AMD RADEON RX 6600 XT REVIEW: BUILT FOR 1080P

Aug-13-2021

1688

AMD has returned to challenge Nvidia with its entry-level RX 6600 XT. This $379 (on paper at least) card is built on the same RDNA 2 architecture that AMD is using for its high-end cards, but it’s designed to boost 1080p gaming instead of reaching the heights of 4K gaming.

Nearly 70 percent of PC gaming on Steam is still at 1080p, so if you’re one of the millions enjoying 1080p gaming with an older card like the GeForce GTX 1060, this latest RX 6600 XT might be a tempting upgrade when it launches on August 11th.

It sits at $50 more (again, on paper) than Nvidia’s RTX 3060, and $20 less than the RTX 3060 Ti. AMD claims the RX 6600 XT should perform around 15 percent better than an RTX 3060 at 1080p, for the extra $50.

But AMD’s latest RDNA 2 cards have barely registered on Valve’s latest Steam hardware survey, suggesting that Nvidia is producing far more RTX cards compared to AMD. So even if AMD can beat Nvidia at the entry level, it needs to make cards that people can actually buy for it to matter.

GOOD STUFF

Good at 1080p
AMD’s driver software is great
Only need a 500W PSU

BAD STUFF

For $20 more, Nvidia will offer greater performance
AMD isn’t making enough GPUs
Performance issues in Control and Watch Dogs: Legion

HARDWARE

AMD isn’t creating its own RX 6600 XT, so it’s relying on board partners like ASRock, Asus, Biostar, Gigabyte, MSI, PowerColor, Sapphire, XFX, and Yeston to produce cards. I’ve been testing Gigabyte’s version of the RX 6600 XT.

This particular RX 6600 XT has three fans, with the fan in the middle spinning in an opposite direction to help with cooling. There’s a metal back plate that includes a cutout for the air to dissipate from the heatsink below.

As the RX 6600 XT only draws around 160W of power, it only needs a single eight-pin PCIe power connector. The recommended minimum power supply is 500W, so this is ideal for those not wanting to upgrade their entire systems.

At more than 11 inches long, Gigabyte’s version is a surprisingly big card for an entry-level GPU, but it’s lightweight to hold so it shouldn’t put any strain on your motherboard. The card is also a traditional dual-slot width, despite its bulky look.

Gigabyte has equipped its RX 6600 XT with an RGB light system that lights up its logo on the side of the GPU. By default, this will cycle through a rainbow of colors, but with 16.7 million color options and the ability to sync to other Aorus devices, there are plenty of options for customizing this.

At the rear of the RX 6600 XT there are two HDMI 2.1 ports and two DisplayPort 1.4 ports. The card also supports PCI Express 4.0 and includes 8GB of GDDR6 memory.

1080P TESTING

I’ve been testing the RX 6600 XT with Intel’s latest Core i9 processor. For both 1080p and 1440p tests, I’ve paired this GPU with a 32-inch Samsung Odyssey G7 monitor. This monitor supports refresh rates at up to 240Hz, as well as AMD’s FreeSync support.

I wasn’t able to test the RX 6600 XT directly against Nvidia’s RTX 3060 as I don’t own one of Nvidia’s entry-level cards, but you can see how well the RTX 3060 performed in my colleague Sean Hollister’s review. I’ve been testing the RX 6600 XT against AMD’s RX 6700 XT to see just how much performance you get for $100 less.

I tested a variety of AAA titles, including Microsoft Flight Simulator, Gears 5, Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla, and Control. All games were tested at high or ultra settings on the RX 6600 XT with resizable BAR enabled, and most comfortably exceeded 60fps at 1080p.

AMD RADEON RX 6600 XT (1080P)

Death Stranding topped out at an impressive 150fps on average, while Gears 5 managed 105fps at ultra settings. Even Microsoft Flight Simulator nearly managed 60fps, thanks to a recent update that has greatly improved how the game runs on all hardware.

Where I really saw the 6600 XT struggle was in ray tracing performance. Watch Dogs: Legion only managed a pathetic 6fps with ray tracing settings maxed out, but it held at 60fps without ray tracing turned on. There appears to be some issues with this card and Watch Dogs: Legion, though. AMD supplied a new driver for testing midway through the review period to specifically help with Watch Dogs: Legion, but it didn’t improve ray tracing performance in my tests.

“We are aware of some lingering performance issues when DXR is enabled at max settings in Watch Dogs: Legion,” says an AMD spokesperson. “In our findings, reducing quality settings with DXR enabled delivers a better user experience.”

Control seemed to run well with ray tracing enabled, but you’re cutting performance in half if you want this visual quality and there’s no DLSS, or FSR in AMD speak, to make up for it yet. Metro Exodus was practically unplayable with ray tracing and settings maxed out, averaging 24fps.

So this isn’t a ray tracing card, but for an entry-level budget GPU, I wasn’t really expecting it to be. For everything else, it performs well for its price point at 1080p. When you compare it to the RX 6700 XT, with its $100 price premium, you’ll get around 20 percent more performance if you’re willing to pay extra.

Performance in Gears 5 was 18 percent better on the RX 6700 XT over the RX 6600 XT, ranging all the way up to 29 percent better in Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and 31 percent with Watch Dogs: Legion. Given the issues with Watch Dogs: Legion on the RX 6600 XT, that’s a gap that may be closed with driver updates, though.

Where things get really interesting is when you consider Nvidia’s RTX 3060 Ti. At a $20 price premium (in theory at least) over AMD’s RX 6600 XT, you’ll get between 10 percent and 25 percent better performance in the majority of games. There are some rare exceptions where games like Assassin’s Creed Valhalla are clearly optimized for AMD, but it’s certainly worth paying extra if pricing and availability is realistic.