Monday, July 5th 2021

PowerColor Website Lists Radeon RX 6600 XT and RX 6600

AMD board partner PowerColor's website briefly showed product categories for graphics cards based on the upcoming Radeon RX 6600 XT and Radeon RX 6600 graphics processors. This would mean that a formal launch of the two is just around the corner. Both SKUs are reportedly based on the 7 nm "Navi 23" silicon. The RX 6600 XT maxes it out, featuring 2,048 stream processors, while the RX 6600 is slightly cut down, in featuring 1,792 of them. The "Navi 23" silcon is based on the same RDNA2 graphics architecture as the rest of the RX 6000 series, which means DirectX 12 Ultimate support, including raytracing. Both feature 8 GB of video memory, whereas the RX 6600 also comes in 4 GB. Both memory options use 16 Gbps GDDR6 memory, over a 128-bit wide memory bus. PowerColor is expected to design a variety of custom-design products based on the two.
Source: VideoCardz
Add your own comment

26 Comments on PowerColor Website Lists Radeon RX 6600 XT and RX 6600

#1
TumbleGeorge
Ray tracing is like crypto coins digging. Eat many resources for nothing useful.
Posted on Reply
#2
MikeMurphy
TumbleGeorgeRay tracing is like crypto coins digging. Eat many resources for nothing useful.
So was very early 3D acceleration PC hardware.
Posted on Reply
#3
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
MikeMurphySo was very early 3D acceleration PC hardware.
Erm 2d to 3d was different
Posted on Reply
#4
Punkenjoy
There are many issue with the current implementation of ray tracing

- First implementation are sponsored by Nvidia, meaning they get crappy performance on AMD
- Dev have very few experience with real time ray tracing and still have an hard time to make it effective (Resource required vs quality gain)
- It will take time before low end hardware can run ray tracing effectively once they start to support it
- Ray tracing can be used by many thing and some have higher effect on the visual than other, having them all at the same time is too costly for current hardware.


But at some point, we are so far in cheating graphic with rasterization that it start to make sense to use ray tracing. Solution like screen space reflection and cube map just doesn't cut it anymore. SSAO also just look ok but are capped. Raytracing resolve many issue but it's indeed costly. But I suspect devs will get smart and will be able to make game that run not only fast, but also look amazing using raytracing. But many game right now just feel like they implemented raytracing to have it on their spec sheet.

But even right now, Devs find way to do things with RT that was just too complicated with other methods. The data generated with RT can be used by so much technique.

We are like when the first game got out with Pixel shader. Except few tech demo, these games were not really looking better than game with just T&L. it took some time before devs started to use these shaders (and also better shaders, DX 8 and 8.1 shaders were pretty limited, started to really shine with DX 9.0c).

That bring back to the news, well These card will suck at raytracing, but it do not really matter, like all card currently on the market, when it will really matter, there will be much better card around like RDNA3+ and Ampere Next.
Posted on Reply
#5
Sithaer
Don't give a single damn about RT and other than that a 6600 XT could be the perfect upgrade from my RX 570 given no crazily inflated prices which I can't really hope for in my country anytime soon.
Well actually RTX 3060 or 6600 XT would be my choice, that performance level is just right for my needs and budget if I count MSRP+my country's tax and other shet. 'at that point I might pick based on features like DLSS 2.0+'

Will see how the market is at the end of the year or so but I have no hopes anymore.
Posted on Reply
#6
Totally
MikeMurphySo was very early 3D acceleration PC hardware.
CAD says otherwise. There literally was a design renaissance lagging in lock-step with breakthroughs in 3D.
Posted on Reply
#7
TumbleGeorge
Yes for science and for work with 3D maybe also for autonomous cars with and without lidars raytracing is useful and there has billions $. But why ordinary peoples must pay for this r&d which they don't need in their home computers?
Posted on Reply
#8
InVasMani
Rasterization hasn't peaked there is still better cheats to fake left in it like FSR. Ray tracing is nice, but it sure is a lot of overhead.
Posted on Reply
#9
Punkenjoy
InVasManiRasterization hasn't peaked there is still better cheats to fake left in it like FSR. Ray tracing is nice, but it sure is a lot of overhead.
FSR have nothing to do with Rasterization or Ray Tracing. It work on a flat 2D image after the image have been rendered.

Yes it does indeed have a lot of overhead. But it allow effect that are just too hard to cheat effectively with rasterization effects. By example Reflection, right now it's only what you can see, so if you are in a fps, you can't see your own character in a reflection, you can't see what behind the camera. Unless it's a cube map where you render the scene 6 time with less details and then map it to reflective surface. And the mapping of these always seems off as it's a texture applied to a surface.

All these effects are just approximation and and they aren't cheap. In some game, mirror are literally the same scene rendered from a different viewpoint. It just seems to run faster because they greatly reduce the details and they apply it lightly. Rasterization give an unnatural look due to baked lighting or bad dynamic lighting (that have fake diffuse, no bounce reflection, etc.)

The thing is doing good raytracing in Real-time in a Rasterized renderer isn't a skill that people have right now. It's brand new. People still don't know how to tune it properly, what effect to use first for maximum effect, etc.. There are a lot of people that know how to make things look good with an offline renderer but that is a very different thing. Artist and developers need time to adapt. Most game that have it right now just implemented it quickly. Just look at what Metro Exodus enhanced edition were able to achieve with some time. The expertise is starting to build up.

And yes, right now it's too costly, it will probably take 1-2 generation before the hardware can run it smoothly.
Posted on Reply
#10
Richards
Those clocks d'not help the 3060 abd 3060ti are gonna massacre these cards
Posted on Reply
#11
ZoneDymo
RichardsThose clocks d'not help the 3060 abd 3060ti are gonna massacre these cards
welcome to the forums, your post history already paints a pretty clear picture.
Posted on Reply
#12
Richards
ZoneDymowelcome to the forums, your post history already paints a pretty clear picture.
Lol you stalking me ?
Posted on Reply
#13
ZoneDymo
RichardsLol you stalking me ?
no I always check someone's post history after posts that reak of fanboyism and it was confirmed once again.
Posted on Reply
#15
InVasMani
Helps us Lisa Su you're our only hope.
Posted on Reply
#16
watzupken
I feel this is going to be a decent performing card considering the number of CUs lost vs Navi22 isn't that bad. AMD cut to deep when it came to Navi22, and while it is still able to keep up with Nvidia's RTX 3060Ti and in some cases 3070 due to higher clockspeed, I think it is not an efficient card.
Posted on Reply
#17
RidiculousOwO
RidiculousOwOHurray! 6600 XT plz save gamers ASAP
I don't need neither fancy ray-tracing nor shiny 4K resolution. I just want an AFFORDABLE and AVAILABLE power-efficient nice 1080P max-out GPU. So please be launched as soon as possible! ASAP!!!
Posted on Reply
#18
Turmania
Will the 6600 be a card that requires no power connector? <75W?
Posted on Reply
#19
RidiculousOwO
TurmaniaWill the 6600 be a card that requires no power connector? <75W?
I don't think so, considering 6600M of the same spec already draws 100 W at most. Maybe lower-grade series will be.
Posted on Reply
#20
ThrashZone
Hi,
Never noticed power color before
Saw them listing amd cards at micro center for 2500.us said wow okay
Posted on Reply
#21
kruk
TurmaniaWill the 6600 be a card that requires no power connector? <75W?
The XT card will probably use ~180W and non-XT ~150W, 6500XT/6500 possibly 130/100W judging by the 3050 Ti/3050 laptop specs. Unfortunately it looks that the sub 75W discrete GPU market is basically abandoned at this moment :(
Posted on Reply
#22
Richards
watzupkenI feel this is going to be a decent performing card considering the number of CUs lost vs Navi22 isn't that bad. AMD cut to deep when it came to Navi22, and while it is still able to keep up with Nvidia's RTX 3060Ti and in some cases 3070 due to higher clockspeed, I think it is not an efficient card.
Wanna bet on that? Those clocks didnt help the 6700xt
Posted on Reply
#23
kruk
RichardsWanna bet on that? Those clocks didnt help the 6700xt
No potential buyer cares if this card beats 3060 Ti (this is not a d*ck measuring contest), it just has to be priced properly and that's all it needs to be a great alternative.
Posted on Reply
#24
ThrashZone
krukNo potential buyer cares if this card beats 3060 Ti (this is not a d*ck measuring contest), it just has to be priced properly and that's all it needs to be a great alternative.
Hi,
Only advantage this brand has is it's still instock mostly because of overpricing I'm guessing.
Posted on Reply
#25
mechtech
RichardsThose clocks d'not help the 3060 abd 3060ti are gonna massacre these cards
Old saying is no bad products.....................only bad pricing...........................
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Copyright © 2004-2021 www.techpowerup.com. All rights reserved.
All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners.