Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse: RTX 3060 is no match in Full HD

Frequency response of sound

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

After Nvidia and the GeForce RTX 3060, now AMD has modern, more power-efficient graphics cards as well – the RX 6600 and the RX 6600 XT. In this test, we’ll focus on the more powerful RX 6600 XT, which is expected to deliver lower performance than the RX 6700 XT, but also significantly lower power consumption. While the RX 6700 XT has a TDP of 230W, the RX 6600 XT’s TDP is 160W, or 170W in the case of the variant tested. But the TDP is otherwise the same as that of the RTX 3060. A comparison with this card also makes the most sense because of the price similarity.

The RX 6600 XT is built on the Navi 23 graphics core, which at 237mm² is still 14% smaller than the GA106 GPU in the RTX 3060. Compared to the RX 6700 XT (and Navi 22), there’s the disadvantage of a narrower memory bus, half the Infinity Cache, and finally, the RX 6600 XT also has 4GB less video memory (8GB), at least it’s still GDDR6.

Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse details

We got the sample for testing from Sapphire Pulse. This design has been popular among users for a long time. Usually these are the cheapest cards with a given GPU, but they are definitely not the worst ones. But it’s true that quite a lot has changed between generations. Sapphire seems to have come to the conclusion a long time ago that some of the premium features on the cheapest cards don’t pay off very well. A lightweight “BE” (Basic Edition) variant of the Pulse has already been released with the RX 5700 XT. The RX 6600 XT Pusle doesn’t have such an attribute, but still the card’s design is devoid of some things that we were used to seeing on older Sapphire Pulse graphics.

The backplate here remained proper, made of metal and with a vent in the back. But this RX 6600 XT no longer has a dual BIOS, for example, and the heatsink only has two heatpipes. This is how Sapphire chopped down (from three to two heatpipes) the BE cooler of the RX 5700 XT as well. But here its implementation seems to be on a better level. Admittedly there are only two heatpipes, but with a more even disposition in the heatsink. The RX 6600 XT also has a lower TDP (than the RX 5700 XT), so a weaker heatsink doesn’t automatically mean noisier operation.

To achieve higher static pressure, the fans have a kind of collar. All the ends of the blades are recessed into it so that there is no gap at the edge of the blades. There are two fans, they are 90 mm in diameter, 10 mm deep and have ball bearings. In this regard, the cooler does not differ from the previous generation of Pulse graphics cards.

The fan connections are also a bit disconcerting to look at. The rotors are no longer connected via a connector in the frame, but traditionally via a cable. This eliminates quick and convenient user replacement in case of failure. We won’t lynch Sapphire for this though, as it has always been an added value that other manufacturers don’t offer.

   

The port configuration combines three DisplayPort 1.4a connectors with one HDMI 2.1 connector. The cover of the outputs is open on a large area, or its lower part is only symbolically connected by partitions to keep it tightly together. For better cooling efficiency, Sapphire goes down such paths as well.

It is not a significant overlap, but in some cases that have the interior vertically divided into two chambers, even such a small protrusion can cause incompatibility. It should also be taken into account that this is not a purebred dual-slot card and the heatsink cover of the second slot protrudes by 2.5 mm, and the total thickness of the graphics card (including the backplate) is 44 mm.

The article continues in further chapters.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Gaming tests

The largest sample of tests is from games. This is quite natural given that GeForce and Radeons, i.e. cards primarily intended for gaming use, will mostly be tested.

We chose the test games primarily to ensure the balance between the titles better optimized for the GPU of one manufacturer (AMD) or the other one (Nvidia). But we also took into account the popularity of the titles so that you could find your own results in the charts. Emphasis was also placed on genre diversity. Games such as RTS, FPS, TPS, car racing as well as a flight simulator, traditional RPG and sports games are represented by the most played football game. You can find a list of test games in the library of chapters (9–32), with each game having its own chapter, sometimes even two (chapters) for the best possible clarity, but this has its good reason, which we will share with you in the following text.

Before we start the gaming tests, each graphics card will pass the tests in 3D Mark to warm up to operating temperature. That’s good synthetics to start with.

We’re testing performance in games across three resolutions with an aspect ratio of 16:9 – FHD (1920 × 1080 px), QHD (2560 × 1440 px) and UHD (3840 × 2160 px) and always with the highest graphic settings, which can be set the same on all current GeForce and Radeon graphics cards. We turned off proprietary settings for the objectivity of the conclusions, and the settings with ray-tracing graphics are tested separately, as lower class GPUs do not support them. You will find their results in the complementary chapters. In addition to native ray-tracing, also after deploying Nvidia DLSS (2.0) and AMD FidelityFX CAS.

If the game has a built-in benchmark, we use that one (the only exception is Forza Horizon 4, where due to its instability – it used to crash here and there – we drive on our track), in other cases the measurements take place on the games’ own scenes. From those we capture the times of consecutive frames in tables (CSV) via OCAT, which FLAT interprets into intelligible fps speech. Both of these applications are from the workshop of colleagues from the gpureport.cz magazine. In addition to the average frame rate, we also write the minimum in the graphs. That contributes significantly to the overall gaming experience. For the highest possible accuracy, all measurements are repeated three times and the final results form their average value.

Computational tests

Testing the graphics card comprehensively, even in terms of computing power, is more difficult than drawing conclusions from the gaming environment. Just because such tests are usually associated with expensive software that you don’t just buy for the editorial office. On the other hand, we’ve found ways to bring the available computing performance to you. On the one hand, thanks to well-built benchmarks, on the other hand, there are also some freely available and at the same time relevant applications, and thirdly, we have invested something in the paid ones.

The tests begin with ComputeBench, which computes various simulations (including game graphics). Then we move on to the popular SPECviewperf benchmark (2020), which integrates partial operations from popular 2D and 3D applications, including 3Ds max and SolidWorks. Details on this test package can be found at spec.org. From the same team also comes SPECworkstation 3, where GPU acceleration is in the Caffe and Folding@Home tests. You can also find the results of the LuxMark 3.1 3D render in the graphs, and the remarkable GPGPU theoretical test also includes AIDA64 with FLOPS, IOPS and memory speed measurements.

For obvious reasons, 3D rendering makes the largest portion of the tests. This is also the case, for example, in the Blender practical tests (2.91). In addition to Cycles, we will also test the cards in Eevee and radeon ProRender renderers (let AMD have a related test, as most are optimized for Nvidia cards with proprietary CUDA and OptiX frameworks). Of course, an add-on for V-ray would also be interesting, but at the moment the editorial office can’t afford it, we may manage to get a “press” license in time, though, we’ll see. We want to expand application tests in the future. Definitely with some advanced AI testing (we haven’t come up with a reasonable way yet), including noise reduction (there would be some ideas already, but we haven’t incorporated those due to time constraints).

Graphics cards can also be tested well in photo editing. To get an idea of the performance in the popular Photoshop, we’re using a script in PugetBench, which simulates real work with various filters. Among them are those that use GPU acceleration. A comprehensive benchmark suggesting the performance of raster and vector graphics is then also used in alternative Affinity Photo. In Lightroom, there are remarkable color corrections (Enhance Details) of raw uncompressed photos. We apply these in batches to a 1 GB archive. All of these tasks can be accelerated by both GeForce and Radeon.

From another perspective, there are decryption tests in Hashcat with a selection of AES, MD5, NTLMv2, SHA1, SHA2-256/512 and WPA-EAPOL-PBKDF2 ciphers. Finally, in the OBS and XSplit broadcast applications, we measure how much the game performance will be reduced while recording. It is no longer provided by shaders, but by coders (AMD VCE and Nvidia Nvenc). These tests show how much spare performance each card has for typical online streaming.

There are, of course, more hardware acceleration options, typically for video editing and conversion. However, this is purely in the hands of encoders, which are always the same within one generation of cards from one manufacturer, so there is no point in testing them on every graphics card. It is different across generations and tests of this type will sooner or later appear. Just fine-tuning the metric is left, where the output will always have the same bitrate and pixel match. This is important for objective comparisons, because the encoder of one company/card may be faster in a particular profile with the same settings, but at the expense of the lower quality that another encoder has (but may not have, it’s just an example).

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Methodology: how we measure power draw

We have been tuning the method of measuring power draw for quite a long time and we will also be tuning it for some time. But we already have gimmicks that we can work with happily.

To get the exact value of the total power draw of the graphics card, it is necessary to map the internal power draw on the PCI Express slot and the external one on the additional power supply. For the analysis of the PCIe slot, it was necessary to construct an in-between card on which the power draw measurement takes place. Its basis is resistors calibrated to the exact value (0.1 Ω) and according to the amount of their voltage drop we can calculate the current. We then substitute it into the formula for the corresponding value of the output voltage ~ 12 V and ~ 3.3 V. The voltage drop is so low that it doesn’t make the VRM of the graphics card unstable and the output is still more than 12/3.3 V.

We are also working on a similar device for external power supply. However, significantly higher currents are achieved there, longer cabling and more passages between connectors are necessary, which means that the voltage drop will have to be read on an even smaller resistance of 0.01 Ω, the current state (with 0.1 Ω) is unstable for now. Until we fine-tune it, we will use Prova 15 current clamp for cable measurements, which also measures with good accuracy, they just have a range of up to 30 A. But that is also enough for the OC version of the RTX 3090 Gaming X Trio. If a card is over the range, it is always possible to split the consumption measurement (first into one half and then into the other half of the 12 V conductors).

And why bother with such devices at all when Nvidia has a PCAT power draw analyzer? For complete control over the measurements. While our devices are transparent, the Nvidia’s tool uses the processor that can (but of course does not have to) affect the measurements. After testing the AMD graphics card on the Nvidia’s tool, we probably wouldn’t sleep well.

To read and record measurements, we use a properly calibrated multimeter UNI-T UT71E, which exports samples to XLS. From it we obtain the average value and by substituting into the formula with the exact value of the subcircuit output voltages we obtain the data for the graphs.

   

We will analyze the line graphs with the waveforms for each part of the power supply separately. Although the 3.3 V value is usually negligible, it needs to be monitored. It is difficult to say what exactly this subcircuit powers, but usually the consumption on it is constant and when it changes only with regard to whether a static or dynamic image is rendered. We measure consumption in two sort of demanding games (F1 2020 and Shadow of the Tomb Raider) and one less demanding one (CS:GO) with the highest graphic details preset and UHD resolution (3840 × 2560 px). Then in 3D rendering in Blender using the Cycles renderer on the famous Classroom scene. However, in addition to high-load tests, it’s important to know your web browser consumption (which, in our case, is accelerated Google Chrome), where we also spend a lot of time watching videos or browsing the web. The usual average load of this type is represented by the FishIE Tank (HTML5) website with 20 fish and the web video in our power draw tests is represented by a sample with the VP9 codec, data rate of 17.4 mb/s and 60 fps. In contrast, we also test offline video consumption, in VLC player on a 45 HEVC sample (45.7 mb/s, 50 fps). Finally, we also record the power consumption of the graphics card on the desktop of idle Windows 10 with one or two active UHD@60 Hz monitors.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Noise measurement…

Noise, as well as other operating characteristics, which we will focus on, we’re measuring in the same modes as consumption, so that the individual values overlap nicely. In addition to the level of noise produced, we also record the frequency response of the sound, the course of the GPU clock speed and its temperature.

In this part of the methodology description, we will present something about the method of noise measurement. We use a Reed R8080 sound level meter, which we continuously calibrate with a calibrated Voltcraft SLC-100 digital sound level meter. A small addition to the sound level meter is a parabola-shaped collar, which has two functions. Increases the sensitivity to distinguish the sound produced even at very low speeds. It is thus possible to better compare even very quiet cards with the largest possible ratio difference. Otherwise (without this adjustment) it could simply happen that we measured the same noise level across several graphics cards, even though it would actually be a little different. This parabolic shield also makes sense because, from the outer convex side (from the back), it reflects all the parasitic sounds that everyone who really aims for accuracy of the measurements struggles with during the test. These are various cracks of the body or objects in the room during normal human activity.

To ensure the same conditions when measuring the noise level (and later also the sound), we use acoustic panels with a foam surface around the bench-wall. This is so that the sound is always reflected to the sound level meter sensor in the same way, regardless of the current situation of the objects in the test room. These panels are from three sides (top, right and left) and their purpose is to soundproof the space in which we measure the noise of graphics cards. Soundproofing means preventing different reflections of sound and oscillations of waves between flat walls. Don’t confuse it with sound-absorbing, we’ve had that solved well in the test lab for a long time.

During the measurements, the sound level meter sensor is always placed on a tripod at the same angle and at the same distance (35 cm) from the PCI Express slot in which the graphics card is installed. Of course, it’s always closer to the card itself, depending on its depth. The indicated reference point and the sensor angles are fixed. In addition to the “aerodynamic noise” of the coolers, we also measure the noise level of whining coils. Then we stop the fans for a moment. And for the sake of completeness, it should be added that during sound measurements, we also switch off the power supply fan as well as the CPU cooler fan. Thus, purely the graphics card is always measured without any distortion by other components.

…and the sound frequency response

From the same place, we also measure the frequency of the sound produced. One thing is the noise level (or sound pressure level in decibels) and the other thing is its frequency response.

According to the data on the noise level, you can quickly find out whether the graphics card is quieter or noisier, or where it is on the scale, but it is still a mix of different frequencies. Thus, it does not say whether the sound produced is more booming (with a lower frequency) or squeaking (with a high frequency). The same 35 dBA can be pleasant but also unpleasant for you under certain circumstances – it depends on each individual how they perceive different frequencies. For this reason, we will also measure the frequency response of the sound graphics card in addition to the noise level, via the TrueRTA application. The results will be interpreted in the form of a spectrograph with a resolution of 1/24 octave and for better comparison with other graphics cards we will include the dominant frequency of lower (20–200 Hz), medium (201–2,000 Hz) and higher (2,001–20,000 Hz) sound spectrum into standard bar graphs. For measurements, we’re using a calibrated miniDSP UMIK-1 microphone, which accurately copies the position of the sound level meter, but also has a collar, even with the same focal length.

At the end of this chapter, it should be noted that measurements of noise and frequency response of sound will be performed on most cards only in load tests, as out of load and at lower load (including video decoding) operation is usually passive with fans turned off. On the other hand, we must also be prepared for exceptions with active operation in idle or graphics cards with dual BIOS setup, from which the more powerful one never turns off the fans and they run at least at minimum speed. Finally, as with measuring the noise level in one of the tests, we also record the frequency response of whining coils. But don’t expect any dramatic differences here. It will usually be one frequency, and the goal is rather to detect any potential anomalies. The sound of the whining coils is of course variable, depending on the scene, but we always measure in the same scene (in CS:GO@1080p).

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Methodology: temperature tests

We’re also bringing you temperature tests. You are at HWCooling after all. However, in order to make it sensible at all to monitor temperatures on critical components not only of the graphics card, but anything in the computer, it is important to simulate a real computer case environment with healthy air circulation. The overall behavior of the graphics card as such then follows from this. In many cases, an open bench-table is inappropriate and results can be distorted. Therefore, during all, not only heat tests, but also measurement of consumption or course of graphics core frequencies, we use a wind tunnel with equilibrium flow.

Two Noctua NF-S12A fans are at the inlet and the same number is on the exhaust.When testing various system cooling configurations, this proved to be the most effective solution. The fans are always set to 5 V and the speed corresponds to approx. 550 rpm. The stability of the inlet air is properly controlled during the tests, the temperature being between 21 and 21.3 °C at a humidity of ±40%.

We read the temperature from the internal sensors via GPU-Z. This small, single-purpose application also allows you to record samples from sensors in a table. From the table, it is then easy to create line graphs with waveforms or the average value into bar graphs. We will not use the thermal camera very much here, as most graphics cards have a backplate, which makes it impossible to measure the PCB heating. The key for the heating graphs will be the temperature reading by internal sensors, according to which, after all, the GPU frequency control also takes place. It will always be the heating of the graphics core, and if the sensors are also on VRAM and VRM, we will extract these values into the article as well.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Test rig

Note.: At the time of testing, graphics drivers AMD Adrenalin 21.10.3, and the OS Windows 10 Enterprise build is 19042.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

3DMark

For the tests we’re using 3DMark Professional and the Night Raid (DirectX12) is suitable for comparing weaker GPUs, for more powerful ones there is Fire Strike (DirectX11) and Time Spy (DirectX12).

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Age of Empires II: DE

Test platform benchmark, API DirectX 11; graphics setting preset Ultra; no extra setting.

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla

Test platform benchmark, API DirectX 11; graphics setting preset Ultra high; no extra setting.

---

---

   

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Battlefield V

Test platform custom scene (War stories/Under no flag); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; TAA high; no extra setting.

---

---

   

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Battlefield V s with DXR

Test platform custom scene (War stories/Under no flag); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; TAA high; extra settings DXR.

---

---

---

The game also supports DLSS, but as it’s an older title and there are many tests, we will not address it in standard tests. However, measurements on request are possible if you ask for it.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Borderlands 3

Test platform benchmark; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; TAA; no extra settings.

---

---

   

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Control

Test platform custom scene (Polaris chapter); API DirectX 11, graphics settings preset High; no extra settings.

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Control with DXR

Test platform custom scene (Polaris chapter); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset High; extra settings DXR.

   

DXR (native)

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Counter-Strike: GO

Test platform benchmark (Dust 2 map tour); API DirectX 9, graphics settings High; 4× MSAA; no extra setting.

---

---

   

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Cyberpunk 2077

Test platform custom scene (Little China); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; no extra settings.

---

---

   

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Cyberpunk 2077 with FidelityFX CAS

Test platform custom scene (Little China); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; extra settings FidelityFX CAS.

FidelityFX CAS (50 %)

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Cyberpunk 2077 with DXR

Test platform custom scene (Little China); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; extra settings DXR with DLSS and FidelityFX CAS.

DXR (native)

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

DOOM Eternal

Test platform custom scene; API Vulkan, graphics settings preset Ultra Nightmare; no extra settings.

---

---

      

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

F1 2020

Test platform benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle); API DirectX 12, graphics setting preset Ultra High; TAA; extra settings Skidmarks blending off*.

---

---

   

---

*on GeForce graphics cards, the Skidmarks blending option is disabled. This option is missing on AMD graphics cards. However, the overall quality of Skidmarks is otherwise set to High on both GeForce and AMD.
Note: The game also supports DLSS 2.0 and FidelityFX for upscaling and sharpening, but due to the relatively low hardware requirements in the native settings, we will not address them in standard tests. However, measurements on request are possible if you ask for it.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

FIFA 21

Test platform custom scene (Autumn/Fall, Overcast, 9pm, Old Trafford); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; no extra settings.

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Forza Horizon 4

Test platform custom scene; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; 2× MSAA; no extra settings.

---

---

      

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Mafia: DE

Test platform custom scene (from the Salieri’s Bar parking lot to the elevated railway gate); API DirectX 11, graphics settings preset High; no extra settings.

---

---

   

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Metro Exodus

Test platform benchmark; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Extreme; no extra settings.

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Metro Exodus s DXR

Test platform benchmark; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; extra settings DXR.

DXR (native)

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Warning: We do not use the results from this game to calculate the average game performance. That’s because after the big July update the performance changed significantly, as you can see in this test, and we had to discard the older results and start collecting them all over again.
Test platform custom scene (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot:from 1000 until hitting the terrain; API DirectX 11, graphics settings preset Ultra; TAA; no extra settings.

---

---

   

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Red Dead Redemption 2 (Vulkan)

Test platform custom scene; API Vulkan, graphics settings preset Favor Quality; no extra settings.

---

---

      

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Red Dead Redemption 2 (Dx12)

Test platform custom scene; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Favor Quality; no extra settings.

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Test platform custom scene; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Highest; TAA; no extra settings.

---

---

   

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider s DXR

Test platform benchmark; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Highest; extra settings DXR.

---

---

Note: This game also supports DLSS and FidelityFX CAS, but since this is an older title and there are more than enough tests, we will not address this setting in standard tests. However, testing on request is possible if you ask for it.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Total War Saga: Troy

Test platform benchmark; API DirectX 11, graphics settings preset Ultra; 4× AA, no extra settings.

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Wasteland 3

Test platform custom scene; API DirectX 11, graphics settings preset Ultra; no extra settings.

---

---

   

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Overall game performance

We calculate the average performance so that each game has an equal weight on the result. You can find out exactly how we arrive at the result in this article.

---

---

Výkon za euro

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

CompuBench 2.0 (OpenCL)

Test platform benchmark; API OpenCL; no extra settings.

Game Effects

Advanced Compute

High Quality Computer Generated Imagery and Rendering

Computer Vision

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

SPECviewperf 2020

Test platform benchmark; API OpenGL a DirectX; no extra settings.

---

---

SPECworkstation 3

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

FLOPS, IOPS and memory speed tests

Test platform benchmark; app version 6.32.5600; no extra settings.

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

LuxMark

Test platform benchmark; API OpenCL; no extra settings.

Blender@Cycles

Test platform render BMW and Classroom; renderer Cycles, 12 tiles; extra settings OpenCL.

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Blender@Radeon ProRender

Test platform render BMW and Classroom; renderer Radeon ProRender, 1024 samples; extra settings OpenCL.

---

Blender@Eevee

Test platform animation render Ember Forest; renderer Eevee, 350 images; extra settings OpenCL.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Photo editing

Adobe Photoshop: Test platform PugetBench; no extra settings.

---

Affinity Photo: Test platform vstavaný benchmark; no extra settings.

Adobe Lightroom*: Test platform custom 1-gigabyte archive of 42 RAW photos (CR2) from a DSLR; no extra settings.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Broadcasting

OBS Studio a XSplit: Test platform F1 2020 game benchmark ; extra settings enabled encoders AMD VCE/Nvidia Nvenc (AVC/H.264), output resolution 2560 × 1440 px (60 fps), target bitrate 19,700 kbps.

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Password cracking

Test platform Hashcat; no extra settings. You can easily try the tests yourself. Just download the binary and enter the cipher you are interested in using the numeric code on the command line.

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

GPU clock speed

---

---

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

GPU temperatures

---

---

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Net graphics power draw

Performance per watt

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Analysis of 12 V subcircuit power supply

---

---

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Analysis of 12 V subcircuit power supply

---

---

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Analysis of 3.3 V subcircuit power supply

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Noise level

---

---

---

---

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Frequency response of sound

Measurements are performed in the TrueRTA application, which records sound in a range of 240 frequencies in the recorded range of 20–20,000 Hz. For the possibility of comparison across articles, we export the dominant frequency from the low (20–200 Hz), medium (201–2,000 Hz) and high (2,001–20,000 Hz) range to standard bar graphs.

However, for an even more detailed analysis of the sound expression, it is important to perceive the overall shape of the graph and the intensity of all frequencies/tones. If you don’t understand something in the graphs or tables below, you’ll find the answers to all your questions in this article. This explains how to read the measured data below correctly.

   

---

   

---

   

---

   

---

   

---

**With the Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE, as with the only tested graphics card, the spectral analysis also includes the sound of the water pump.

Radeons RX 6600 XT are the most powerful graphics cards with the small AMD Navi 23 core. The Navi 22 in the RX 6700 XT is naturally better, but it still humbles the GeForce RTX 3060 with ease. However, in making this bold claim, it should be clarified that this dominance only works perfectly under certain circumstances – at lower resolutions without ray-tracing. This graphics card, in short, begs for high-speed monitor gamers with FHD resolutions.

Záver

At Full HD resolution, Radeon RX 6600 XT is like a fish in water. At higher resolutions, the charm fades compared to the competition. But that doesn’t matter too much, as even the GeForce RTX 3060’s performance at higher resolutions (from QHD upwards) isn’t properly up to scratch. At FHD, the RX 6600 XT Pulse has an average 4% edge compared to the RTX 3060 Eagle.It’s not a staggering difference, but when you factor in the roughly 10% lower power consumption of the Radeon, the GeForce is only interesting in a gaming PC perhaps because of its DLSS support.

RX 6600 XT in higher resolutions is a bit slowed down by the rather small Infinity Cache with only 32 MB (it is twice as big in the RX 6700 XT). There, those ratios against the RTX 3060 are already worse. Low power consumption does remain, but performance already drops more steeply than on a GeForce with significantly higher memory bandwidth. At QHD, the RX 6600 XT loses around 5% in terms of average performance to the RTX 3060, then as much as 9% at UHD. At this highest test resolution, even the gameplay of the undemanding Age of Empires II: Definitive Edition is less smooth already . More important than that, though, is that at the target resolution (Full HD) in the vast majority of games, the RX 6600 XT has the edge over the RTX 3060. And in some games, it’s quite substantial. In Borderlands up to 29 %, IN Battlefield V up to +26 % (tam Radeon only loses to GeForce when DXR is on), In F1 2020 it’s 19 %, In FIFA 21 it’s 14 %, Next is Forza Horizon 4 with 10 % a Metre Exodus with 9 %. Red Dead redemption 2 with Direct X 12 in 13% better on the RX 6600 XT (with Vulkan the results are equal).

The Radeon falls behind the GeForce in Full HD in for example Total War Saga: Troy (-12 %), Control (-9 %) and also in CS:GO (-21 %). For completeness, it should be added that the mentioned comparisons are without active Resizable BAR, we don’t have the RTX 3600 measured with it yet. With the Radeon RX 6600 XT, however, ir does add up to 6% of performance to this card on average, with the power increase always being less than the performance increase. Thus, it can be said that this technology works quite efficiently on Radeons, but it is still far from perfect. It is still being debugged and has some shortcomings. While it doesn’t significantly reduce performance in games, for some cases SAM (as AMD ReBAR tends to refer to it) is quite unoptimized. Even within Radeon Pro’s own renderer. Enabling ReBAR knocks performance down to a quarter, and with the presence of this technology we’ve seen significant drops even under OpenCL in LuxMark. This is also why we cannot drop measurements with ReBAR turned off and will continue to monitor how performance changes over time. Hopefully it will settle down one day and will not disadvantage graphics cards in any way.

ReBAR additionally increases power consumption under low loads, such as typically video playback, web work or “complete” idleness on the desktop. While it won’t break the bank on electricity, it’s also one example of the technology’s lack of tuning. There’s also the consumption with two higher-resolution monitors to consider at lower loads. As you know, the latter has gone up significantly compared with only one monitor connected and continues to do so, at least with the RX 6600 XT. This is despite the fact that there was anecdotal information a long time ago that it no longer increases like this with a second monitor, and recently AMD confirmed this officially in the framework to the new drivers. But unfortunately, for the RX 6600 XT this is not the case. Maybe this card doesn’t have enough power for 2× UHD and everything is already fine with more powerful Radeons. But we won’t find out right now.

Either way, the Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse is a very decent card. We’ve already discussed the excellent performance per watt, but there’s still the cooler. This is as far from quiet as it is noisy, but it’s definitely above average in this class of graphics card. Remember the noisy RTX 3060 Eagle… RX 6600 XT is four times more quiet during heavy loads while reaching lower GPU temperatures. What’s also average is the coil whine. The highest clock speeds exceed 2600 MHz, but this is at relatively lower load (rendering), in games it’s between 2476–2577 MHz, which is still well above the claimed values for Game Clock. Aside from the current market situation around graphics cards overall, there’s not much to fault the Sapphire RX 6600 XT for, and the “Smart buy!” award is probably well deserved. Do you agree?

English translation and edit by Jozef Dudáš

Games for testing are from Jama levova

• Contents
• Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse in detail
• Specifications table
• Methodology: performance tests
• Methodology: how we measure power draw
• Methodology: noise and sound measurement
• Methodology: temperature tests
• Test rig
• 3DMark
• Age of Empires II: DE
• Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla
• Battlefield V
• Battlefield V s DXR
• Borderlands 3
• Control
• Control with DXR
• Counter-Strike: GO
• Cyberpunk 2077
• Cyberpunk 2077 with FidelityFX CAS
• Cyberpunk 2077 with DXR
• DOOM Eternal
• F1 2020
• FIFA 21
• Forza Horizon 4
• Mafia: DE
• Metro Exodus
• Metro Exodus with DXR
• Microsoft Flight Simulator
• Red Dead Redemption 2 (Vulkan)
• Red Dead Redemption 2 (Dx12)
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider s DXR
• Total War Saga: Troy
• Wasteland 3
• Overall game performance and performance per euro
• CompuBench (OpenCL)
• SPECviewperf 2020 and SPECworkstation 3
• FLOPS, IOPS and memory speed tests
• 3D rendering 1/2 (LuxMark and Blender@Cycles)
• 3D rendering 2/2 (Blender@Radeon ProRender a Eevee)
• Photo editing (Adobe Photoshop, Lightroom and Affinity Photo)
• Broadcasting (OBS a Xsplit)
• Password cracking
• GPU clock speed
• GPU temperatures
• Net graphics power draw and performance per watt
• Analysis of 12 V subcircuit power supply (higher load)
• Analysis of 12 V subcircuit power supply (lower load)
• Analysis of 3.3 V subcircuit power supply
• Noise level
• Frequency response of sound
• Conclusion