ATI Radeon X1600 PRO vs RX 6900 XT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 6900 XT and Radeon X1600 PRO, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 6900 XT
2020
16 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
69.45
+27680%

RX 6900 XT outperforms ATI X1600 PRO by a whopping 27680% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking221355
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation29.88no data
Power efficiency16.140.43
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)R500 (2005−2007)
GPU code nameNavi 21RV530
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date28 October 2020 (4 years ago)1 October 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6900 XT and ATI X1600 PRO have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores5120no data
Core clock speed1825 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed2250 MHzno data
Number of transistors26,800 million157 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)300 Watt41 Watt
Texture fill rate720.02.000
Floating-point processing power23.04 TFLOPSno data
ROPs1284
TMUs3204
Ray Tracing Cores80no 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 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width3-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 typeGDDR6GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount16 GB256 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz390 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s12.48 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model6.53.0
OpenGL4.62.0
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 6900 XT 69.45
+27680%
ATI X1600 PRO 0.25

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 6900 XT 26791
+27238%
ATI X1600 PRO 98

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 HD1950−1
1440p125-0−1
4K79-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.12no data
1440p7.99no data
4K12.65no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 130−140 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 117 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 169 0−1
Battlefield 5 220−230 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 110−120 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140 0−1
Far Cry 5 110−120 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 170−180 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 0−1
Hitman 3 120−130 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 250−260 0−1
Metro Exodus 150−160 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 120−130 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 290−300
+29200%
1−2
−29200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 150−160 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 279
+27800%
1−2
−27800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 142 0−1
Battlefield 5 220−230 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 110−120 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140 0−1
Far Cry 5 110−120 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 170−180 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 0−1
Hitman 3 120−130 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 250−260 0−1
Metro Exodus 150−160 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 120−130 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 290−300
+29200%
1−2
−29200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 140−150 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 150−160 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 98 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 137 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 110−120 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140 0−1
Far Cry 5 110−120 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 248 0−1
Hitman 3 120−130 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 283
+28200%
1−2
−28200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 290−300
+29200%
1−2
−29200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 164 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 121 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 120−130 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 160−170 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 110−120 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 99 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 109 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 0−1
Far Cry 5 80−85 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 270−280 0−1
Hitman 3 100−110 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 224 0−1
Metro Exodus 117 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 190−200 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120−130 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 230−240 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70 0−1
Hitman 3 83 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 220−230 0−1
Metro Exodus 110−120 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 122 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 68 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 66 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 50−55 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 162 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 54 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 69.45 0.25
Recency 28 October 2020 1 October 2007
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 7 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 300 Watt 41 Watt

RX 6900 XT has a 27680% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1185.7% more advanced lithography process.

ATI X1600 PRO, on the other hand, has 631.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6900 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1600 PRO 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 6900 XT
Radeon RX 6900 XT
ATI Radeon X1600 PRO
Radeon X1600 PRO

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 3693 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6900 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 121 vote

Rate Radeon X1600 PRO 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.