OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£240VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):165 W

XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition
6.6/10

Overall score

Score
6.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
Score components

90%

6.3

Technical score

10%

8.8

User score

â–¼Worse than 63% of graphics cards
7.4

Value for money

Value for money
7.4/ 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–² Better than 57% of models
Score components

70%

6.6

Overall score

30%

9.3

Price

â–²Better than 57%
6.3

Technical score

Technical score
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components

44%

5.7

Performance

24%

4.2

Memory

12%

8.5

Power & Cooling

11%

9.2

Platform & Features

5%

7.8

Design

4%

9.7

Connectivity & Media

â–¼Worse than 65%
8.8

User score

User score
8.8/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 78% of models
Score components

70%

8.6

User ratings

30%

9.1

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
â–²Better than 78%
  • xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
  • xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
  • xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
  • xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
  • xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
  • xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
xfx-speedster-swft-210-radeon-rx-7600-core-edition
Best prices
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition

Technical score
Technical score
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components:

44%

5.7

Performance

24%

4.2

Memory

12%

8.5

Power & Cooling

11%

9.2

Platform & Features

5%

7.8

Design

4%

9.7

Connectivity & Media

6.3
User score
User score
8.8/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 78% of models
Score components

70%

8.6

User ratings

30%

9.1

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
8.8
Popularity
Popularity
9.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 85% of models
Popularity:
XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition has a popularity score of 9.1 points, which is higher than that of 85.2% of products in this category.
9.1
Value for money
Value for money
7.4/ 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–² Better than 57% of models
Score components:

70%

6.6

Overall score

30%

9.3

Price

7.4
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
10,500 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 10,500 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 68.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
5,480 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 5,480 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 70.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
16,578 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 16,578 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 72.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
8,757 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 8,757 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 66.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
21.75 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 21.75 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 55% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 57.5% of graphics cards and equal to 25.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
GDDR version
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 15.9% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 69.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26% 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 69.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.8% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.3% of graphics cards and equal to 52.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 76.7% of graphics cards and equal to 22.2% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.6% of graphics cards and equal to 77.4% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.7% of graphics cards and equal to 79.3% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 1.9% of graphics cards and equal to 98.1% 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 8.3% of graphics cards and equal to 88.9% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 91% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21% of graphics cards and equal to 76.8% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
2.1
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2.1, which is more advanced than on 67.5% of graphics cards and equal to 8% 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 57.6% of graphics cards and equal to 21.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
165 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 165 W, which is lower than that of 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.6% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
165 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 165 W under peak load, which is lower than 68.5% of graphics cards and equal to 2.2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
550 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 550 W PSU, which is lower than that of 62.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 13.3% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
187 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 187 W, which is lower than that of 60% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
165 W
Show more
Size
241x 131x 41 mm
Length
241 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 mm
This graphics card is 241 mm long, which is shorter than 75% of graphics cards and equal in length to 1.7% of graphics cards.
Height
131 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 131 mm tall, which is taller than 61.8% of graphics cards and equal in height to 2% 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 53.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 42.5% of graphics cards.
Weight
900 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 900 g, which is lighter than 63.7% of graphics cards and equal in weight to 0.8% of graphics cards.
Show more

XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 6% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2655 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    2,655 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 28.6% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2250 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
    2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 44 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (241 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    241 mm vs 285 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
  • 15.4% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (550 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    550 W vs 650 W
  • 23.3% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (165 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    165 W vs 215 W
  • 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
  • 9.7% higher user score
    User score
    8.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
    When it matters
    When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition
    the average graphics card
    XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition has a higher user score than the average graphics card (8.77 vs 8.000).
    8.77 vs 8
  • 2.21x cheaper
    XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition is cheaper than the average graphics card (£240 vs £530).
    £240 vs £530
  • 2.16x more popular
    XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition is more popular than the average graphics card (9.12 vs 4.2).
    9.12 vs 4.22
  • 6% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2655 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    2,655 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 28.6% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2250 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 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
  • 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
  • Newer HDMI version
    This graphics card supports a newer HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1a vs 2.1).
    2.1a vs 2.1
  • 15.4% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (550 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    550 W vs 650 W
  • 23.3% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (165 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    165 W vs 215 W
  • 83.3% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (2 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    2 W vs 12 W
  • 9 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (28 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    28 °C vs 37 °C
  • 44 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (241 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    241 mm vs 285 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
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    128 bit vs 256 bit
  • 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
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 10.9% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (339.8 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    339.8 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 26.8% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (16578 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    16,578 points vs 22,653 points
  • 40.2% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (5480 points vs 9166 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9166 points.
    5,480 points vs 9,166 points
  • 28.5% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (10500 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    10,500 points vs 14,678.5 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
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    128 bit vs 256 bit
  • 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
  • 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 (18000 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 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
  • 20% larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (6 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    6 nm vs 5 nm
  • Older encoder generation
    This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (4 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
    4.0 vs 8
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 3).
    2.2 vs 3.0
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • Narrower encode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware encode codec support 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
  • 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.
  • 6 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (131 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    131 mm vs 125 mm

Video reviews

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

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition

  • Strong 1080p gaming performance, often exceeding 60 FPS on high/ultra settings in modern titles.
  • Compact dual-fan design fits easily into most PC cases.
  • Excellent value for budget-conscious builders looking for a current-generation card.
  • Relatively quiet operation under standard loads.
  • Simple 'plug and play' installation with easy-to-use software and drivers.
  • Low power consumption, typically requiring only a 550W power supply.

What we don't like about XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition

  • 8GB of VRAM is considered a limitation for some high-end 1440p gaming and future-proofing.
  • Can run hot during intensive performance tasks, with some users reporting high hotspot temperatures.
  • Occasional driver issues such as flickering or DirectX errors reported by a small number of users.
  • Performance uplift over the previous generation (RX 6650 XT) is relatively modest.
  • Struggles significantly with Ray Tracing compared to higher-end or competing Nvidia cards.

Verdict

The XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition is a compact, dual-slot graphics card built on the AMD RDNA 3 architecture, featuring 2048 stream processors, 8GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, and a boost clock speed of up to 2655 MHz. It excels as an efficient 1080p gaming solution with a quiet dual-fan cooling system, support for DisplayPort 2.1 and HDMI 2.1, and a relatively low 165W power draw requiring only a single 8-pin connector. Main pros include its streamlined, aerodynamic design that fits easily into smaller builds and its excellent value for high-refresh-rate mainstream gaming. However, its 8GB VRAM can be a limiting factor in more memory-intensive modern titles at higher resolutions, and it lacks the built-in RGB lighting found on more premium models.

Compare XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition 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 XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Radeon RX 7600 Core Edition and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found