AMD RX 6600 XT
RRP $ 379.00
"The AMD RX 6600 XT is a solid 1080p card at a time when GPU options are few and far between."
advantages
-
Smooth 1080p gaming
-
Doesn't take much strength
-
1440p gaming possible
-
Support for FidelityFX Super Resolution
disadvantage
-
A little too expensive
-
Poor content creation performance
-
Poor ray tracing performance
Budget and 1080p gamers haven't had many graphics card options in the past few months, and AMD's new RX 6600 XT tried to solve that problem. It's a card that can deliver smooth 1080p gaming at high frame rates, and it uses a stripped-down core to alleviate some supply issues. But its price stretches the definition of what it means to be a budget graphics card.
AMD could have priced the RX 6600 XT almost anywhere for under $ 500 and still selling cards like there's no tomorrow. At $ 379, it nestles in a comfortable spot between Nvidia competition, and if you can get one at list price on launch, you won't find another card that works this well for the cost.
But should you? $ 379 is an attractive price given the current market conditions, but the RX 6600 XT still has to pile up the competition after the market launch boom ended. The Radeon RX 6600 XT is a solid card, but it is flanked by two great Team Green cards that are making their money.
design
AMD does not publish a reference design for the RX 6600 XT, so you are limited to options from board partners. For this test, I got my hands on MSI's RX 6600 XT Gaming X card, which uses a traditional dual-fan design.
AMD has shared designs from other partners, some of which include three fans, but most should come with two. Regardless of the model, the RX 6600 XT uses a single 8-pin power connector and requires at least a 500W power supply.
My device measured 10.88 inches long, which is what the slightly protruding bezel made. Each model is a little different – especially the triple fans – so double check before you pick one up. A standard dual-fan design should be no longer than the length of an ATX motherboard (12 inches).
During the test, the card stayed cool, peaking at around 62 degrees Celsius in Cyberpunk 2077. It is important to mention that in a Be quiet! Dark Base Pro 900 Rev. 2, which is a full tower chassis with a little more space for cooling. Your mileage may vary.
A welcome feature on my review unit was a backplate that was missing from the competing RTX 3060 I tested. At least one board partner design has a backplate based on the images provided by AMD, but this may not apply to all designs.
Specifications
The RX 6600 XT builds on AMD's existing RDNA 2 architecture, which we have seen in action over and over again. However, it is built with the Navi 23 GPU core, which is otherwise only found in AMD's workstation class Radeon Pro W6600 and W6600M. This marks the debut of the Navi 23 for the desktop audience.
An important note about Navi 23 compared to previous versions: It is much smaller. That means AMD can squeeze more GPU dies onto a wafer, which should help with supply. It's still built using chip maker TSMC's 7nm node, but with a smaller size, AMD can make more chips with each manufacturing pass.
| Arithmetic units | Shading units | Game speed | Increase speed | Storage capacity | TDP | price | |
| Radeon RX 6600 XT | 32 | 2,048 | 1.97 GHz | 2.59 GHz | 8GB DDR6 | 160W | $ 380 |
| Radeon RX 6700 XT | 40 | 2,560 | 2.32 GHz | 2.58 GHz | 12 GB DDR6 | 230w | $ 480 |
| Radeon RX 6800 | 60 | 3,840 | 1.82 GHz | 2.11 GHz | 16GB DDR6 | 250w | $ 580 |
| Radeon RX 6800 XT | 72 | 4,608 | 2.02 GHz | 2.25 GHz | 16GB DDR6 | 300W | $ 649 |
| Radeon RX 6900 XT | 80 | 5,120 | 2.01 GHz | 2.25 GHz | 16GB DDR6 | 300W | $ 1,000 |
Regardless, Navi 23 builds on AMD's existing architecture, so we can make many comparisons with the rest of the range. Compared to the next level, the RX 6600 XT saves around 20% of the compute units (CUs) with a price difference of 20%. That would make sense if all the other specs are the same, but they are not. The RX 6600 XT corresponds to the boost clock of the RX 6700 XT, but comes with 4 GB less GDDR6 memory.
The RX 6600 XT shows a decent value compared to similar gaps in the range.
Still, it is better than a few other steps in the series. If you're switching from an RX 6800 to an RX 6700 XT, there's about a 20% price difference for a 40% difference in CUs – and that move also reduces 4GB of RAM. At least according to AMD's own list, the RX 6600 XT shows a decent value compared to similar gaps in the range.
There's no reason to compare it to Nvidia on the spec front – I'll touch on the better brand in the sections to come. However, the price of the RX 6600 XT in comparison to the competition should be emphasized. At $ 380, it's between Nvidia's RTX 3060 for $ 330 and the RTX 3060 Ti for $ 400.
The RTX 3060 Ti is also equipped with 8 GB of memory, while the RTX 3060 is equipped with 12 GB. When looking at prices, the way forward is clear. The RX 6600 XT should do a little below an RTX 3060 Ti and about 20% less than the RX 6700 XT. But does it do that?
Games
The RX 6600 XT is aimed at high refresh rate 1080p monitors. And based on my average frame rates, it hits that brand well. In the five non-ray tracing games I tested, it averaged 117.6 frames per second (fps), making it a great option for 1080p monitors with a 144Hz refresh rate. The 1440p performance is only slightly worse with an average of 86.6 fps.
Before you get to the individual results, it is worth looking at the average values I have collected. At 1080p, the RX 6600 XT sits between the RTX 3060 Ti and RTX 3060 where it should, and slightly outperforms the last-gen RX 5700 XT. The price difference between the RX 6600 XT and its closest competitor, the RTX 3060 Ti is around 10%.
1440p showed similar results, but with a larger 18% difference between the RTX 3060 Ti and the RX 6600 XT. The RTX 3060 and RX 6600 XT were much closer with only 6% difference. Of course, such averages don't tell the whole story, so let's go through some individual tests to get a clearer picture.
I tested the RX 6600 XT on a machine that rocks an Intel Core i9-10900K, 32GB of RAM, and an Asus Tuf Z490-Plus motherboard. All of my tests were performed on a Crucial MX500 2TB hard drive with the latest version of Windows 10. Unfortunately, I didn't have an AMD processor to test Smart Access Memory, but you can expect a 5-10% increase in support for games if you have a current Ryzen processor.
Starting with the simplest fight, the RX 6600 XT took home a GPU score of 9,644 in 3DMark Time Spy. That's about 11% faster than the RX 5700 XT and RTX 3060, which were only one point apart in this test. As you'll see in other reviews, the RX 6600 XT comes close to the RX 5700 XT in most games. Here it actually shoots forward.
However, the RTX 3060 Ti resets the RX 6600 XT. It got a graphics score of 11,706 – a difference of about 19%. This also applies to the RX 6700 XT, which took the crown in 3DMark with a graphics score of 12,068.
Assassin's Creed Valhalla is one of the games that preferred the RX 6600 XT over the RTX 3060 Ti. At 1080p with ultra high settings, the RX 6600 XT averaged 83 fps. That is within one frame of the RX 5700 XT, but still five frames ahead of the RTX 3060 Ti. The RTX 3060 and RTX 2060 Super lagged behind the field with 64 fps and 66 fps, respectively, while the RX 6700 XT again with 100 fps was ahead of the pack.
At 1440p Ultra High, the RX 6600 XT and RTX 3060 Ti swapped places. The AMD card reached 60 fps while the Nvidia card came in at 64 fps. The RTX 3060 was significantly lower at 51 fps, while the RX 6700 XT still showed its dominance at 76 fps. I've found similar results at high settings, with the RX 6600 XT outperforming the RTX 3060 Ti at 1080p but falling short at 1440p.
The Vulkan-based Red Dead Redemption 2 painted a slightly different picture, with the RX 6600 XT being closer to the RTX 3060. The RX 6600 XT averaged 68 fps at 1080p Ultra Quality, while the RTX 3060 averaged 65 fps. The RTX 3060 Ti showed a difference of 21% compared to the RX 6600 XT with an average of 84 fps.
I've seen similar performance at 1440p Ultra Quality, with the RTX 3060 Ti leading the way at 70 fps. The RX 6600 XT showed a difference of 24% to the RTX 3060 Ti with an average frame rate of 55 fps. As with 1080p, the RTX 3060 was only slightly behind the RX 6600 XT with a difference of 4%.
AMD has kept its promise to deliver 1080p gaming at high frame rates.
Civilization VI again showed a dominant lead for the RTX 3060 Ti, although the RX 6600 XT came closer than it was in Red Dead Redemption 2. The RX 6600 XT averaged 161 fps at 1080p Ultra settings, while the RTX 3060 Ti averaged 194 fps reached, which corresponds to a difference of about 19%. The RX 6700 XT was ahead of the other cards with an average of 219 fps.
I've seen similar scaling on 1440p Ultra. The RX 6600 XT achieved 137 fps and the RTX 3060 Ti achieved 163 fps, while the RTX 3060 lagged behind at 119 fps. Here the RX 6600 XT sits exactly where it belongs – right between the RTX 3060 Ti and RTX 3060.
Battlefield V produced similar results. The RX 6600 XT averaged 139 fps at 1080p Ultra settings. The RTX 3060 showed a difference of 12% at 123 fps and the RTX 3060 Ti showed a difference of 9% at 152 fps. The RX 6700 XT was able to prevail again with 164 fps.
At 1440p Ultra settings, the RTX 3060 Ti pushed itself even further in front of the RX 6600 XT. AMD's card averaged 100 fps and Nvidia's average 123 fps – almost a difference of 21%. The RTX 3060 was close to the RX 6600 XT at 97 fps, while the last generation RX 5700 XT achieved a slightly higher 110 fps.
Fortnite showed a closer race between the RX 6600 XT, RTX 3060 and RTX 3060 Ti. The RTX 3060 Ti led at 1080p Epic settings at 143 fps, but the RX 6600 XT was not far behind at 137 fps (only a 4 %). The RTX 3060 lags behind the group with 132 fps. All three cards scored well above the RTX 2060 Super and the RX 5700 XT – both of which never broke 110 fps – and showed some significant improvements over the previous generation.
The 1440p Epic showed a more dominant lead for the RTX 3060 Ti, where it averaged 100 fps. That's about 21% less than the RX 6600 XT, which averaged 81 fps. With an average of 86 fps, the RTX 3060 is a better comparison point to the RX 6600 XT at 1440p.
Overall, you can expect a performance difference of around 10% between the RX 6600 XT and the RTX 3060 cards, as the price suggests. At 1080p, the RTX 3060 Ti and RX 6600 XT are about a 5% price difference for a 10% difference in performance. With the RTX 3060 there is a price difference of 14% for a performance difference of about 11%.
Within AMD's own product range, the RX 6600 XT performs according to the specifications. Even with the memory gap between the two cards, the RX 6700 XT and RX 6600 XT show a difference of around 20%.
However, when I use the previous generation the RX 6600 XT shows some problems. The RX 6600 XT only marginally outperformed the RX 5700 XT in my tests, which was released for $ 399 two years ago. The RX 6600 XT is only $ 20 cheaper and only slightly more powerful. It includes ray tracing that the RX 5700 XT lacked, but that's not exactly the generational improvement I would have liked.
Still, AMD has kept its promise to deliver 1080p gaming at high frame rates, even if there are some slightly better options available from Nvidia at list prices.
Content creation
Gaming is the focus of the RX 6600 XT, so it is not surprising that the card takes a back seat when creating content. Here I ran tests using the Blender and PugetBench benchmarks for Premiere Pro. The RX 6600 XT can run both programs, but there could be a better option if your focus is more on it than gaming.
In Blender I did three test renderings and averaged the times. When it comes to supporting CUDA and OptiX rendering in Blender, the RTX 3060 Ti is unsurprisingly. However, the RX 6600 XT still managed to beat the RTX 3060 by about a 11% difference. Nevertheless, the RTX 3060 Ti and RX 6700 XT showed a clear lead.
PugetBench for Premiere Pro favored the Nvidia cards even more. The RX 6600 XT recently scored a total of 625 points, while the RTX 3060 Ti received 807 points. Note that PugetBench takes into account a number of features in Premiere Pro, so the endnote doesn't just rest on the shoulders of the graphics card.
I was surprised that the RX 6600 XT shows up a bit in my Blender review, but overall it's not a great card for content creation. It's powerful enough to work in apps like Blender and Premiere Pro, but if you use those apps a lot, Nvidia still has the edge.
Super resolution and ray tracing
Normally, Nvidia would have a clear lead over AMD with Deep Learning Super Sampling (DLSS) and ray tracing. This is not the case with this generation. The RX 6600 XT also comes with hardware-accelerated ray tracing and has access to a DLSS-like function in the form of FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR).
I took Control and Cyberpunk 2077 to test ray tracing. I ignored DLSS in all of the testing to see how the RX 6600 XT would hold up in a fair fight. Like other cards in the RX 6000 series, it clearly lagged behind the Nvidia competition.
In Cyberpunk 2077, the RX 6600 XT showed about a 79% decrease when switching from the Ultra preset to the Ultra RT preset, while the RTX 3060 only saw a 53% decrease. Remember, this is with DLSS disabled. Even without the upscaling advantage, the cards of the RTX-30 series from Nvidia handle ray tracing better than the RX-6000 series.
1440p Ultra RT was not playable on any of the cards I tested. As a reference, the RX 6600 XT only achieved an average of 3 fps in this mode. The most powerful card, the RTX 3060 Ti, averaged just 23 fps.
Ray tracing is challenging regardless of the hardware used, but Nvidia's cards can still handle the heat better than AMD's.
Control was much more forgiving. It's at least playable with ray tracing enabled at 1080p, but the RX 6600 XT still showed a 54% drop and the RTX 3060 only showed a 38% drop.
At 1440p, the RX 6600 XT dropped 62% – 47 fps to 18 fps – with ray tracing enabled – while the RTX 3060 dropped 40%. I used the RTX 3060 as a benchmark as it was the closest competitor in these tests, but the RTX 3060 Ti showed similar dips when turning on ray tracing.
The difference here makes sense. Nvidia uses dedicated ray tracing cores, while AMD opts for a "ray accelerator" packed into each computing unit. Ray tracing is tough regardless of the hardware used, but Nvidia's cards can still handle the heat better than AMD's – and the RX 6600 XT doesn't change that.
In the case of an Nvidia card, I would point out DLSS to increase ray tracing performance. AMD has an alternative in the form of FSR, but Nvidia usually bundles ray tracing with DLSS, while FSR is a bit scattered. That could change over time, but Nvidia's cards still have the best of ray tracing features.
As my tests show, you really need an upscaling function to run ray tracing at playable frame rates. AMD has this feature now in the form of FSR, but many popular ray tracing titles – including Cyberpunk 2077 and Control – don't yet support the feature.
Nevertheless, FSR is available to you with the RX 6600 XT. As we found in our FidelityFX Super Resolution test, it is a very powerful upscaling feature that can significantly improve your frame rates. Image quality isn't quite as good as DLSS, but the differences are easy to forgive when everything goes well.
Our opinion
In a perfect world with list prices and GPUs on the shelves, I would definitely recommend the RX 6600 XT's RTX 3060 Ti. It's only $ 20 more expensive and performs better almost anywhere. The RX 6600 XT is a bit overpriced at $ 380 – it should be closer to $ 350 given its performance. However, having an extra $ 30 is hard to argue with considering how expensive graphics cards are right now.
Much of this depends on what card you can find and what the price is. When starting at the list price, the RX 6600 XT is a slam dunk in view of the popular graphics cards. When the initial inventory is gone, you should classify the RX 6600 XT between the RTX 3060 Ti and RTX 3060 in terms of performance and take the offer price from there.
Is there a better alternative?
Yes, the RTX 3060 Ti is a better alternative. However, given the price of graphics cards and the difficulty of finding them, the list price doesn't say much. If the price of the RX 6600 XT is between the RTX 3060 and the RTX 3060 Ti, it's a great 1080p card for high refresh rate monitors.
The other alternative is the RX 6700 XT, which even outperforms the RTX 3060 Ti, albeit at an additional cost.
How long it will take?
The RX 6600 XT is set to last for the next few years for 1080p gaming. If you want to use features like ray tracing or want to upgrade to a higher resolution, you will probably feel the weaknesses of the RX 6600 XT within a few years.
Should you buy it?
Yes. The RX 6600 XT is about $ 30 too expensive, but still a lot cheaper than any other card you can buy right now. However, if you're missing out on the launch boom, consider upgrading to the RTX 3060 Ti instead if you can find it at a reasonable price.
Editor's recommendations