AMD budget GPU listed with twice the memory of RX 7600 and RTX 4060 — RX 7600 XT with 16GB GDDR6

Radeon RX 7600
Radeon RX 7600 (Image credit: AMD)

AMD's rumored RX 7600 XT has been spotted on the Eurasian Economic Union customs database (or EEC for short) by hardware leaker Harukaze5719. This specific model is seemingly Gigabyte's Aorus RX 7600 XT OC, and it even comes with 16GB of VRAM, apparently more than the 12GB that the Radeon RX 7700 XT carries and equal to the Radeon RX 7800 XT. An important note is that not all products listed at the EEC make it to the market.

There have been previous listings for the Radeon RX 7600 XT in the EEC database, but these listings mentioned 10GB and 12GB variants of the Radeon RX 7600 XT. Concerning product coverage, 10GB would make the most sense since it would allow the Radeon RX 7600 XT to slot in right between the Radeon RX 7600 and the Radeon RX 7700 XT, with 8GB and 12GB of memory, respectively. 16GB would, however, jump over the Radeon RX 7700 XT and put the Radeon RX 7600 XT on par with the Radeon RX 7800 XT.

A memory capacity of 16GB implies a great deal about the design of the 7600 XT. Since the Navi 33 graphics chip used inside the Radeon RX 7600 is fully enabled and can't power a graphics card with more cores, AMD is almost certainly using a chiplet design for the Radeon RX 7600 XT as it does for the Radeon RX 7700 XT and Radeon RX 7800 XT. If the Radeon RX 7600 XT uses 10GB or 12GB of VRAM, it would have three memory cache dies (MCDs), the same as the Radeon RX 7700 XT. With 16GB, though, that would mean a mere two MCDs or an extensive four MCDs, since 16GB can't go evenly into three MCDs.

For a graphics card that will likely cost between $300 and $350, 16GB of memory seems unnecessary. The cheapest 16GB GPU you can buy today is Nvidia's RTX 4060 Ti 16GB, which retails for $450 at best. Though, AMD has been known to offer lots more memory than Nvidia at lower price points.

Then there's the matter of the bus width, which would have to be a 128-bit or a 256-bit wide memory bus. To pair 16GB of VRAM with a slim 128-bit bus would be very weird, but Nvidia has done it with the RTX 4060 Ti 16GB. For his part, Harukaze5719 believes this 16GB Radeon RX 7600 XT uses a 256-bit wide bus, which would be pretty overkill given that the Radeon RX 7700 XT does fine with a 192-bit bus. A slimmer bus would probably be fine since the Radeon RX 7600 XT will likely have less graphics horsepower than the Radeon RX 7700 XT.

As unlikely as it sounds that AMD would make Radeon RX 7600 XT GPUs with such an overkill memory solution, it nevertheless is in the database. That doesn't mean a 16GB Radeon RX 7600 XT is confirmed. AMD may backtrack or even already has backtracked on offering a 16GB variant, or it could be that this listing is a typo. Gigabyte does offer an Aorus RX 7800 XT OC with 16GB of memory, and changing that '8' to a '6' would be enough to give us a very confusing graphics card.

Matthew Connatser

Matthew Connatser is a freelancing writer for Tom's Hardware US. He writes articles about CPUs, GPUs, SSDs, and computers in general.

  • valthuer
    Good news. With Nvidia overpricing its 12GB mediocrities, AMD has a golden opportunity to grab some market share right now.
    Reply
  • ohio_buckeye
    This gives amd a way to get market share but are gpus in this price point able to utilize 16gb? If you are a 7700xt owner do you regret the purchase? 16gb on a 7600 series cards could work out or confuse the market.
    Reply
  • Notton
    Isn't the Arc A770 significantly cheaper than a 4060Ti 16GB?
    Reply
  • usertests
    ohio_buckeye said:
    This gives amd a way to get market share but are gpus in this price point able to utilize 16gb? If you are a 7700xt owner do you regret the purchase? 16gb on a 7600 series cards could work out or confuse the market.
    It's the same confusion as Nvidia at the same time, so it's OK.

    Looking at Tom's RX 7600 review, even with the same 128-bit bus, this could probably outperform the RX 6700 (10GB). RX 6700 XT (12 GB) is probably the better buy, but I'd consider this after it went on sale.

    Another EEC listing is also pointing at an RX 7700 non-XT and 7800 non-XT. The 7700 could end up having a lot better performance than this, since the 7700 XT is already 20-35% faster than the 6700 XT.
    Reply
  • Amdlova
    Nvidia only need droop prices to counter AMD
    With super series amd is on tough position
    Reply
  • usertests
    Amdlova said:
    Nvidia only need droop prices to counter AMD
    Nvidia and dropping prices, name a less iconic duo.

    What AMD has going on is fine. It's questionable if a Navi 33-based 7600 XT 16 GB is a good idea, but I'll be taking a look at the reviews.

    The 7700 and 7800 (non-XT) could shake things up, if 7700 goes for $300-350, and 7800 at $400-450. I assume 7700 would get 12 GB and not 10 GB like the 6700.
    Reply
  • fyiv
    Notton said:
    Isn't the Arc A770 significantly cheaper than a 4060Ti 16GB?
    I was thinking the same thing, I just got mine (the Predator BiFrost) for $280 and it got as low as $240 for a bit during Black Friday. I don't think it's a waste to have potential future growth for the hardware you're paying for, it's probably pennies for them to get those higher capacity chips, they're just being greedy.

    If course, the actual horsepower the card produces is still a huge bottleneck when paired with my 5800X3D, but I knew that, and I was tired of the other two milking these cards' prices, I wanted an upgrade to my GTX1070 that was under $500 (RIP RX7700XT), and something that may have some room to improve (which seems to be the case with improved drivers).

    I refuse to overpay for these cards from any company, clearly their margins are not suffering, it's just greed dictating these prices.
    Reply
  • mdd1963
    I mean, twice the VRAM worked out oh *so* well for the RTX4060's 16 GB variant, right? :)
    Reply
  • SSGBryan
    mdd1963 said:
    I mean, twice the VRAM worked out oh *so* well for the RTX4060's 16 GB variant, right? :)
    Depends on what you are doing with it.

    It makes a real difference in Stable Diffusion - gaming, not so much.
    Reply
  • Sleepy_Hollowed
    It would make sense them releasing a card with 16 GB minimum, anything less is just not acceptable, regardless of the bus.

    If games use the VRAM as high speed cache that is closer than say RAM (be it by design or a driver feature), that's a major win as well, so I'll be inclined to believe it's a smart move.
    Reply