Riva TNT2 vs Radeon RX 6800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 6800 and Riva TNT2, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 6800
2020
16 GB GDDR6, 250 Watt
57.55
+575400%

RX 6800 outperforms Riva TNT2 by a whopping 575400% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking421519
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation51.10no data
Power efficiency15.79no data
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)Fahrenheit (1998−2000)
GPU code nameNavi 21NV5
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date28 October 2020 (4 years ago)12 October 1999 (25 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$579 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 cores3840no data
Core clock speed1700 MHz125 MHz
Boost clock speed2105 MHzno data
Number of transistors26,800 million15 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm250 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Wattno data
Texture fill rate505.20.25
Floating-point processing power16.17 TFLOPSno data
ROPs962
TMUs2402
Ray Tracing Cores60no 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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16AGP 4x
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR6SDR
Maximum RAM amount16 GB16 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz150 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s2.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectors1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C1x VGA
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)6.0
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.61.2
OpenCL2.1N/A
Vulkan1.2N/A

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.

RX 6800 57.55
+575400%
Riva TNT2 0.01

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.

RX 6800 22181
+739267%
Riva TNT2 3

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 HD176-0−1
1440p100-0−1
4K60-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.29no data
1440p5.79no data
4K9.65no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 135 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 120−130 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 205 0−1
Battlefield 5 180−190 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−110 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 115 0−1
Far Cry 5 100−110 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 130−140 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 220−230 0−1
Hitman 3 110−120 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 210−220 0−1
Metro Exodus 150−160 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 230−240 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 120−130 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 172 0−1
Battlefield 5 180−190 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−110 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 104 0−1
Far Cry 5 100−110 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 130−140 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 220−230 0−1
Hitman 3 110−120 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 210−220 0−1
Metro Exodus 150−160 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 341 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120−130 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 120−130 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 162 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−110 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 99 0−1
Far Cry 5 100−110 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 220−230 0−1
Hitman 3 110−120 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 237 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 295 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 152 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 88 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 120−130 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 90−95 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 144 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 74 0−1
Far Cry 5 65−70 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 270−280 0−1
Hitman 3 80−85 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 186 0−1
Metro Exodus 138 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 215 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95−100 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 220−230 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55 0−1
Hitman 3 70 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 210−220 0−1
Metro Exodus 80−85 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 99 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 99 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 34 0−1
Far Cry 5 35−40 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 85−90 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 127 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 45 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 57.55 0.01
Recency 28 October 2020 12 October 1999
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 16 MB
Chip lithography 7 nm 250 nm

RX 6800 has a 575400% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 21 year, a 102300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 3471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Riva TNT2 in performance tests.


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 RX 6800
Radeon RX 6800
NVIDIA Riva TNT2
Riva TNT2

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.


4.3 1896 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.8 17 votes

Rate Riva TNT2 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.