GeForce RTX 3060 vs Radeon RX 6600 XT: 50 Game Benchmark

dacoll

Posts: 19   +7
Ahh, prices in my country didn't budge much at all after last march drops. I considered myself lucky able to snatch RTX 3060 Ti for US$590 after that time window because since then the price are going up a bit to more than US$630 on average with limited stock for unknown reason.
 

mosu

Posts: 562   +199
Keeping in mind that these are, after all, low end cards with poor raytracing performance, so a better option would be RX 6650 XT.
 

Lounds

Posts: 1,119   +1,015
"the RTX 3060 offers similar rasterization performance" I disagree with this. There's clearly an average of 20% performance gap between the two card when RT isn't enabled. On average in the UK the 3060 has been £100 more than the 6600XT making it a poor product in my country. AMD promotes the card as a 1080p ultra settings card and I think that's a fair statement to make, it's the better 1080p card. Neither card is brilliant at 1440p, where the 3060ti and 6700XT excel a lot more at. 12GB of VRAM is never going to be fully filled at 1080p gaming for the next 2 years and maybe longer. So if you can get a 3060 cheaper than the 6600XT then it's the better buy but if the 6600XT is cheaper get that you won't be disappointed.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,104   +3,633
"the RTX 3060 offers similar rasterization performance" I disagree with this. There's clearly an average of 20% performance gap between the two card when RT isn't enabled. On average in the UK the 3060 has been £100 more than the 6600XT making it a poor product in my country. AMD promotes the card as a 1080p ultra settings card and I think that's a fair statement to make, it's the better 1080p card. Neither card is brilliant at 1440p, where the 3060ti and 6700XT excel a lot more at. 12GB of VRAM is never going to be fully filled at 1080p gaming for the next 2 years and maybe longer. So if you can get a 3060 cheaper than the 6600XT then it's the better buy but if the 6600XT is cheaper get that you won't be disappointed.

Good info - had not even noticed that RT results are now combined with pure raster. That does skew the results.

Not sure about that approach - can see both pro and con for this. Either way, it is a definitive advantage for the 3060, so it‘s good to point that out and games appear to have playable fps with RT and without DLSS.

The additional info that without RT the performance difference would look differently might be a helpful information.
Otoh this makes me wonder why SAM is not activated, as well since - unless I am mistaken - all recent platforms support this.
 
Last edited:

emmzo

Posts: 609   +766
3070 is really where you want to start.

The 3060 and the 3060Ti are good, but that 3070 should really be the lowest you go.
For once I agree, anything lower than 3070 for 2k is on the very limit for a demanding game and are going to get in trouble soon enough. Considering most people don't upgrade every gen, I think 3060 or ti and 6600xt are a bad investment for 2k, especially now, when prices will become more affordable.
 

Roddy_K

Posts: 14   +6
I'm just curious why you didn't use the RX 6700xt and the RTX 3060. Both are around $480 price point right now, both have 12gb of memory and both have 192 bit memory interface. Apples to apples.
 

Nobina

Posts: 3,774   +4,196
For once I agree, anything lower than 3070 for 2k is on the very limit for a demanding game and are going to get in trouble soon enough. Considering most people don't upgrade every gen, I think 3060 or ti and 6600xt are a bad investment for 2k, especially now, when prices will become more affordable.
If you're buying a GPU you're getting rinsed so might as well get at least an RTX 3070 so you know you're getting something decent.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,104   +3,633
I'm just curious why you didn't use the RX 6700xt and the RTX 3060. Both are around $480 price point right now, both have 12gb of memory and both have 192 bit memory interface. Apples to apples.

Can only speak about Germany, but the 6700xt is noticeably more expensive than a 3060.

6600XT: €425 and up
3060: €460 and up
6700XT: €599 and up

(Mindfactory)
 

Lounds

Posts: 1,119   +1,015
Good info - had not even noticed that RT results are now combined with pure raster. That does skew the results.

Not sure about that approach - can see both pro and con for this. Either way, it is a definitive advantage for the 3060, so it‘s good to point that out and games appear to have playable fps with RT and without DLSS.

The additional info that without RT the performance difference would look differently might be a helpful information.
Otoh this makes me wonder why SAM is not activated, as well since - unless I am mistaken - all recent platforms support this.
In the article it does mention resizable bar is on which is the official name, AMD just branded it as Smart Access Memory (SAM). So this really is the best case situation for the 6600XT.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,104   +3,633
In the article it does mention resizable bar is on which is the official name, AMD just branded it as Smart Access Memory (SAM). So this really is the best case situation for the 6600XT.
I guess I need to learn to read articles more thoroughly. Thanks.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,576   +2,800
TechSpot Elite
I can't take it anymore. I have to ask because I can never find a good explanation, so here goes tech gurus.

I consider myself very tech-savvy, but not so much with what is going on under the hood. I know all GPUs are built with proprietary tech, but in the end they all use the same API.
So why can we see such big gaps between 2 video cards running the same game in, say DX12? And then be so close in other games also running in DX12?
 

WhiteLeaff

Posts: 8   +5
"the RTX 3060 offers similar rasterization performance" I disagree with this. There's clearly an average of 20% performance gap between the two card when RT isn't enabled. On average in the UK the 3060 has been £100 more than the 6600XT making it a poor product in my country. AMD promotes the card as a 1080p ultra settings card and I think that's a fair statement to make, it's the better 1080p card. Neither card is brilliant at 1440p, where the 3060ti and 6700XT excel a lot more at. 12GB of VRAM is never going to be fully filled at 1080p gaming for the next 2 years and maybe longer. So if you can get a 3060 cheaper than the 6600XT then it's the better buy but if the 6600XT is cheaper get that you won't be disappointed.
Yes. It's a mix that confuses the consumer, Ray tracing is something for the high-end for now. I should have already separated the games that force you to use RT.
 
I'm a miner so I can game on whatever card I feel like. Amd is just better. I don't have to deal with any of the GeForce login bs or 3rd party oc software
Everything you could need is in the Radeon software. Performance overlays, instant gif, recording, screen shots, etc.

 

Crinkles

Posts: 245   +220
I can't take it anymore. I have to ask because I can never find a good explanation, so here goes tech gurus.

I consider myself very tech-savvy, but not so much with what is going on under the hood. I know all GPUs are built with proprietary tech, but in the end they all use the same API.

This is your API
API: WHAT?
This is your CPU: color dots x120-x468; yellow
The software that sent the 'color' instruction, gets the yellow dots, The Api says..
API: WHAT? (*no API 'announces' that way, as far as I know) API is software that can be used by another program 'that is programmed' how to use it. DirectX 10,11,12 (Windows) have methods accessible via API, DirectX was developed by Microsoft it is proprietary and comes with Windows and other MS products. Microsoft allows programs and people use of DirectX but it is theirs.


So why can we see such big gaps between 2 video cards running the same game in, say DX12? And then be so close in other games also running in DX12?

Dozens of 'working' variables, everything in a computer can *be in play during a test or play, touch the mouse and the score may change. (*edit to add 'be')
 
Last edited:

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,597   +1,421
Yes. It's a mix that confuses the consumer, Ray tracing is something for the high-end for now. I should have already separated the games that force you to use RT.
Personally if I’m spending £300-£400 on a GPU I’d expect to be ray tracing at 1080p. Ray tracing is 4 years old now and even the consoles have it.

Maybe a budget GPU for >£200 can be excused for not doing it but these parts advertise it, they cost a lot, they should do it.
 

Alfatawi Mendel

Posts: 202   +303
With the new AMD drivers and FSR 2.0 it looks like a handy win for the 6600. Nvidia's much hyped DLSS is apparently no better than FSR 2.0. The only thing Nvidia has going for it now is the marginal Ray-Tracing chops...but really, that is just the new version of Hairworks.
 

Alfatawi Mendel

Posts: 202   +303
In the article it does mention resizable bar is on which is the official name, AMD just branded it as Smart Access Memory (SAM). So this really is the best case situation for the 6600XT.
AMD introduced Smart Access Memory (SAM) first. Nvidia later introduced it on their cards with the BAR moniker. Hope this helps clear up your confusion.
 

Alfatawi Mendel

Posts: 202   +303
"The RTX 3060 packs a 50% larger frame buffer with 12 GB opposed to 8 GB, so it should handle future HD texture packs a lot better, meaning future AAA titles could potentially look better without hurting frame rate performance. In our opinion, that's a nice bonus that shouldn't be overlooked.

The RTX 3060 also packs a full x16 PCIe 4.0 connection whereas the 6600 XT is cut down to just 8 lanes, and this can cause serious performance issues when exceeding the memory buffer. That's another reason why the memory subsystem of the RTX 3060 is vastly superior."

Pretty much irrelevant, as the charts don't show any effect of this. You may as well say the 3060 would be even more of an expensive dog without these features.