Radeon RX 6600 XT vs R4 (Beema)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R4 (Beema) with Radeon RX 6600 XT, including specs and performance data.

R4 (Beema)
2014
1.03

RX 6600 XT outperforms R4 (Beema) by a whopping 4046% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking106678
Place by popularitynot in top-10092
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data48.60
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 (2014)Navi / RDNA2 (2020−2022)
GPU code nameBeemaNavi 23
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)30 July 2021 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$379
Current priceno data$283 (0.7x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1282048
Core clock speed800 MHz1968 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2589 MHz
Number of transistorsno data11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data160 (TGP) Watt
Texture fill rateno data331.4

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R4 (Beema) and Radeon RX 6600 XT compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data190 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data16000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data256.0 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 Connectorsno data1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMIno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkanno data1.2

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

R4 (Beema) 1.03
RX 6600 XT 42.70
+4046%

RX 6600 XT outperforms R4 (Beema) by 4046% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R4 (Beema) 399
RX 6600 XT 16489
+4033%

RX 6600 XT outperforms R4 (Beema) by 4033% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R4 (Beema) 716
RX 6600 XT 39051
+5354%

RX 6600 XT outperforms R4 (Beema) by 5354% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R4 (Beema) 2506
RX 6600 XT 88163
+3418%

RX 6600 XT outperforms R4 (Beema) by 3418% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R4 (Beema) 497
RX 6600 XT 28342
+5603%

RX 6600 XT outperforms R4 (Beema) by 5603% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R4 (Beema) 3309
RX 6600 XT 156297
+4623%

RX 6600 XT outperforms R4 (Beema) by 4623% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

R4 (Beema) 29548
RX 6600 XT 472371
+1499%

RX 6600 XT outperforms R4 (Beema) by 1499% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

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 HD9
−1322%
128
+1322%
1440p1−2
−7400%
75
+7400%
4K0−141

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−7800%
79
+7800%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−7300%
70−75
+7300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4200%
85−90
+4200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−7700%
78
+7700%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−4450%
90−95
+4450%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−5150%
100−110
+5150%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−5133%
150−160
+5133%
Hitman 3 2−3
−5300%
108
+5300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−4717%
289
+4717%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−4183%
257
+4183%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−5900%
120
+5900%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−7300%
70−75
+7300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4200%
85−90
+4200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−7500%
76
+7500%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−4450%
90−95
+4450%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−5150%
100−110
+5150%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−5133%
150−160
+5133%
Hitman 3 2−3
−4600%
94
+4600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−4250%
170−180
+4250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
−4080%
209
+4080%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−4300%
176
+4300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−5000%
100−110
+5000%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−7300%
70−75
+7300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4200%
85−90
+4200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−6800%
69
+6800%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−4450%
90−95
+4450%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−5133%
150−160
+5133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−5133%
157
+5133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−4475%
183
+4475%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−4850%
99
+4850%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−6000%
61
+6000%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−4050%
80−85
+4050%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−4600%
45−50
+4600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−6500%
65−70
+6500%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 40
Far Cry 5 2−3
−5150%
105
+5150%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−4400%
90−95
+4400%
Hitman 3 1−2
−6600%
67
+6600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−5700%
116
+5700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−6300%
60−65
+6300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−7300%
70−75
+7300%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 35−40
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 30−33
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 28
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 27−30
Far Cry 5 0−1 24−27
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−6500%
66
+6500%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−5200%
53
+5200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 35−40

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−4200%
129
+4200%
Battlefield 5 3−4
−4467%
130−140
+4467%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−5800%
110−120
+5800%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−5200%
106
+5200%
Battlefield 5 3−4
−4467%
130−140
+4467%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−6300%
64
+6300%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−7400%
75
+7400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−5500%
56
+5500%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−4800%
98
+4800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
−5800%
118
+5800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−4300%
44
+4300%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−4200%
40−45
+4200%
Hitman 3 0−1 33
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 40
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−5300%
54
+5300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 14
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−5900%
60−65
+5900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 24

This is how R4 (Beema) and RX 6600 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6600 XT is 1322% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6600 XT is 7400% faster in 1440p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.03 42.70
Recency 29 April 2014 30 July 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R4 (Beema) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R4 (Beema) is a notebook 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.

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.


AMD Radeon R4 (Beema)
Radeon R4 (Beema)
AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT
Radeon RX 6600 XT

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.1 74 votes

Rate Radeon R4 (Beema) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 3874 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6600 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.