Radeon RX 7600S vs GeForce GTX 980

Place in the ranking	198	120
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	10.87	no data
Power efficiency	12.05	35.58
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GM204	Navi 33
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	19 September 2014 (10 years ago)	4 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$549	no data

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	2048	1792
Core clock speed	1064 MHz	1500 MHz
Boost clock speed	1216 MHz	2200 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	13,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	165 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	155.6	246.4
Floating-point processing power	4.981 TFLOPS	15.77 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	64
TMUs	128	112
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	28

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	no data	large
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Recommended system power (PSU)	500 Watt	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	None
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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	7.0 GB/s	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	224 GB/s	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	Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2	Portable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
VGA аnalog display support	+	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
G-SYNC support	+	-
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream	+	-
GeForce ShadowPlay	+	-
GPU Boost	2.0	no data
GameWorks	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
BatteryBoost	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.3
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 980 28.89

RX 7600S 38.76
+34.2%

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 980 11107

RX 7600S 14901
+34.2%

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 980 17605

RX 7600S 34218
+94.4%

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 980 37997

RX 7600S 79339
+109%

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.

GTX 980 12938

RX 7600S 25900
+100%

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.

GTX 980 85374

RX 7600S 155806
+82.5%

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:

Full HD	92 −8.7%	100 +8.7%
1440p	50 +8.7%	46 −8.7%
4K	40 +53.8%	26 −53.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	5.97	no data
1440p	10.98	no data
4K	13.73	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −80%	99 +80%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 −40.7%	80−85 +40.7%
Elden Ring	95−100 −40.2%	130−140 +40.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	75 −38.7%	100−110 +38.7%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −50.9%	83 +50.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +13.5%	52 −13.5%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −75.4%	228 +75.4%
Metro Exodus	70−75 −25.7%	90−95 +25.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 −24.6%	75−80 +24.6%
Valorant	110−120 −81.7%	209 +81.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	77 −35.1%	100−110 +35.1%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −36.4%	75 +36.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +40.5%	42 −40.5%
Dota 2	48 −154%	122 +154%
Elden Ring	95−100 −49.5%	145 +49.5%
Far Cry 5	80−85 +48.2%	56 −48.2%
Fortnite	105 −61.9%	170−180 +61.9%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −46.2%	190 +46.2%
Grand Theft Auto V	72 −75%	126 +75%
Metro Exodus	70−75 −25.7%	90−95 +25.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	194 −3.1%	200−210 +3.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 −24.6%	75−80 +24.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	67 −104%	130−140 +104%
Valorant	110−120 −34.8%	150−160 +34.8%
World of Tanks	270−280 −3%	270−280 +3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	67 −55.2%	100−110 +55.2%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −1.8%	56 +1.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +68.6%	35 −68.6%
Dota 2	95−100 −13.4%	110 +13.4%
Far Cry 5	80−85 −16.9%	95−100 +16.9%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −25.4%	163 +25.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	69 −190%	200−210 +190%
Valorant	110−120 −55.7%	179 +55.7%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	50−55 −44%	70−75 +44%
Elden Ring	50−55 −43.4%	76 +43.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	50−55 −44%	70−75 +44%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 −40.7%	35−40 +40.7%
World of Tanks	180−190 −30.9%	240−250 +30.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	47 −53.2%	70−75 +53.2%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +8.3%	24 −8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +23.8%	21 −23.8%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −42%	120−130 +42%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 −41.8%	110−120 +41.8%
Metro Exodus	65−70 −29.2%	80−85 +29.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 −52.3%	65−70 +52.3%
Valorant	80−85 −49.4%	120−130 +49.4%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −48.1%	40−45 +48.1%
Dota 2	59 −28.8%	75−80 +28.8%
Elden Ring	24−27 −54.2%	37 +54.2%
Grand Theft Auto V	59 −28.8%	75−80 +28.8%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −39.1%	30−35 +39.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70 −78.6%	120−130 +78.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −38.9%	24−27 +38.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	59 −28.8%	75−80 +28.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	22 −105%	45−50 +105%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −48.1%	40−45 +48.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +11.1%	9 −11.1%
Dota 2	50−55 −46.2%	75−80 +46.2%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −46.2%	55−60 +46.2%
Fortnite	30 −83.3%	55−60 +83.3%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −42.2%	60−65 +42.2%
Valorant	40−45 −60%	60−65 +60%

This is how GTX 980 and RX 7600S compete in popular games:

RX 7600S is 9% faster in 1080p
GTX 980 is 9% faster in 1440p
GTX 980 is 54% faster in 4K

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

in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 980 is 69% faster.
in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 7600S is 190% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 980 is ahead in 7 tests (11%)
RX 7600S is ahead in 55 tests (87%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	28.89	38.76
Recency	19 September 2014	4 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	165 Watt	75 Watt

RX 7600S has a 34.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 120% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 7600S is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 980 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 is a desktop card while Radeon RX 7600S is a notebook one.

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