Radeon RX 7600M XT vs Quadro T2000 Mobile

Place in the ranking	269	150
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	23.83	19.83
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	TU117	Navi 33
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	4 January 2023 (2 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	1024	2048
Core clock speed	1575 MHz	1280 MHz
Boost clock speed	1785 MHz	2469 MHz
Number of transistors	4,700 million	13,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	120 Watt
Texture fill rate	114.2	316.0
Floating-point processing power	3.656 TFLOPS	20.23 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	64
TMUs	64	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	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	128.0 GB/s	288.0 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

Portable Device Dependent

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	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	-

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.

T2000 Mobile 20.77

RX 7600M XT 34.56
+66.4%

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.

T2000 Mobile 7985

RX 7600M XT 13286
+66.4%

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.

T2000 Mobile 13524

RX 7600M XT 38039
+181%

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	65−70 −78.5%	116 +78.5%
1440p	30−35 −83.3%	55 +83.3%
4K	18−20 −83.3%	33 +83.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −184%	105 +184%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −78%	70−75 +78%
Elden Ring	65−70 −105%	135 +105%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −47%	95−100 +47%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −143%	90 +143%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −78%	70−75 +78%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −190%	255 +190%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −94.6%	109 +94.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −48.9%	70−75 +48.9%
Valorant	80−85 −64.3%	130−140 +64.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −47%	95−100 +47%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −122%	82 +122%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −78%	70−75 +78%
Dota 2	70−75 −21.9%	89 +21.9%
Elden Ring	65−70 −80.3%	110−120 +80.3%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −2.9%	70 +2.9%
Fortnite	100−110 −44%	150−160 +44%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −136%	208 +136%
Grand Theft Auto V	70−75 −80.8%	132 +80.8%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −60.7%	90 +60.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −37.7%	190−200 +37.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −48.9%	70−75 +48.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 −80.3%	110−120 +80.3%
Valorant	80−85 −64.3%	130−140 +64.3%
World of Tanks	230−240 −17.8%	270−280 +17.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −47%	95−100 +47%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −62.2%	60 +62.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −78%	70−75 +78%
Dota 2	70−75 −53.4%	110−120 +53.4%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −33.8%	90−95 +33.8%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −105%	180 +105%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −37.7%	190−200 +37.7%
Valorant	80−85 −64.3%	130−140 +64.3%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	30−35 −112%	70 +112%
Elden Ring	35−40 −91.4%	65−70 +91.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −103%	69 +103%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −1.7%	170−180 +1.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −73.7%	30−35 +73.7%
World of Tanks	140−150 −57.9%	220−230 +57.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −57.1%	65−70 +57.1%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −94.1%	30−35 +94.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −94.1%	30−35 +94.1%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −93%	110−120 +93%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −122%	120 +122%
Metro Exodus	45−50 −95.7%	92 +95.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −155%	74 +155%
Valorant	50−55 −90.7%	100−110 +90.7%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +1600%	1 −1600%
Dota 2	35−40 −111%	74 +111%
Elden Ring	14−16 −107%	30−35 +107%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −111%	74 +111%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −133%	35 +133%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 −77.4%	110−120 +77.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −69.2%	21−24 +69.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −111%	74 +111%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −85.7%	35−40 +85.7%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +30.8%	13 −30.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Dota 2	35−40 −85.7%	65−70 +85.7%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −81.5%	45−50 +81.5%
Fortnite	24−27 −88%	45−50 +88%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −106%	64 +106%
Valorant	24−27 −112%	50−55 +112%

This is how T2000 Mobile and RX 7600M XT compete in popular games:

RX 7600M XT is 78% faster in 1080p
RX 7600M XT is 83% faster in 1440p
RX 7600M XT is 83% 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 T2000 Mobile is 1600% faster.
in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 7600M XT is 190% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

T2000 Mobile is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
RX 7600M XT is ahead in 61 test (97%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	20.77	34.56
Recency	27 May 2019	4 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	120 Watt

T2000 Mobile has 100% lower power consumption.

RX 7600M XT, on the other hand, has a 66.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7600M XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T2000 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 7600M XT is a mobile workstation one.

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