Radeon RX 6600 XT vs Quadro K2000M

Place in the ranking	808	90
Place by popularity	not in top-100	87
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.30	63.51
Power efficiency	3.30	18.52
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GK107	Navi 23
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	1 June 2012 (12 years ago)	30 July 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$265.27	$379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6600 XT has 21070% better value for money than K2000M.

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	384	2048
Core clock speed	745 MHz	1968 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2589 MHz
Number of transistors	1,270 million	11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	160 Watt
Texture fill rate	23.84	331.4
Floating-point processing power	0.5722 TFLOPS	10.6 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	64
TMUs	32	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	medium sized	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	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	DDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.8 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	No outputs	1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

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.

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	+	1.2
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. 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.

K2000M 2.62

RX 6600 XT 42.79
+1533%

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.

K2000M 1012

RX 6600 XT 16513
+1532%

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.

K2000M 1798

RX 6600 XT 39051
+2072%

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.

K2000M 7947

RX 6600 XT 88163
+1009%

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.

K2000M 1046

RX 6600 XT 28342
+2610%

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.

K2000M 8766

RX 6600 XT 156297
+1683%

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	24 −458%	134 +458%
1440p	4−5 −1850%	78 +1850%
4K	2−3 −2000%	42 +2000%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	11.05	2.83
1440p	66.32	4.86
4K	132.64	9.02

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

−1480%

79
+1480%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −1025%	90−95 +1025%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	129
Battlefield 5	4−5 −3325%	130−140 +3325%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −1333%	85−90 +1333%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −1460%	78 +1460%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −1720%	90−95 +1720%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −1400%	100−110 +1400%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −1431%	190−200 +1431%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1443%	108 +1443%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −729%	170−180 +729%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −6550%	130−140 +6550%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −1517%	95−100 +1517%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −1345%	150−160 +1345%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −250%	130−140 +250%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −1025%	90−95 +1025%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	106
Battlefield 5	4−5 −3325%	130−140 +3325%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −1333%	85−90 +1333%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −1420%	76 +1420%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −1720%	90−95 +1720%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −1400%	100−110 +1400%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −1431%	190−200 +1431%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1443%	108 +1443%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −729%	170−180 +729%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −6550%	130−140 +6550%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −1517%	95−100 +1517%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −1800%	209 +1800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −577%	85−90 +577%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −250%	130−140 +250%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −1025%	90−95 +1025%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	75
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −1333%	85−90 +1333%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −1280%	69 +1280%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −1720%	90−95 +1720%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −1431%	190−200 +1431%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1329%	100 +1329%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −648%	157 +648%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −1564%	183 +1564%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −662%	99 +662%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −60.5%	61 +60.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−1517%

95−100
+1517%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −1975%	80−85 +1975%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −1525%	65−70 +1525%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −2250%	45−50 +2250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −2400%	50−55 +2400%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −3900%	40 +3900%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −1533%	45−50 +1533%
Hitman 3	8−9 −738%	67 +738%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −1557%	116 +1557%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −3100%	60−65 +3100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 −1247%	200−210 +1247%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−1133%

70−75
+1133%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −4200%	40−45 +4200%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −3600%	35−40 +3600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −1400%	30−33 +1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −2700%	28 +2700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −2700%	27−30 +2700%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −2400%	24−27 +2400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	24

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−875%

35−40
+875%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	56 +0%	56 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Metro Exodus	98 +0%	98 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	118 +0%	118 +0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3	33 +0%	33 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	54 +0%	54 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	14 +0%	14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	61 +0%	61 +0%

This is how K2000M and RX 6600 XT compete in popular games:

RX 6600 XT is 458% faster in 1080p
RX 6600 XT is 1850% faster in 1440p
RX 6600 XT is 2000% faster in 4K

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 6600 XT is 6550% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 6600 XT is ahead in 57 tests (84%)
there's a draw in 11 tests (16%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.62	42.79
Recency	1 June 2012	30 July 2021
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	160 Watt

K2000M has 190.9% lower power consumption.

RX 6600 XT, on the other hand, has a 1533.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 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 Quadro K2000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K2000M is a mobile workstation 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.