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 7600 XT review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£350VRAM:16 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):190 W

AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT Review: Compare 117 technical specifications, 31 expert and video reviews and 3 best-of lists to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT
7.0/10

Overall score

Score
7.0/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 64% of models
Score components

40%

6.8

Technical score

25%

6.5

Reviews score

25%

8.1

List score

10%

6.8

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 64% of graphics cards
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 54% of models
Score components

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

8.7

Price

▲Better than 54%
6.8

Technical score

Technical score
6.8/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components

44%

5.8

Performance

24%

5.8

Memory

12%

8.3

Power

11%

9.0

Features

5%

9.1

Design

4%

9.7

Connectivity

▼Worse than 54%
6.5

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.5/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 77% of models

80%

5.8

Average grade

20%

9.3

Popularity

Grades by review (31)
18 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 13 video reviews, each 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.
▼Worse than 77%
8.1

List score

List score
8.1/ 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 (3)
List score: in 3 of 94 lists (3%)
★Better than 98%
  • amd-radeon-rx-7600-xt
amd-radeon-rx-7600-xt
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 reviewers say about the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT

Based on 18 · 13

Reviewers like the extra video memory and frame generation, but see little gain over the non-XT card, weak ray tracing, poor value.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT

Based on 148 owners sharing their experience in online comments

72%positive11%mixed17%negative

Owners mostly praise smooth gaming, generous memory, and value, while some report crashes, lag, and heat.

What owners dislike

  • Owners report stutters, lag and low frame rates in some games, sometimes with the GPU near full load while the CPU sits lower, and fixes are not always found.10
  • Owners report random black screens, freezes and crashes, some needing an RMA replacement and some needing the card downclocked to stay stable.5
  • Owners say the card is overpriced for its performance and that competing cards at a similar price offer better value.4
  • Owners report the card running very hot under gaming loads, with some needing to undervolt or repaste it after about six months.3

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT

Technical score
Technical score
6.8/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components:

44%

5.8

Performance

24%

5.8

Memory

12%

8.3

Power

11%

9.0

Features

5%

9.1

Design

4%

9.7

Connectivity

6.8
Reviews score
6.5
List score
8.1
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 54% of models
Score components:

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

8.7

Price

7.5
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
10,985 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 10,985 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 66.4% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
5,920 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 5,920 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 67.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
17,537 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 17,537 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 66.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
8,966 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 8,966 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 65.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
22.6 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 22.6 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 50% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
16 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 16 GB of VRAM, which is more than 62% of graphics cards and equal to 28.1% 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
288 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 288 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 69.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
18,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 18,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 51.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
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
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
2.1
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2.1, which is more advanced than on 66.4% of graphics cards and equal to 7.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
54 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 54 Gbps, which is faster than on 78.8% of graphics cards and equal to 4.8% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
190 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 190 W, which is lower than that of 54.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.8% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
190 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 190 W under peak load, which is lower than 57.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.8% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
600 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 600 W PSU, which is lower than that of 53.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
190 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 190 W, which is lower than that of 58.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.9% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
190 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
241x 110x 40 mm
Length
241 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 241 mm long, which is shorter than 74.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 1.7% of graphics cards.
Height
115 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 115 mm tall, which is shorter than 72.6% of graphics cards and equal in height to 1.7% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
?
Show more
What reviewers say

AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 10% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,755 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,755 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 28.6% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 41.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (241 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    241 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 1.4a).
    2.1 vs 1.4a
  • 10 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (115 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    115 mm vs 125 mm
  • Supports LHR limiting
    This graphics card supports an LHR limiter, while the average graphics card does not. 7.5% of Graphics cards support one.
  • 6.6% higher list score
    List score
    8.1/ 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 (3)
    List score: in 3 of 94 lists (3%)
    8.1 vs 7.6
  • 10% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,755 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,755 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 28.6% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,250 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
  • Supports LHR limiting
    This graphics card supports an LHR limiter, while the average graphics card does not. 7.5% of Graphics cards support one.
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 1.4a).
    2.1 vs 1.4a
  • 2.5x higher DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (54 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    54 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 7.7% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (600 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    600 W vs 650 W
  • 41.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (241 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    241 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 10 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (115 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    115 mm vs 125 mm
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 9.7% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.5/ 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
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 77% of models

    80%

    5.8

    Average grade

    20%

    9.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (31)
    18 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 13 video reviews, each 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.
    6.5 vs 7.2
  • 12.8% lower sentiment score
    6.8 vs 7.8
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 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
  • 80 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (64 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    64 vs 144
  • 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
  • 22.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (17,537 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    17,537 points vs 22,638 points
  • 25.7% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (10,985 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    10,985 points vs 14,779 points
  • 35.3% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (5,920 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    5,920 points vs 9,148 points
  • 6.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (352.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    352.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 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
  • 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
  • 35.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    288 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
  • 5.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (18,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    18,000 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
  • 20% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (6 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    6 nm vs 5 nm
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 3).
    2.2 vs 3
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 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
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • 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
  • 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

4.0
TechArc
≈ estimated
14/04/2024
Hands-on review · benchmarks, overclocking and value analysis
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is disappointing: the extra VRAM is poorly used, so the RX 7600 or 6750 XT makes more sense.
4.0
PC Centric
≈ estimated
02/02/2024
Hands-on review · full PC build and gaming benchmarks
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is hard to recommend at launch, since the RTX 4060 or standard RX 7600 offer better value for most buyers.
3.0
ShortCircuit
≈ estimated
01/02/2024
Hands-on review · benchmarks against rivals and FMF test
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is not worth buying, as it lacks the features and price-to-performance to beat rival cards.
5.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
24/01/2024
Review · VRAM comparison and price-to-performance analysis
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT falls short on price, a close call against the RTX 4060 and not strongly recommended.
4.0
eTeknix
≈ estimated
24/01/2024
Hands-on review · one-hour gaming loop, temperatures and power
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is hard to recommend: an older capable card or a step up is the better buy.
4.0
Gamers Nexus
≈ estimated
24/01/2024
Full review · benchmarks, power draw and price analysis
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is not recommended at this price: extra memory rarely helps, and the gain is small.
5.0
TechPowerUp
≈ estimated
30/01/2024
Comparison review · three partner cards, 1080p to 4K tests
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is only worth it if you need 16 GB of VRAM; the cheaper RX 6700 XT is usually faster.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

6.0
tomshardware.com
✓ explicit
24/01/2024
Benchmark review · AI and VRAM
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT suits buyers needing 16GB of VRAM for AI and future games, but it trails the RTX 4060 and RX 6700 XT in most games.
7.0
techspot.com
✓ explicit
25/01/2024
Benchmark review · Three card models
Verdict
Radeon RX 7600 XT is a better card than the 8GB RX 7600 thanks to its 16GB of memory, but it is hard to recommend over the RTX 4060.
7.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
24/01/2024
Hands-on test · 1080p and 1440p
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is a strong 1080p card and decent at 1440p, but the RTX 4060 is faster overall and extra memory does little for most games.
7.0
trustedreviews.com
✓ explicit
03/05/2024
Hands-on review · 4K and FSR
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is a strong 1080p and 1440p card, with enough headroom to play some games at 4K if you use FSR upscaling.
4.0
gamersnexus.net
≈ estimated
07/03/2024
Benchmark review · Power efficiency tests
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is only slightly faster than the RX 7600 and trails the RTX 4060 in ray tracing and efficiency, so it is a niche pick.
7.0
cgmagonline.com
✓ explicit
08/03/2024
Hands-on review · 1080p performance
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is a solid 1080p card with useful AI headroom, but the standard RX 7600 suits most gamers who don't need the extra memory.
5.0
digitaltrends.com
≈ estimated
16/02/2024
Hands-on test · VRAM and ray tracing
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is a fine 1080p card whose 16GB pays off in only a few games; the RTX 4060 and Arc A770 often match it.
6.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
24/01/2024
Lab test · XFX partner card
Verdict
XFX Speedster Quicksilver 309 is mostly a Radeon RX 7600 with more memory, about 8% faster, so the upgrade is hard to justify.
6.0
pcguide.com
✓ explicit
21/02/2024
Hands-on test · Triple-fan partner card
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT holds up well at 1080p, but it struggles with ray tracing and creative work, so it suits budget gaming.
6.0
pcgamesn.com
✓ explicit
24/01/2024
Hands-on test · Budget graphics card
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is a 16GB budget card that gains little over the RX 7600, so it suits only those who need its extra memory.
5.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
24/01/2024
Benchmark test · Doubled graphics memory
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT doubles memory to 16 GB but is otherwise nearly identical to the RX 7600 and only slightly faster.
5.0
gamestar.de
≈ estimated
24/01/2024
Benchmark test · Full HD focus
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT handles Full HD at maximum details, but its extra memory adds little there, and it does not fully convince.
5.0
hardwareluxx.de
≈ estimated
24/01/2024
Hardware test · Two custom models
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT's 16 GB of memory is welcome, but unchanged 288 GB/s bandwidth and eight PCIe lanes keep it from being a full upgrade.
5.0
heise.de
≈ estimated
24/01/2024
Hands-on test · Overclocked models
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is up to 15% faster than the RX 7600 at Full HD, but XFX's fans get loud and idle power is high on multi-monitor setups.
8.0
gameswelt.de
≈ estimated
30/01/2024
Hands-on test · Full HD gaming
Verdict
Sapphire Pulse RX 7600 XT runs quietly and handles Full HD well, but its extra memory helps only in heavy games and barely beats the RX 7600.
6.0
tomshw.it
✓ explicit
24/01/2024
Benchmark review · Ray tracing tests
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is mostly an RX 7600 with double memory, decent for 1080p gaming but trails the RTX 4060 in ray tracing and power efficiency.
6.0
hwupgrade.it
≈ estimated
24/01/2024
Benchmark review · Sapphire Pulse
Verdict
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse is quiet and strong at 1080p, but its extra memory helps only some games, which makes it hard to justify.
6.0
hwupgrade.it
≈ estimated
Not Dated
Launch review · Budget graphics card
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is the RX 7600 with 16GB of memory, so it pulls ahead only in games that need the extra VRAM.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT

  • Generous 16GB VRAM provides future-proofing for texture-heavy modern games and 1440p gaming.
  • Solid performance for 1080p ultra gaming, maintaining high frame rates in most titles.
  • Significant benefits for specific non-gaming workloads like AI generation and 3D design.
  • Includes modern features such as AV1 encoding support and DisplayPort 2.1.
  • Efficient cooling and quiet operation reported for many partner models like Sapphire Pulse and XFX Qick.
  • Access to AMD's latest software suite, including FSR 3 and AFMF (frame generation).

What customers don't like about AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT

  • Relatively high MSRP makes it poor value compared to the base RX 7600 or older RX 6750 XT.
  • Limited 128-bit memory bus can bottle-neck the potential of the 16GB frame buffer.
  • Performance is often only a minor uplift (approx. 5-10%) over the much cheaper non-XT version.
  • Ray tracing performance remains weak and significantly lags behind Nvidia's RTX 4060 series.
  • Higher power consumption (190W TBP) compared to the standard RX 7600 without a proportional performance jump.
  • Underwhelming rasterization value; it often struggles to justify its existence as a separate model from the RX 7600.

Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is a performance-oriented graphics card based on the RDNA 3 architecture, featuring 2,048 stream processors, a boost clock speed of up to 2.76 GHz, and a significant 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit interface. Its primary strengths include its generous VRAM capacity, which provides future-proofing for texture-heavy 1080p and 1440p gaming, as well as support for modern technologies like DisplayPort 2.1 and AV1 encoding. However, it faces criticism for having a higher 190W power draw and limited performance gains over the standard RX 7600, often struggling to justify its price premium in standard rasterization workloads.

Compare AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT 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 7600 XT and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found