Radeon 6950 benchmark: Please click the green button to continue.

AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT Review

The new Radeon RX 6950 XT flagship is once again a minor refresh in AMD’s GPU lineup. Like the 6650 XT and 6750 XT refreshes, the 6950 XT is based on the same die as the original model, the Navi 21-based 6900 XT. The core count is the same as before, with a tiny 3% core clock uplift and a boost to memory bandwidth which has been increased by 13% thanks to the use of 18 Gbps GDDR6 memory.

Based on those specs, we’re expecting typical performance gains over the 6900 XT to be in the vicinity of 5-10%, which should help AMD in their flagship halo product battle with Nvidia. In this case, AMD has increased the MSRP from $1,000 to $1,100 which doesn’t bother me all that much since this was never a value oriented product, hence I was more concerned with the price increase on the 6650 XT and 6750 XT models.

As of writing, the 6900 XT and 6800 XT are almost within the same price range and although the new 6950 XT is likely going to be more expensive, in terms of value it’s probably going to be only marginally worse with the potential to be worlds better than Nvidia’s high-end options since GeForce GPUs are still selling considerably higher than MSRPs.

For testing all AMD and Nvidia GPUs we have clocked them at the official spec with no factory overclocking. All the data in this review is fresh, collected on a machine powered by the Ryzen 7 5800X3D with 32GB of dual-rank, dual-channel DDR4-3200 CL14 memory on the Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Extreme motherboard using the latest BIOS.

We’ve tested 11 games at 1080p, 1440p and 4K, of which we’ll go into more detail for a few of them before looking at our 11 game average data and cost per frame analysis.

Benchmarks

Starting with Rainbow Six Extraction, we find the 6950 XT to be chart topping at 1080p with 309 fps, a 10% increase over the 6900 XT. That allowed it to budge ahead of the much more expensive RTX 3090 Ti at this lower resolution and it’s an 11% boost over the RTX 3080 Ti, a GeForce GPU that’s still more expensive than the 6950 XT.

Jumping up to 1440p quickly changes the standings and now the 6950 XT is seen matching the original RTX 3090 with 206 fps on average, an 11% boost over the original 6900 XT. It was also just 4% faster than the RTX 3080 Ti, but 7% slower than the RTX 3090 Ti, though from a value standpoint that’s not a bad result for AMD given the 6950 XT is cheaper than both GeForce GPUs.

Then at 4K the Ampere RTX GPUs take over and even the original 10GB version of the RTX 3080 is faster than the new 6950 XT in this title.

This is not a bad result for AMD in terms of value though. The RTX 3080 Ti, for example, might be 11% faster, but it also costs 16% more, while the RTX 3090 Ti costs 82% more for a 28% increase at 4K in this title.

Next we have Watch Dogs: Legion and again the 6950 XT tops the chart at 1080p, averaging 168 fps or 6% faster than the 6900 XT, and a mere 6% faster than what should be the much cheaper 6800 XT, though in reality it isn’t.

Even at 1440p, the Radeon GPUs maintain a decent performance advantage over GeForce competitors and here the 6950 XT was 12% faster than the RTX 3090 Ti, 21% faster than the RTX 3090 and 23% faster than the RTX 3080 Ti. Those are impressive margins, though it was just 5% faster than the original 6900 XT.

Then at 4K, the RTX GPUs come back hard, but still the 6950 XT was able to maintain top spot, edging out the RTX 3090 Ti by just a few frames. Here we’re looking at an 11% performance boost over the 6900 XT, which is not a bad result and in line with the price increase.

Moving on to the Shadow of the Tomb Raider, the 6950 XT is able to command top spot at 1080p, delivering 201 fps on average, which is an 8% increase over the 6900 XT. It’s also a 5% boost over the RTX 3090 Ti, 12% over the RTX 3090, and 13% over the RTX 3080 Ti.

The margins remained the same at 1440p. The 6950 XT edged out the RTX 3090 Ti by a tiny margin and boosted performance over the 6900 XT by 11%.

As usual, it’s 4K that proves to be a challenge for RNDA2 in its battle with Ampere and now it’s the RTX 3090 Ti that leads the 6950 XT by an 8% margin. We’re looking at a 12% performance boost for the 6950 XT over the 6900 XT, and that was enough to put it just ahead of the RTX 3090 and 3080 Ti.

The Radeon GPUs don’t fare quite as well in The Outer Worlds as evidenced by these 1080p results. The 6950 XT was only slightly slower than the RTX 3090 Ti, but this is the first sample we have where it wasn’t faster at 1080p. We’re looking at similar performance between the RTX 3080 Ti, 6900 XT, RTX 3090, 6950 XT and RTX 3090 Ti.

Increasing the resolution to 1440p reduces how CPU bound The Outer Worlds testing is and now we’re seeing an 8% performance increase from the 6900 XT to the 6950 XT. The RTX 3090 Ti is 10% faster than the 6950 XT, though right now that’s a GPU over 80% more expensive.

Finally at 4K, the 6950 XT is only able to match the RTX 3080 10GB despite offering a 12% boost over the 6900 XT. The RTX 3090 Ti is now 22% faster than the 6950 XT as well.

We’re going to wrap up the individual game data with a look at F1 2021, and of course, we’ll start with 1080p. We find another example where the 6950 XT is unable to beat the RTX 3090 series at 1080p, this time trailing the RTX 3090 Ti by an 8% margin, though it was a little faster than the 3080 Ti which is technically a good result.

Increasing the resolution to 1440p sees the RTX 3080 Ti close in on the 6950 XT though the margin to the RTX 3090 remains much the same while the 3090 Ti was 8% faster. We’re also looking at a 12% increase for the 6950 XT over the 6900 XT, or about as good as you could hope for.

Finally at 4K the 6950 XT falls further behind the RTX 3080 Ti and trails the RTX 3090 Ti by a 16% margin, and that’s despite boosting performance over the original 6900 XT by 13%.

Power Consumption

Looking at total system power, the 6950 XT pushed total usage to 528 watts, and that’s a massive 19% increase in total power usage when compared to the 6900 XT for what looked like around 10% more performance. Efficiency certainly has gone out the window with these overclocked models.

We thought the power usage of the 3090 Ti was pretty horrible, but the 6950 XT is only dropping system usage by 8%. So if you care about power usage and efficiency, it probably goes without saying, but these overclocked-to-the-max models won’t be for you.

Performance Summary

Starting with the 1080p fps average gaming data we see that for low resolution gamers targeting maximum fps – we imagine mostly competitive shooter type gamers – the Radeon RX 6950 XT is about as good as it gets for out of the box performance.

That said, we are only talking about a 3% boost over the RTX 3090 Ti. The Radeon is around 45% cheaper right now though, so that’s a win for AMD. When compared to the 6900 XT though we’re only looking at a 6% boost, so certainly not worth the premium.

At 1440p, the 6950 XT and RTX 3090 Ti are neck and neck with 149 fps on average across the 11 games tested. That means a 9% performance boost for the 6950 XT over the 6900 XT and an 11% increase over the more expensive RTX 3080 Ti.

Then at 4K the RTX 3090 Ti takes over, beating the 6950 XT by a 7% margin. Still the 6950 XT was just able to edge out the RTX 3090 and 3080 Ti, with a 12% boost over the 6900 XT.

Cost Per Frame

We’ll set up our cost per frame analysis with the mythical MSRP, just to visualize what would be, even if it’s not relevant to the current market.

Had these GPUs been available at their MSRP, this is how the RDNA2 and Ampere generations would have stacked up at the high-end using our 1440p data…

In this wishful scenario, AMD and Nvidia would have been evenly matched in terms of performance and value. Looking at the Radeon RX 6800 XT and GeForce RTX 3080 10GB, a slight premium for the RTX 3080 can be seen, but that product probably does command a slight premium.

Where the value goes out the window is with the AMD and Nvidia refresh products, and of course, the «halo» products. For rasterization performance, the 6900 XT is much better value than the RTX 3090, saving you around 28% per frame, but for high resolution gaming the RTX 3090 is the faster halo product with better features.

Interestingly, the 6950 XT is slightly better value than the original model at the MSRP, dropping the cost per frame by about 2%, or essentially they are about the same. The RTX 3090 Ti costs 70% more per frame than the 6950 XT based on the MSRP. Now let’s move on to real-world pricing…

Here’s a reality check at the high-end. The 6950 XT has been listed at the MSRP at retailers and that makes sense given the 6900 XT is selling for just below the MSRP as we found multiple models available for $950. Quite surprisingly, the 6800 XT is still up around $860 which is a 76% price increase from the 6700 XT, when in reality it should be more like 35%. Keep that in mind as we’ll discuss this further towards the end of the review.

AMD’s high-end lineup is in line with Nvidia’s sensible high-end options, namely the RTX 3080 10GB. Pricing for GeForce GPUs gets ridiculous once we reach the RTX 3080 Ti and beyond. From the 6950 XT, the cost per frame jumps up by 24% for the 3080 Ti, then 70% for the RTX 3090 and 3090 Ti. So if you had $1,000 or more to spend on a high-end GPU, but you still wanted to make the most out of your buck, then you’d go with the 6900 XT or maybe the 6950 XT as it’s only 4% more per frame.

Cooling

Taking a quick look at the thermal and clock characteristics of the MSI and Sapphire 6950 XT models that we have on hand. Starting with the 6950 XT Gaming X Trio we have a typical looking card from MSI, we’d summarise it as a quality but basic design, a triple slot triple fan card with the typical Gaming X Trio looks.

Performance wise, it saw a peak GPU temperature of 77C when installed inside our Corsair Obsidian 500D test case with a room temperature of 21C, a good result given the power consumption of the 6950 XT GPU. The fans spinned at 2000 RPM to maintain that temperature and could just be heard over our case fans. That’s a relatively quiet high-end graphics card in our book. The cores typically clocked at 2470 MHz with GPU power around 332 watts.

The Sapphire 6950 XT Nitro+ Pure is a massive triple fan four-slot monster and in our opinion this card looks amazing. This model features dual BIOS support which is essential for any graphics card priced over $300 in our opinion, let alone these ones, so it was disappointing to see that MSI omitted the feature.

Thankfully the Nitro+ Pure doesn’t and out of the box using the primary mode this is how the card behaves. .. the GPU peaked at 76C with a fan speed of just 1200 RPM making it noticeably quieter than the MSI model. It did clock slightly lower at 2350 MHz, a 5% reduction, when using the standard operating BIOS.

Switching to the «OC BIOS» saw the peak GPU temperature decline ever so slightly as the fan speed increased to 1400 RPM, but even here the Nitro+ Pure couldn’t be heard over the case fans. The GPU clock speed averaged 2430 MHz, similar to the Gaming X Trio at a lower operating volume and temperature.

The Sapphire 6950 XT Nitro+ Pure is an impressive looking graphics card, that’s also beastly. It costs $200 more at $1,300, but if you’re interested in a 6950 XT then we feel these higher-end models make more sense as it’s more of a «go big or go home» type mentality with halo products.

What We Learned

The Radeon RX 6950 XT does well against the RTX 3090 Ti at a dramatically lower price point, so in that sense it does a great job and is an excellent competitor. It’s also not bad in terms of value next to the original 6900 XT.

It’s a bit difficult to go hard after AMD for raising prices in this segment given how much cheaper Radeon GPUs are than their GeForce competitors. Of course, AMD would love you to pay more, but they simply don’t have the mindshare to get away with it the same way Nvidia can. In other words, AMD is not intentionally doing gamers a favor, but it works out kind of nice for consumers that don’t have eyes only for the green team.

We should note though, there’s still some market manipulation going with GPUs when multiple products are sharing the same silicon. As we noted in the cost per frame analysis, the more affordable RX 6800 is meant to cost 21% more than the 6700 XT, while the 6800 XT is meant to cost 35% more. However, the RX 6800 currently costs 55% more, while the 6800 XT costs 76% more. The simple explanation is that the 6800 and 6900 series share the same silicon.

So you see, rather than sell you their 520mm2 Navi 21 silicon for around $590, which is where the RX 6800 should be, AMD is limiting supply of the 6800 series which increases the price, pushing the 6800 up to $760 and in turn making the RX 6900 series appear more reasonable.

But why stop there? They can and have gone a step further with the Radeon 6950 XT to make an additional $100 per unit sold. As long as the demand is there, you can expect 6800, 6800 XT and we suspect even 6900 XT supply to be very limited. We’re not fans of this somewhat artificial inflation of GPU pricing, but while gamers continue to purchase products like the RTX 3090 and RX 6900 series, AMD and Nvidia will continue to divert as much supply as possible to their premium lineups.

Shopping Shortcuts:

Radeon RX 6950 XT on Amazon
GeForce RTX 3090 on Amazon
GeForce RTX 3090 Ti on Amazon
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti on Amazon
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti on Amazon
GeForce RTX 3080 on Amazon
Ryzen 9 5900X on Amazon

AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT Review

We’ve tested 11 games at 1080p, 1440p and 4K, of which we’ll go into more detail for a few of them before looking at our 11 game average data and cost per frame analysis.

Benchmarks

Then at 4K the Ampere RTX GPUs take over and even the original 10GB version of the RTX 3080 is faster than the new 6950 XT in this title.

The margins remained the same at 1440p. The 6950 XT edged out the RTX 3090 Ti by a tiny margin and boosted performance over the 6900 XT by 11%.

Finally at 4K, the 6950 XT is only able to match the RTX 3080 10GB despite offering a 12% boost over the 6900 XT. The RTX 3090 Ti is now 22% faster than the 6950 XT as well.

Finally at 4K the 6950 XT falls further behind the RTX 3080 Ti and trails the RTX 3090 Ti by a 16% margin, and that’s despite boosting performance over the original 6900 XT by 13%.

Power Consumption

Performance Summary

Then at 4K the RTX 3090 Ti takes over, beating the 6950 XT by a 7% margin. Still the 6950 XT was just able to edge out the RTX 3090 and 3080 Ti, with a 12% boost over the 6900 XT.

Cost Per Frame

We’ll set up our cost per frame analysis with the mythical MSRP, just to visualize what would be, even if it’s not relevant to the current market.

Had these GPUs been available at their MSRP, this is how the RDNA2 and Ampere generations would have stacked up at the high-end using our 1440p data. ..

Cooling

Thankfully the Nitro+ Pure doesn’t and out of the box using the primary mode this is how the card behaves… the GPU peaked at 76C with a fan speed of just 1200 RPM making it noticeably quieter than the MSI model. It did clock slightly lower at 2350 MHz, a 5% reduction, when using the standard operating BIOS.

What We Learned

Shopping Shortcuts:

Radeon RX 6950 XT on Amazon
GeForce RTX 3090 on Amazon
GeForce RTX 3090 Ti on Amazon
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti on Amazon
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti on Amazon
GeForce RTX 3080 on Amazon
Ryzen 9 5900X on Amazon

AMD Radeon HD 6950 — 34 secret facts, review, specifications, reviews.

Top specifications and features

Passmark score
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics test score
Unigine Heaven 4. 0 test score
GPU base clock
RAM

Passmark

AMD Radeon HD 6950 test score:
2626
Best score:
29325

Performance

AMD Radeon HD 6950:
1554
Best score:

Memory

AMD Radeon HD 6950:
452
Best score:

General Information

AMD Radeon HD 6950:
553
Best score:

AMD Radeon HD 6950 features:
147
Best score:

Description

AMD Radeon HD 6950 graphics card based on TeraScale 3 architecture has 2640M transistors, tech. 40 nm process. The frequency of the graphics core is 800 MHz. In terms of memory, 2 GB is installed here. DDR5, 1250MHz frequency and 160Gb/s maximum bandwidth. The texture size is 73.9 GTexels/s. FLOPS is 2.3.

In tests, the AMD Radeon HD 6950 video card showed itself as follows — according to the Passmark benchmark, the model scored 2626 points. At the same time, the maximum number of points for today is 260261 points. According to the 3DMark benchmark, the video card scored 3165 points out of 49575 possible.
The version of Directx is 11.2. The OpenGL version is 4.4.

In terms of compatibility, the video card is connected via the PCIe 2.0 x16 interface. Regarding cooling, the heat dissipation requirements here are 200 watts.
In our tests, the video card scores 261142 points.

Why AMD Radeon HD 6950 is better than others

No merits

Passmark score 2626 . This parameter is lower than 25% of products
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics 3165 test score. This parameter is lower than that of 22% of goods
Unigine Heaven 4.0 test score 433 . This parameter is lower than 8% of products
GPU base clock frequency 800 MHz. This parameter is lower than 72% of products
RAM 2 GB. This parameter is lower than 32% of products
Memory bandwidth 160 GB/s. This parameter is lower than 55% of products
Effective memory speed 5000 MHz. This parameter is lower than 24% of products
GPU memory frequency 1250 MHz. This parameter is lower than that of 61% of goods

Review AMD Radeon HD 6950

Performance

Memory

general information

Functions

Ports

Tests in benchmarks

AMD Radeon HD 6950 Review Highlights

GPU base clock

The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a high clock speed.

800MHz

max 2459

Average: 1124.9 MHz

2459MHz

GPU memory frequency

This is an important aspect calculating memory bandwidth

1250MHz

max 16000

Average: 1468 MHz

16000MHz

FLOPS

A measure of the processing power of a processor is called FLOPS.

2.3TFLOPS

max 1142.32

Average: 53 TFLOPS

1142.32TFLOPS

RAM

2GB

max 128

Average: 4. 6 GB

128GB

Texture size

A certain number of textured pixels are displayed on the screen every second.
Show all

73.9 GTexels/s

max 756.8

Average: 145.4 GTexels/s

756.8 GTexels/s

Architecture name

TeraScale 3

GPU name

Cayman

Memory bandwidth

This is the speed at which the device stores or reads information.

160GB/s

max 2656

Average: 257.8 GB/s

2656GB/s

Effective memory speed

The effective memory clock speed is calculated from the size and information transfer rate of the memory. The performance of the device in applications depends on the clock frequency. The higher it is, the better.
Show all

5000MHz

max 19500

Average: 6984.5 MHz

19500MHz

RAM

2GB

max 128

Average: 4. 6 GB

128GB

GDDR Memory Versions

Latest GDDR memory versions provide high data transfer rates for improved overall performance
Show all

Mean: 4.9

Memory bus width

A wide memory bus indicates that it can transfer more information in one cycle. This property affects the performance of the memory as well as the overall performance of the device’s graphics card.
Show all

256bit

max 8192

Average: 283.9bit

8192bit

Heat dissipation (TDP)

Heat dissipation requirement (TDP) — the maximum possible amount of energy dissipated by the cooling system. The lower the TDP, the less power will be consumed.
Show all

200W

Average value: 160 W

Process technology

The small size of the semiconductor means it is a new generation chip.

40 nm

Average: 34.7 nm

4 nm

Number of transistors

2640 million

max 80000

Average: 7150 million

80000 million

PCIe version

Considerable speed is provided for an expansion card used to connect a computer to peripherals. The updated versions have impressive throughput and provide high performance.
Show all

2.1

Average: 3

Width

260mm

max 421.7

Average: 192.1mm

421.7 mm

Height

100mm

max 619

Average: 89.6mm

619 mm

Purpose

Desktop

Sales start date

2010-12-14 00:00:00

Mean value:

Release price

$299

max 419999

Average: $5679.5

419999 $

DirectX

Used in demanding games, providing enhanced graphics

11.2

max 12.2

Mean: 11.4

12.2

OpenCL version

Used by some applications to enable GPU power for non-graphical calculations. The newer the version, the more functional it will be
Show all

1. 2

max 4.6

Average: 2.2

4.6

opengl version

Later versions provide quality game graphics

4.4

max 4.6

Average: 4.2

4.6

Shader model version

max 6.6

Average: 5.9

6.6

Has HDMI output

HDMI output allows you to connect devices with HDMI or mini-HDMI ports. They can transmit video and audio to the display.
Full text

Yes

DVI outputs

Allows connection to a display using DVI

Mean: 1.4

Number of HDMI connectors

The more there are, the more devices can be connected at the same time (for example, game/TV type consoles)
Show all

Average: 1.1

mini-DisplayPort

Allows you to connect to a display using a mini-DisplayPort

Mean: 2. 1

Interface

PCIe 2.0 x16

HDMI

Yes

Passmark test score

2626

max 29325

Average: 7628.6

29325

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics test score

3165

max 49575

Average: 11859.1

49575

Unigine Heaven 4.0 test score

433

max 4818

Average: 1291.1

4818

FAQ

How much RAM does AMD Radeon HD 69 have?50

AMD Radeon HD 6950 has 2 GB.

What version of RAM does AMD Radeon HD 6950

AMD Radeon HD 6950 support GDDR5.

What is the architecture of the AMD Radeon HD 6950

TeraScale 3.

How many watts does the AMD Radeon HD 6950 consume

How the AMD Radeon HD 6950 performs in the benchmarks

In the Passmark benchmark, the video card scored 2626 points.

AMD Radeon HD 69 FLOPS50

2.3 TFLOPs.

What version of PCIe does it support?

PCIe version 2.1.

Which version of DirectX does the AMD Radeon HD 6950

DirectX 11.2 support.

How many HDMI ports does AMD Radeon HD 6950 have

1 HDMI ports.

Does AMD Radeon HD 6950 DVI support

2 DVI ports.

When was the AMD Radeon HD 6950 released?

2010-12-14 00:00:00.

NVIDIA QuadroFX 3500M

NVIDIA RTX A4500

NVIDIA GeForce GT 610

NVIDIA RTX A4500

AMD Radeon HD 6520G

NVIDIA RTX A4500

Intel HD Graphics 2500

NVIDIA RTX A4500

NVIDIA GeForce GT 520

NVIDIA RTX A4500

AMD Radeon HD 6450M

NVIDIA RTX A4500

NVIDIA GRID K120Q

NVIDIA RTX A4500

ATI Radeon HD 2900 GT

NVIDIA RTX A4500

NVIDIA GeForce 610M

NVIDIA RTX A4500

NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX

NVIDIA RTX A4500

NVIDIA QuadroFX 3500

NVIDIA RTX A4500

NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX

NVIDIA RTX A4500

ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4550

NVIDIA RTX A4500

NVIDIA GeForce GT 520M

NVIDIA RTX A4500

AMD Radeon HD 7480D

NVIDIA RTX A4500

AMD Radeon HD 7450A

NVIDIA RTX A4500

NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M

NVIDIA RTX A4500

ATI Radeon HD 2600XT

NVIDIA RTX A4500

ATI Mobility FireGL V5700

NVIDIA RTX A4500

ATI Mobility Radeon HD 540v

NVIDIA RTX A4500

leave your feedback

Radeon RX 69 first user tests50 XT — super flagship or disappointment of the year by TG

Can the Radeon RX 6950 XT compete for the crown of the fastest graphics card on the market? Let’s figure it out

If you follow the news of the computer world, you should know that AMD has not pleased its fans in recent years. Engineers made several unsuccessful attempts to release a high-performance graphics chip, but every time everything crashed against the reality of modern game engines. As it turned out, high-speed HBM video memory does not solve anything at all, so each announcement of the next generation was perceived with an ever-increasing degree of skepticism. The Radeon RX 6000 line was no exception, because only the biggest optimists could believe that the flagship Radeon RX 6900 XT will be able to compete with the GeForce RTX 3090. Despite a series of unsuccessful decisions, we still got a decent product. Not without drawbacks, because AMD was not able to offer an effective ray tracing technology. And yet, the Radeon RX 6900 XT is much cheaper than its direct competitor, and the 7000 series is already on the nose, the performance of which promises to secure the leader’s jersey for the reds.

How true the rumors are, we will find out this fall, but for now let’s get back to what is happening in the video card market right now. If you remember, recently a pumped GeForce RTX 309 graphics chip went on sale.0 Ti. He put the long-resisting green Radeon RX 6900 XT on the shoulder blades, only the price difference between the graphics chips reaches two times, which means that a few extra percent cost NVIDIA extremely expensive. AMD did not stand aside either, which decided to release a faster flagship, which instead of 16 Gb / s video memory received the same amount at 18 Gb / s. Even before the announcement, it seemed that a confrontation between the giants was brewing, only in the official press release we saw that the Radeon RX 6950 XT does not claim to be a duel with the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti.

But the GeForce RTX 3090 turned out to be frankly slow in the presented diagram. This raised questions from the Testing Games team. Bloggers took three video cards and ran them through popular tests. Unfortunately, the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti could not be found, so we have to limit ourselves to the available data. All tests were carried out in 4K resolution, the settings are close to the maximum, the Core i9-12900K was used as the processor. Below you can see the indicators grouped in a table.

Usually we sum up with the averages for each video card, but this time the results in Hitman 3 spoil the whole thing. The fact is that absolutely everywhere the difference between graphics chips is linear, while in this game the new Radeon RX The 6950 XT has a huge lead over its rival in the face of the GeForce RTX 3090. That is why the average calculations will not correspond to the big picture, which we will talk about. As you can see, in most games, the Radeon RX 6950 XT still lags behind the GeForce RTX 3090. In fact, the difference is minimal and often does not exceed a few percent, but there is a gap and victory is on the side of NVIDIA. If you came here only for these percentages, expecting to see AMD win, then we are in a hurry to disappoint you.

In some projects, the Radeon RX 6900 XT strengthened its leadership, while in most it could not get ahead of the green flagship. Well, considering that the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti is on sale, we still have nothing to please the fans of Lisa Su.