ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT vs GeForce GTX 670M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 670M with Radeon HD 2600 XT, including specs and performance data.

GTX 670M
2012
1536 MB GDDR5, 75 Watt
4.55
+523%

GTX 670M outperforms ATI HD 2600 XT by a whopping 523% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6601166
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.02
Power efficiency4.181.12
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGF114RV630
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)28 June 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

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 cores336120
Core clock speed598 MHz800 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million390 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate33.496.400
Floating-point processing power0.8037 TFLOPS0.192 TFLOPS
ROPs244
TMUs568

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB256 MB
Memory bus width192bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth72.0 GB/s22.4 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 outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API10.0 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
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. 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 670M 4.55
+523%
ATI HD 2600 XT 0.73

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.

GTX 670M 1750
+521%
ATI HD 2600 XT 282

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:

900p39
+550%
6−7
−550%
Full HD40
+567%
6−7
−567%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data33.17

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Elden Ring 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Valorant 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Dota 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Elden Ring 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+667%
3−4
−667%
Fortnite 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+550%
6−7
−550%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Valorant 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
World of Tanks 91
+550%
14−16
−550%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Dota 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+667%
3−4
−667%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+550%
6−7
−550%
Valorant 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 3−4 0−1
Elden Ring 5−6 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+675%
4−5
−675%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1
World of Tanks 30−35
+540%
5−6
−540%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7 0−1
Valorant 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Elden Ring 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Fortnite 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4 0−1
Valorant 4−5 0−1

This is how GTX 670M and ATI HD 2600 XT compete in popular games:

  • GTX 670M is 550% faster in 900p
  • GTX 670M is 567% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.55 0.73
Recency 22 March 2012 28 June 2007
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 256 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 45 Watt

GTX 670M has a 523.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 62.5% more advanced lithography process.

ATI HD 2600 XT, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 670M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 2600 XT in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 670M is a notebook card while Radeon HD 2600 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.

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 GTX 670M
GeForce GTX 670M
ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT
Radeon HD 2600 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.


3.6 92 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 670M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 93 votes

Rate Radeon HD 2600 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.