Radeon RX 6600 XT vs GeForce GTX 485M SLI

Place in the ranking	480	88
Place by popularity	not in top-100	79
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	61.71
Power efficiency	6.28	18.48
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	N11E-GTX-A1	Navi 23
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	6 January 2011 (14 years ago)	30 July 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	768	2048
Core clock speed	575 MHz	1968 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2589 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	160 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	331.4
Floating-point processing power	no data	10.6 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	64
TMUs	no data	128
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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 size	large	no data
Interface	no data	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	190 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2x2 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	256.0 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 Connectors	no data	1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11	12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	no data	6.5
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	2.1
Vulkan	-	1.2

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 485M SLI 9.13

RX 6600 XT 42.96
+371%

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.

GTX 485M SLI 5334

RX 6600 XT 39051
+632%

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.

GTX 485M SLI 24830

RX 6600 XT 88163
+255%

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:

900p	89 −349%	400−450 +349%
Full HD	97 −38.1%	134 +38.1%
1440p	16−18 −381%	77 +381%
4K	9−10 −400%	45 +400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.83
1440p	no data	4.92
4K	no data	8.42

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −606%	120 +606%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −339%	79 +339%
Elden Ring	24−27 −381%	125 +381%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 −263%	100−110 +263%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −441%	90−95 +441%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −317%	75 +317%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −614%	257 +614%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −446%	131 +446%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −232%	80−85 +232%
Valorant	30−35 −427%	170−180 +427%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 −263%	100−110 +263%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −441%	90−95 +441%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −317%	75 +317%
Dota 2	30−35 −345%	147 +345%
Elden Ring	24−27 −508%	158 +508%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −71.1%	65 +71.1%
Fortnite	50−55 −237%	180−190 +237%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −481%	209 +481%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −322%	135 +322%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −317%	100 +317%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 −192%	200−210 +192%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −232%	80−85 +232%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −454%	150−160 +454%
Valorant	30−35 −427%	170−180 +427%
World of Tanks	130−140 −108%	270−280 +108%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 −263%	100−110 +263%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −294%	67 +294%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −267%	66 +267%
Dota 2	30−35 −264%	120 +264%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −166%	100−110 +166%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −408%	183 +408%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 −192%	200−210 +192%
Valorant	30−35 −427%	170−180 +427%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−12 −518%	68 +518%
Elden Ring	12−14 −567%	80 +567%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−12 −518%	68 +518%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −298%	170−180 +298%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −450%	40−45 +450%
World of Tanks	65−70 −312%	270−280 +312%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 −353%	75−80 +353%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −290%	39 +290%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −443%	38 +443%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −626%	130−140 +626%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −521%	118 +521%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −513%	98 +513%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −600%	75−80 +600%
Valorant	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 −1433%	45−50 +1433%
Dota 2	20−22 −220%	64 +220%
Elden Ring	5−6 −580%	34 +580%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 −237%	64 +237%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −580%	34 +580%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 −442%	140−150 +442%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −367%	27−30 +367%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −237%	64 +237%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −538%	50−55 +538%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4 −1433%	45−50 +1433%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −550%	13 +550%
Dota 2	20−22 −330%	86 +330%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −500%	65−70 +500%
Fortnite	9−10 −600%	60−65 +600%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −455%	61 +455%
Valorant	9−10 −733%	75−80 +733%

This is how GTX 485M SLI and RX 6600 XT compete in popular games:

RX 6600 XT is 349% faster in 900p
RX 6600 XT is 38% faster in 1080p
RX 6600 XT is 381% faster in 1440p
RX 6600 XT is 400% faster in 4K

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6600 XT is 1433% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RX 6600 XT surpassed GTX 485M SLI in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.13	42.96
Recency	6 January 2011	30 July 2021
Chip lithography	40 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	160 Watt

GTX 485M SLI has 60% lower power consumption.

RX 6600 XT, on the other hand, has a 370.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 485M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 485M SLI is a notebook card while Radeon RX 6600 XT is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.