Radeon RX 6600 XT vs GeForce GT 755M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 755M with Radeon RX 6600 XT, including specs and performance data.

GT 755M
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
4.43

RX 6600 XT outperforms GT 755M by a whopping 866% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking67392
Place by popularitynot in top-10075
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data62.14
Power efficiency6.0918.38
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGK107Navi 23
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date25 June 2013 (11 years ago)30 July 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3842048
Core clock speed980 MHz1968 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2589 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate31.36331.4
Floating-point processing power0.7526 TFLOPS10.6 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs32128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data190 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1350 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth86.4 GB/s256.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI++
HDCP content protection+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Blu-Ray 3D Support+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play+-

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 API12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.12.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GT 755M 4.43
RX 6600 XT 42.79
+866%

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GT 755M 1706
RX 6600 XT 16487
+866%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GT 755M 2801
RX 6600 XT 39051
+1294%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 755M 12711
RX 6600 XT 88163
+594%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GT 755M 2106
RX 6600 XT 28342
+1246%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GT 755M 14967
RX 6600 XT 156297
+944%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p56
−793%
500−550
+793%
Full HD22
−500%
132
+500%
1440p7−8
−971%
75
+971%
4K4−5
−975%
43
+975%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.87
1440pno data5.05
4Kno data8.81

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
Atomic Heart 10−11
−1100%
120−130
+1100%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−991%
120
+991%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−778%
79
+778%
Atomic Heart 10−11
−1100%
120−130
+1100%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−738%
130−140
+738%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−736%
90−95
+736%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−767%
78
+767%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−1273%
151
+1273%
Fortnite 24−27
−613%
170−180
+613%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−705%
150−160
+705%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−1438%
123
+1438%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−812%
150−160
+812%
Valorant 55−60
−316%
220−230
+316%
Atomic Heart 10−11
−1100%
120−130
+1100%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−738%
130−140
+738%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−736%
90−95
+736%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
−276%
270−280
+276%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−744%
76
+744%
Dota 2 35−40
−359%
170
+359%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−1182%
141
+1182%
Fortnite 24−27
−613%
170−180
+613%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−705%
150−160
+705%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−1338%
115
+1338%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−864%
135
+864%
Metro Exodus 7−8
−1257%
95
+1257%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−812%
150−160
+812%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−1367%
176
+1367%
Valorant 55−60
−316%
220−230
+316%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−738%
130−140
+738%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−509%
67
+509%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−667%
69
+667%
Dota 2 35−40
−224%
120
+224%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−1109%
133
+1109%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−705%
150−160
+705%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−1113%
97
+1113%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−812%
150−160
+812%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−725%
99
+725%
Valorant 55−60
−316%
220−230
+316%
Fortnite 24−27
−613%
170−180
+613%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−417%
30−35
+417%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
−753%
270−280
+753%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
−1600%
68
+1600%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−2700%
56
+2700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
−483%
170−180
+483%
Valorant 45−50
−478%
260−270
+478%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−10000%
100−110
+10000%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1233%
40
+1233%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−1213%
105
+1213%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−1040%
110−120
+1040%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
−1083%
71
+1083%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−986%
75−80
+986%
Fortnite 8−9
−1213%
100−110
+1213%
Atomic Heart 4−5
−700%
30−35
+700%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−300%
64
+300%
Valorant 21−24
−1048%
240−250
+1048%
Battlefield 5 0−1 60−65
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1300%
14
+1300%
Dota 2 14−16
−514%
86
+514%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−1175%
51
+1175%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1420%
75−80
+1420%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−1700%
36
+1700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
−1000%
55−60
+1000%
Fortnite 4−5
−1200%
50−55
+1200%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 34
+0%
34
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 54
+0%
54
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8
+0%
8
+0%

This is how GT 755M and RX 6600 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6600 XT is 793% faster in 900p
  • RX 6600 XT is 500% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6600 XT is 971% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6600 XT is 975% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6600 XT is 10000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6600 XT is ahead in 62 tests (94%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.43 42.79
Recency 25 June 2013 30 July 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 160 Watt

GT 755M has 220% lower power consumption.

RX 6600 XT, on the other hand, has a 865.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 755M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 755M is a notebook card while Radeon RX 6600 XT is a desktop one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
GeForce GT 755M
AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT
Radeon RX 6600 XT

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3
79 votes

Rate GeForce GT 755M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3
4592 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6600 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 755M or Radeon RX 6600 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.