In a new marketing slide published by AMD, the company claims that its Radeon RX 6000 GPUs lead in both pricing & efficiency versus NVIDIA’s RTX 30 series.
AMD Radeon RX 6000 GPUs Offer Better Value & Efficiency Over NVIDIA’s GeForce RTX 30 Series, Red Team Claims
The slide in question was tweeted by AMD’s Chief Architect of Gaming, Frank Azor which showcases both the performance per watt and performance per dollar of AMD’s entire Radeon RX 6000 lineup against the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 30 series. The list of GPUs include all the way from the fastest AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT to the entry-level Radeon RX 6400.
AMD has used street prices of the cards for comparison and not the MSRPs. Based on the metrics, the AMD Radeon RX 6000 series lineup offers:
- RX 6950 XT vs RTX 3090: 80% Higher FPS/$ ($1100 vs $1700)
- RX 6900 XT vs RTX 3080 Ti: 19% Higher FPS/$ ($1000 vs $1170)
- RX 6800 XT vs RTX 3080: 6% Higher FPS/$ ($850 vs $850)
- RX 6800 vs RTX 3070 Ti: 8% Higher FPS/$ ($759 vs $750)
- RX 6750 XT vs RTX 3070: 33% Higher FPS/$ ($550 vs $700)
- RX 6700 XT vs RTX 3060 Ti: 30% Higher FPS/$ ($490 vs $580)
- RX 6650 XT vs RTX 3060: 54% Higher FPS/$ ($400 vs $430)
- RX 6600 vs RTX 3050: 40% Higher FPS/$ ($330 vs $330)
- RX 6500 XT vs GTX 1650: 19% Higher FPS/$ (199 vs $190)
- RX 6400 vs GTX 1050 Ti: 89% Higher FPS/$ ($160 vs $192)
AMD has claimed up to 89% better performance per watt when comparing its new RDNA 2 Radeon RX 6400 graphics card to a several-year-old GTX 1050 Ti graphics card. The second-biggest increase comes from the recently released flagship, the RX 6950 XT which provides a 80% uplift over its RTX competitor, the GeForce RTX 3090, with an 80% higher value. With that said, AMD also shared the performance per watt metrics for its Radeon RX 6000 series lineup which can be seen below:
- RX 6950 XT vs RTX 3090: 22% Higher FPS / Watt (335W vs 350W)
- RX 6900 XT vs RTX 3080 Ti: 19% Higher FPS / Watt (300W vs 350W)
- RX 6800 XT vs RTX 3080: 21% Higher FPS / Watt (280W vs 320W)
- RX 6800 vs RTX 3070 Ti: 27% Higher FPS / Watt (250W vs 290W)
- RX 6750 XT vs RTX 3070: Similar FPS / Watt (250W vs 220W)
- RX 6700 XT vs RTX 3060 Ti: 10% Higher FPS / Watt (230W vs 200W)
- RX 6650 XT vs RTX 3060: 35% Higher FPS / Watt (180W vs 170W)
- RX 6600 vs RTX 3050: 38% Higher FPS / Watt (132W vs 130W)
- RX 6500 XT vs GTX 1650: Similar FPS / Watt (107W vs 75W)
- RX 6400 vs GTX 1050 Ti: 123% Higher FPS / Watt (53W vs 75W)
AMD also lists down each specific gaming tier that these cards are meant for. The Navi 24 offerings such as the Radeon RX 6500 XT & RX 6400 are meant for 1080p Medium gaming, Navi 23 offerings are designed for 1080p Max, the Navi 22 offerings that include RX 6700 series are designed for 2K Max while the Navi 21 offerings aim for the 4K maxed out the segment.
Once again, the prices are the lowest as seen over at Newegg on the 10th of May, 2022. With the ever-changing prices, this chart may become invalid soon but it looks like AMD & NVIDIA are aware of the fact that with prices dropping and availability improving, gamers are now going to look for a new solution for their PC and both companies are trying their best with marketing and promos to entice gamers to buy their current-generation graphics cards. AMD and NVIDIA have already done marketing around the availability of these cards and the red team also recently announced to do a full relaunch of their ‘Raise The Game’ bundle.
AMD Radeon RX 6000 Series “RDNA 2” Graphics Card Lineup:
| Graphics Card | AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT | AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT | AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT | AMD Radeon RX 6800 | AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT | AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT | AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT | AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT | AMD Radeon RX 6600 | AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT | AMD Radeon RX 6400 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPU | Navi 21 KXTX | Navi 21 XTX | Navi 21 XT | Navi 21 XL | Navi 22 KXT | Navi 22 XT | Navi 23 KXT | Navi 23 (XT) | Navi 23 (XL) | Navi 24 (XT) | Navi 24 (XL) |
| Process Node | 7nm | 7nm | 7nm | 7nm | 7nm | 7nm | 7nm | 7nm | 7nm | 6nm | 6nm |
| Die Size | 520mm2 | 520mm2 | 520mm2 | 520mm2 | 336mm2 | 336mm2 | 237mm2 | 237mm2 | 237mm2 | 107mm2 | 107mm2 |
| Transistors | 26.8 Billion | 26.8 Billion | 26.8 Billion | 26.8 Billion | 17.2 Billion | 17.2 Billion | 11.06 Billion | 11.06 Billion | 11.06 Billion | 5.4 Billion | 5.4 Billion |
| Compute Units | 80 | 80 | 72 | 60 | 40 | 40 | 32 | 32 | 28 | 16 | 12 |
| Stream Processors | 5120 | 5120 | 4608 | 3840 | 2560 | 2560 | 2048 | 2048 | 1792 | 1024 | 768 |
| TMUs/ROPs | 320 / 128 | 320 / 128 | 288 / 128 | 240 / 96 | 160/64 | 160/64 | 128/64 | 128/64 | 112/64 | 64/32 | 48/32 |
| Game Clock | 2116 MHz | 2015 MHz | 2015 MHz | 1815 MHz | 2495 MHz | 2424 MHz | 2410 MHz | 2359 MHz | 2044 MHz | 2610 MHz | 2039 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 2324 MHz | 2250 MHz | 2250 MHz | 2105 MHz | 2600 MHz | 2581 MHz | 2635 MHz | 2589 MHz | 2491 MHz | 2815 MHz | 2321 MHz |
| FP32 TFLOPs | 23.80 TFLOPs | 23.04 TFLOPs | 20.74 TFLOPs | 16.17 TFLOPs | 13.31 TFLOPs | 13.21 TFLOPs | 10.79 TFLOPs | 10.6 TFLOPs | 9.0 TFLOPs | 5.7 TFLOPs | 3.5 TFLOPs |
| Memory Size | 16 GB GDDR6 +128 MB Infinity Cache | 16 GB GDDR6 +128 MB Infinity Cache | 16 GB GDDR6 +128 MB Infinity Cache | 16 GB GDDR6 +128 MB Infinity Cache | 12 GB GDDR6 + 96 MB Infinity Cache | 12 GB GDDR6 + 96 MB Infinity Cache | 8 GB GDDR6 + 32 MB Infinity Cache | 8 GB GDDR6 + 32 MB Infinity Cache | 8 GB GDDR6 + 32 MB Infinity Cache | 4 GB GDDR6 + 16 MB Infinity Cache | 4 GB GDDR6 + 16 MB Infinity Cache |
| Memory Bus | 256-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit | 192-bit | 192-bit | 128-bit | 128-bit | 128-bit | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| Memory Clock | 18 Gbps | 16 Gbps | 16 Gbps | 16 Gbps | 18 Gbps | 16 Gbps | 17.5 Gbps | 16 Gbps | 14 Gbps | 18 Gbps | 14 Gbps |
| Bandwidth | 576 GB/s | 512 GB/s | 512 GB/s | 512 GB/s | 432 GB/s | 384 GB/s | 280 GB/s | 256 GB/s | 224 GB/s | 144 GB/s | 112 GB/s |
| TDP | 335W | 300W | 300W | 250W | 250W | 230W | 176W | 160W | 132W | 107W | 53W |
| Price | $1099 US | $999 US | $649 US | $579 US | $549 US | $479 US | $399 US | $379 US | $329 US | $199 US | $159 US? |
News Source: Videocardz
