (8,527 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    8,527 points vs 14,779 points
  • 53.1% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (4,289 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    4,289 points vs 9,148 points
  • 6.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,800 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,800 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 16.7% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (134.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    134.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 1 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2022 vs 2023).
    January 2022
    2022 vs 2023
  • 49.4% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (6,112 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    6,112 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 2,304 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (2048 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    2,048 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
  • 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
  • 42.9% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 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
  • 15.8% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (16,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    16,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 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 FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1 vs 3.1
  • 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 (2.0b vs 2.1a).
    2.0b vs 2.1a
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 1.4a).
    1.4 vs 1.4a
  • No HDMI output
    This graphics card does not include HDMI output, the average graphics card does.
  • 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
  • 8 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (75 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    75 °C vs 67 °C

Video reviews

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

6.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
22/03/2022
Benchmark review · gaming performance and power efficiency
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 6800S is efficient and competitive at 1080p, but falls short at 1440p and in ray tracing, and its price needs to come down.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
techspot.com
✓ explicit
31/03/2022
Benchmark review · Laptop graphics card
Verdict
The AMD Radeon RX 6800S is a strong 1080p laptop GPU that beats RTX 3070 laptops in several games, but ray tracing and 1440p gaming fall behind.
8.0
lesnumeriques.com
≈ estimated
21/03/2022
Lab test · Laptop graphics card
Verdict
The AMD Radeon RX 6800S is a solid laptop GPU for Full HD ultra gaming, but ray tracing lags, so Nvidia's RTX cards suit ray-traced games better.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Radeon RX 6800S

  • Strong rasterization performance at 1080p, often competing with 80-100W variants of the Nvidia RTX 3070
  • Highly efficient design with lower TDP (80-100W), making it ideal for slim and light gaming laptops
  • Beneficial 8GB of VRAM and Infinity Cache that helps performance in AMD-optimized titles like Forza Horizon 5 and Far Cry 6
  • Good thermal and power efficiency relative to its performance class in portable form factors
  • Included SmartShift technology provides dynamic power allocation when paired with an AMD CPU

What customers don't like about AMD Radeon RX 6800S

  • Significantly weaker ray tracing performance compared to Nvidia counterparts, especially in demanding titles like Cyberpunk 2077
  • Lacks support for Nvidia-exclusive features like DLSS, which offers superior image upscaling compared to early FSR versions at lower resolutions
  • Performance tends to drop more significantly than rivals at higher resolutions like 1440p due to narrower 128-bit memory bus
  • Higher initial laptop pricing compared to some RTX 3060/3070 models often made it a poor value proposition at launch
  • Reports of inconsistent driver stability and subpar hardware video encoding compared to Nvidia's NVENC

Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 6800S is a high-end mobile graphics card launched in early 2022, built on a 7nm process and based on the RDNA 2 architecture (Navi 23 die). Optimized for thin-and-light gaming laptops, it features 2,048 stream processors, 32 Ray Accelerators, and 32MB of AMD Infinity Cache, with boost clock speeds reaching up to 2100 MHz. It is equipped with 8GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a total board power efficiency of up to 100W. Main pros include its excellent performance-to-watt ratio and its ability to handle 1080p ultra gaming in compact laptop form factors. However, main cons include a narrower memory bus and significantly lower ray-tracing performance compared to Nvidia's equivalent mobile offerings, along with reduced performance at higher 1440p resolutions.

Compare AMD Radeon RX 6800S 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 6800S and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found