Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 vs GeForce Go 6600

Place in the ranking	1406	376
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	no data	14.73
Architecture	Curie (2003−2013)	Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code name	NV43 A2	Vega Kaby Lake-G
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	29 September 2005 (19 years ago)	7 January 2018 (7 years ago)

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	12	1280
Core clock speed	300 MHz	931 MHz
Boost clock speed	375 MHz	1011 MHz
Number of transistors	146 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	110 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	2.400	no data
ROPs	4	no data
TMUs	8	no data

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	medium sized	medium sized
Interface	MXM-II	no data

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	DDR	HBM2
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	350 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	11.2 GB/s	no data
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 outputs

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	9.0c (9_3)	12_1
Shader Model	3.0	no data
OpenGL	2.1	no data
OpenCL	N/A	no data
Vulkan	N/A	-

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	0−1	44
1440p	-0−1	28
4K	-0−1	15

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −213%	24−27 +213%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −213%	24−27 +213%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −1020%	55−60 +1020%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −1100%	48 +1100%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −213%	24−27 +213%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −517%	37 +517%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −1020%	55−60 +1020%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	5−6 −2480%	129 +2480%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −300%	16 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −950%	40−45 +950%
World of Tanks	10−12 −1573%	180−190 +1573%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −213%	24−27 +213%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −750%	51 +750%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −1020%	55−60 +1020%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	5−6 −1920%	100−110 +1920%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

1−2

−6100%

62
+6100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −400%	10−11 +400%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −700%	32 +700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −750%	16−18 +750%
Valorant	4−5 −750%	30−35 +750%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −93.3%	29 +93.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −93.3%	29 +93.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	0−1	30
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −93.3%	29 +93.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	12−14
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Dota 2	14−16 −66.7%	24−27 +66.7%
Valorant	0−1	14−16

Full HD
Low Preset

Elden Ring

40−45

+0%

40−45

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Metro Exodus	44 +0%	44 +0%
Valorant	47 +0%	47 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Dota 2	27 +0%	27 +0%
Elden Ring	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Fortnite	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	41 +0%	41 +0%
Metro Exodus	30 +0%	30 +0%
Valorant	30 +0%	30 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Dota 2	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Valorant	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Elden Ring	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
World of Tanks	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Metro Exodus	27 +0%	27 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Elden Ring	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Far Cry 5	15 +0%	15 +0%
Fortnite	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

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

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega M GL / 870 is 6100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX Vega M GL / 870 is ahead in 30 tests (50%)
there's a draw in 30 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.18	13.88
Recency	29 September 2005	7 January 2018
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	4 GB
Chip lithography	110 nm	14 nm

RX Vega M GL / 870 has a 7611.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 685.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 6600 in performance tests.

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