Sapphire Nitro+ Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB: capacity is king

Following disruption of the mainstream market with RX 9070 Series, AMD hopes to now woo mainstream audiences with RX 9060 XT 16GB and 8GB. This results in a tale of two models, with one feeling decidedly better value than the other. Choose the right one, though, and you’ll discover the mainstream graphics card many have been waiting for.

To dispel any mystique, the right choice is the subject of this review, RX 9060 XT 16GB. Starting at £314.99 / $349.99, it’s more expensive than the 8GB model which is available from £269.99 / $299.99. Spending that extra cash is worthwhile as the larger capacity is transformative in many present-day applications and will only prove more useful in the future as will become clear.

Specs

The long-fabled Navi 44 GPU has finally emerged via RX 9060 XT. The die is expectedly smaller in size but still shares the same RDNA 4 smarts as flagship Navi 48.

Comparing RX 9060 XT to sibling graphics cards in the Club386 Table of Doom™ reveals a pattern between its specifications and those of RX 9070 XT. Namely, that this new Radeon sports effectively half the GPU of the other.

	RX 9060 XT	RX 9070	RX 9070 XT
Released	June 2025	March 2025	March 2025
Codename	RDNA 4	RDNA 4	RDNA 4
GPU	Navi 44	Navi 48	Navi 48
Process	TSMC N4P (4nm)	TSMC N4P (4nm)	TSMC N4P (4nm)
Transistors	29.7bn	53.9bn	53.9bn
Die size	199mm2	357mm2	357mm2
Stream processors	2,048	3,584	4,096
Game clock	2,530MHz	2,070MHz	2,400MHz
Boost clock	3,130MHz	2,520MHz	2,970MHz
Compute units	32 of 32	56 of 64	64 of 64
RT accelerators	32 (3rd Gen)	56 (3rd Gen)	64 (3rd Gen)
AI accelerators	64 (2nd Gen)	112 (2nd Gen)	128 (2nd Gen)
Peak FP32 TFLOPS	25.6	36.1	48.7
Peak FP16 TFLOPS	51.3	72.3	97.3
ROPS	64	128	128
Memory	8GB / 16GB	16GB	16GB
Mem. type	GDDR6	GDDR6	GDDR6
Mem. clock	20Gb/s	20Gb/s	20Gb/s
Mem. interface	128-bit (PCIe 5.0 x16)	256-bit (PCIe 5.0 x16)	256-bit (PCIe 5.0 x16)
Mem. bandwidth	320GB/s	640GB/s	640GB/s
Board power	160W	220W	304W
Launch MSRP	$299 / $349	$549	$599

RX 9060 XT rocks the full-fat Navi 44 die, complete with two shader engines down from the four found in Navi 48. As the underlying makeup of either GPU remains the same, the less silicon-rich chip packs half as many subcomponents. More specifically, there are 32 compute units and RT accelerators at play, alongside 64 AI accelerators and 2,048 stream processors.

Clock speeds are expectedly higher on Navi 44, as game clock rises to 2,530MHz and boost clock breaks the 3GHz barrier at 3,130MHz. These increases push RX 9060 XT Peak FP32 TFLOPS up to 25.6, just over half of RX 9070 XT’s theoretical maximum 48.7 while peak FP16 TFLOPS naturally fall around double these values.

The 1:2 ratio continues in RX 9060 XT’s memory configuration. Navi 44 rides in on a 128-bit memory bus, down from the 256-bit bus up the stack. Using the same 20Gb/s GDDR6 memory modules, this leaves the graphics card with 320GB/s of memory bandwidth which is, again, half of Navi 48.

To AMD’s credit, RX 9060 XT retains the same PCIe 5.0 x16 interface as its closest Radeon relatives. With all possible lanes open for business, the pixel pusher should slot into older systems featuring PCIe 3.0 expansion slots without any major detriment to performance. This could prove a key advantage against rivals RTX 5060 and RTX 5060 Ti which only have eight lanes at their disposal.

You’ll find RX 9060 XT on store shelves in two flavours, 8GB and 16GB. As a reminder, the smaller capacity carries a starting price of $299 while the larger incurs a $50 premium bringing the buy-in to $349. My preference lies with the bigger buffer despite the higher cost as the short-term expense should net better long-term value. The short of the matter is that 8GB GPUs are making increasingly less sense in the face of increasing demands from modern applications.

Finally, Navi 44 dials down power consumption to a mere 160W. This actually affords RX 9060 XT more than half of RX 9070 XT’s power budget of 304W, albeit by just 16W. This is an entirely reasonable amount of watts for a graphics card of this calibre and places the fledgling Radeon right alongside GeForce and Arc competitors. In terms of PSU capacity, AMD recommends having a 450W unit to hand.

	RX 9060 XT	RX 7600 XT	RX 6600 XT
Released	Jun 2025	Jan 2024	Jul 2021
Codename	RDNA 4	RDNA 3	RDNA 2
GPU	Navi 44	Navi 33	Navi 23
Process	TSMC N4P (4nm)	TSMC N6 (6nm)	TSMC N7 (7nm)
Transistors	29.7bn	13.3bn	11.1bn
Die size	199mm2	204mm2	237mm2
Stream processors	2,048	2,048	2,048
Game clock	2,530MHz	2,470MHz	2,359MHz
Boost clock	3,130MHz	2,755MHz	2,589MHz
Compute units	32 of 32	32 of 32	32 of 32
RT accelerators	32 (3rd Gen)	32 (2nd Gen)	32 (1st Gen)
AI accelerators	64 (2nd Gen)	64 (1st Gen)	–
Peak FP32 TFLOPS	25.6	22.6	10.6
Peak FP16 TFLOPS	51.3	45.1	21.2
ROPS	64	64	64
Memory	8GB / 16GB	16GB	8GB
Mem. type	GDDR6	GDDR6	GDDR6
Mem. clock	20Gb/s	18Gb/s	16Gb/s
Mem. interface	128-bit (PCIe 5.0 x16)	128-bit (PCIe 4.0 x8)	128-bit (PCIe 4.0 x8)
Mem. bandwidth	320GB/s	288GB/s	256GB/s
Board power	160W	190W	160W
Launch MSRP	$299 / $349	$329	$379

As much as AMD has pushed the boat out with new GPU architectures over the past several years, the brand has resolutely stuck to a particular specification for 60-class graphics cards. Pick up RX 9060 XT, RX 7600 XT, or the almost-four-year-old RX 6600 XT and you’ll find the same number of many subcomponents.

While the likes of stream processors and other specs haven’t increased in number, they are of a dramatically higher quality in Navi 44 relative to Navi 33 and 23. The RDNA 4 GPU comes part and parcel with a new generation of AI and RT accelerators, higher clock speeds, and a host of architectural improvements, allowing AMD’s design to accomplish more using the same quantity of resource.

TSMC N4P makes much of this possible, as AMD is able to greatly increase transistor count in Navi 44, all the way up to 29.7bn despite the die shrinking down a step to 199mm². This marks a staggering 123% increase over Navi 33 with its relatively piddly 13.3bn on a 204mm² die.

After two generations of PCIe 4.0 x8 interfaces, I’m happy to see RX 9060 XT make the jump to a full 16 lanes and PCIe 5.0 is a nice bonus too. Bus width remains the same at 128-bits, but faster GDDR6 memory modules give bandwidth a leg up to 320GB/s. This setup applies to both 8GB and 16GB models.

AMD expectedly trims back board power on RX 9060 XT, given RDNA 4 is a more efficient architecture than RDNA 3. With a 160W budget, the graphics card undercuts RX 7600 XT and mirrors RX 6600 XT.

Finally, a word on pricing. RX 9060 XT should retail from $299 (8GB) / $349 (16GB), making it dearer than RX 7600 XT for the same memory capacity but cheaper than RX 6600 XT regardless of buffer size. I would’ve loved to see AMD match prior generation pricing as every buck counts at this end of the market. Even so, the amount of value that $20 (6%) increase brings is surprisingly large.

Design

There’s no reference design for RX 9060 XT 16GB or 8GB, just as there wasn’t one for the RX 9070 Series. This is a shame in my view as RX 7000 Series MBA (Made By AMD) cards were attractive and well-built and I would’ve liked to have seen the 3D renders used in marketing materials come to life. Still, there are plenty of high-quality options from board partners to choose from, whether you’re after something that hits the £315 / $349 SEP or otherwise.

For this review, I have the pleasure of getting to grips with Sapphire Nitro+ Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB. It’s a more premium option at £359 / $419, but it’s easy to see where that extra cash has gone once you hold the card in your hands and run it in your system. For those seeking a more affordable alternative, Sapphire offers this new Radeon in both Pure and Pulse flavours.

Nitro+ RX 9060 XT 16GB rocks a dual-slot design, measuring in at 300 x 131 x 55mm. This makes it much smaller than Nitro+ RX 9070 XT and the graphics card is far less weighty too at 992g down from 1.89kg. Such shrinking makes sense once you take into account the massive difference in base TGP between Navi 44 (160W) and 48 (304W). Though more petite, there’s no doubt that this is a well-constructed cooler with beauty to match its brawn.

Keen to push performance further on its flagship cooler, Sapphire raises board power to 170W (+10W) out of the box. This is in service of higher operating frequencies, as Nitro+ RX 9060 XT 16GB’s game clock rises to 2,700MHz (+170MHz) with boost clock following at 3,290MHz (+160MHz). While neither of these increases will move the performance needle massively, any and all boosts are welcome.

Sapphire forgoes the 12V-2×6 power connector with Nitro+ RX 9060 XT 16GB and a single 8-pin PCIe header takes its place. An understandable change given the lower power requirements, and nets the added bonus of older systems not requiring an unsightly dongle.

Plugged into your system, Nitro+ RX 9060 XT 16GB becomes a focal point thanks to a stylish metal backplate and distinctive side profile. The ARGB light bar that runs just shy of the entire length of the cooler is undeniably eye-catching but so too is the grate of grey triangles. The perforated frontplate also stands out and would make for a proper showpiece if vertically mounted.

Either through the passage of time or thanks to the smaller cooler, I’ve come around to these aesthetic choices in a big way. In fact, I’d go so far as to say it’s the most beautiful model you can buy for RX 9060 XT 16GB bar none.

This graphics card isn’t just a pretty face, of course, as Nitro+ RX 9060 XT 16GB packs plenty of potent cooling tech under the hood. In place of thermal gel or paste, Sapphire opts for a Thermal Interface Material, specifically Honeywell PTM7950. This solution provides excellent conductivity between the GPU die and integrated cooling module and doesn’t run the risk of declining over time through drying out.

A triple-fan array equipped with Sapphire’s latest ‘AeroCurve’ blade design also plays their part in keeping Nitro+ RX 9060 XT 16GB cool. The brand explains that these new blowers improve on their forebears with lower air friction which reduces noise levels while also increasing RPM range. Dual ball bearings also help keep the graphics card quiet under load and are individually replaceable to boot.

Running Nitro+ RX 9060 XT 16GB in the Club386 test bench sees system power consumption peak at 315W, up from 97W while idle. This is 10W higher than Pulse RX 7600 XT but the new graphics card offers a generational, massive improvement in performance per watt.

Compared to rivals, RX 9060 XT 16GB is relatively power hungry. It pulls 55W more watts from the wall than RTX 5060 and 24W than RTX 5060 Ti 16GB in my testing. The pixel pusher puts that extra power to good use but it’s worth noting depending on how expensive your ‘leccy is.

Given the quality of Sapphire’s Nitro+ cooler, there are no surprises when it comes to noise levels and thermals. This model handles both like a champion, keeping RX 9060 XT 16GB cool to the tune of 55°C without kicking up an audible fuss as fans tick along at 33.9db.

Performance

RX 9060 XT 16GB marks the last time I’ll call upon the Club386 test bench for a graphics card review, at least for the foreseeable future. The system’s Ryzen 9 7950X3D CPU and other components have earned a good rest, though, after playing host to 27 GPUs this year alone in service of our coverage.

With ample VRAM in hand, RX 9060 XT 16GB is free to play games at FHD (1080p) and QHD (1440p) without a second thought. Such a healthy buffer even allows it to reach for UHD (4K) in less-demanding circumstances. In in the interest of brevity and relevance, though, I’ve used the lesser two resolutions for my benchmarks.

Application & AI

The generational gains are gargantuan in 3DMark as RX 9060 XT 16GB zooms past RX 7600 XT in each benchmark. More importantly, the graphics card largely holds fast against the primary competition.

Examining these results more closely, RX 9060 XT 16GB pulls ahead of RX 7600 XT by an impressive 65% in Speed Way but goes further still in Steel Nomad with a 77% lead. This places the new Radeon in the same ballpark as RX 7700 XT, slightly behind in ray tracing but further ahead in raster.

Though RX 9060 XT 16GB claims victory over RTX 5060 in Steel Nomad by 17%, it concedes to the competitor in Speed Way trailing by 15%. Note that these percentages equate to differences of 5fps across each benchmark, indicating how closely matched the two graphics cards are.

AMD’s contender delivers a peppy punch against RTX 5060 Ti 16GB too, surpassing the midrange GeForce model by a cheeky 4% in Steel Nomad. However, Speed Way sees the tables turn in favour of Nvidia as RX 9060 XT 16GB trails by 28%.

Note Arc B580 puts in a decent showing relative to RTX 9060 XT 16GB in Speed Way and isn’t too massively behind in Steel Nomad either. This isn’t the last time Battlemage will get uncomfortably close on these charts, making Intel a thorn in the side of both AMD and Nvidia.

Blender was a sore spot for RX 9070 and RX 9060 XT 16GB befalls the same fate. There’s simply no getting around the dominance that CUDA affords Nvidia, with Arc B580 similarly faltering in the face of GeForce.

You’d understandably think Nvidia a shoo-in over AMD for all things deep learning but Geekbench proves the exception to such a rule.

RX 9060 XT delivers a half precision score of 42,224 in this benchmark, sandwiching between RTX 5060 (38,206) and RTX 5060 Ti 16GB (43,208).

This is a marked improvement over RX 7600 XT, which sits bottom of the table with a score of 25,621. That’s a massive 65% improvement across a single generation.

AMD has clearly strengthened Radeon in the realms of AI but there’s still room for improvement. It’s possible to run a Llama 3.1 LLM (Large Language Model) locally on RX 9060 XT 16GB but there are far better options on the market for this task.

RX 9060 XT 16GB sadly doesn’t move the needle much from RX 7600 XT. More specifically, this result is a decent generational improvement of 25% but still well behind the competition.

Gaming

Assassin’s Creed Mirage proves a spectacular showing for RX 9060 XT 16GB. Not only does the graphics card soar above RX 7600 XT it also manages to handily beat RTX 5060 and trade blows with RTX 5060 Ti 16GB.

Delivering 100+fps at both FHD and QHD nets generational performance improvements of 26% and 30% at each resolution, respectively. Meanwhile, RX 9060 XT 16GB enjoys leads of 11-14% over RTX 5060.

VRAM isn’t a limiting factor in this benchmark, meaning these results rest solely on silicon. As such, I’d expect to see RX 9060 XT 8GB return similar if not these exact frame rates.

RX 9060 XT 16GB has a harder time shining in Final Fantasy XIV: Dawntrail but still holds fast. Ahead of RTX 5060 by 6fps at FHD but 1fps behind at QHD, both graphics cards prove their worth in this MMORPG.

RX 7700 XT is curiously but confidently ahead of both current generation operations, serving as a more worthy sparring partner to RTX 5060 Ti 16GB. Meanwhile, Arc B580 nips at the heels of RTX 5060 and RX 9060 XT 16GB at QHD despite stumbling at FHD.

Like Assassin’s Creed Mirage, there’s no major strain on VRAM here. FFXIV serves as another example of how 8GB of memory can be enough memory capacity for the here and now in some cases. Although, the limits of such a small buffer quickly become apparent elsewhere.

RTX 9060 XT 16GB makes up for weaker ray tracing chops relative to RTX 5060 with versatility in Forza Motorsport. Speed counts for naught if there isn’t enough track to run on VRAM capacity ultimately sees the 16GB Radeon race ahead of the 8GB GeForce graphics card.

Thanks to a larger buffer, RX 9060 XT 16GB more than laps RTX 5060 at QHD by a blistering 148%. In a surprise turn of events, it’s only 3fps behind RTX 5060 Ti 16GB at the same resolution too but neither are capable of producing a 60fps average natively.

Looking outside of GeForce, this is a cracking showing for AMD’s third-generation AI accelerators, besting RX 7600 XT by a welcome 49%. They push RX 9060 XT 16GB past RX 7700 XT too, by a cool 24%, and stave Arc B580 off with a 30% lead.

I must stress that you should only expect this level of performance from RX 9060 XT 16GB. The 8GB variant will suffer the same issues as the likes of RTX 5060 at the same settings.

Getting back in the saddle of rasterised workloads, RX 9060 XT 16GB emerges the victor against RTX 5060 while running Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord. The battle is well-fought on both sides, as just 3fps on average separates the two graphics cards at QHD. However, Radeon rules supreme at FHD with frame rates north of 200fps and an 8% lead.

Arc B580 has done well to keep pace with RX 9060 XT 16GB and RTX 5060 but it’s behind the curve in this battleground. Intel’s champion falls 29-32% behind, performing closer to RX 7600 XT that the newer Radeon. Conversely, RTX 5060 Ti 16GB creates a 12-13% gap across the resolutions.

Pumping out 240fps on average in Rainbow Six Extraction at FHD, there’s no doubt RX 9060 XT 16GB is a strong choice for any budding esports champion on a budget. The graphics card is no slouch at QHD either, turning in a 157fps average. Better still, these results outpace RTX 5060 Ti 16GB.

Looking further down the chart, RX 7600 XT doesn’t even come close to RX 9060 XT 16GB as the new kid on the block sits pretty with a 33-44% advantage. RTX 5060 and Arc B580 are at each others throats here and each deliver suitably high performance but every frame counts in competitive FPS and there can be only one winner.

to RX 9060 XT 16GB	Avg. +/- at FHD	Avg. +/- at QHD
From RX 7600 8GB	+33%	+39%
From RX 7600 XT 16GB	+25%	+27%
From RTX 4060 8GB	+29%	+35%
From RTX 3060 Ti 8GB	+23%	+24%
From Arc B580 12GB	+21%	+18%
From RTX 5060 8GB	+19%	+18%
From RTX 4060 Ti 8GB	+15%	+20%
From RX 7700 XT 12GB	-3%	-2%
From RTX 5060 Ti 16GB	-6%	-7%
From RTX 5070 12GB	-36%	-43%
From RX 9070 16GB	-42%	-50%

Aggregating average frame rates at both FHD and QHD, RX 9060 XT 16GB’s biggest wins come from the latter resolution, outperforming RX 7600 and RTX 4060 by 39% and 35%, respectively. These leads shrink slightly at FHD to 33% and 25% but that’s still a respectable margin.

More pertinently, RX 9060 XT 16GB betters RTX 5060 by 19% at FHD and 18% at QHD. This creates an almost-linear price-to-performance ratio as the 16GB Radeon’s starting price is 17% more ($349) than the GeForce ($299). It’s impossible to say for certain how this translates to the 8GB variant without testing, but I’m fairly sure there’d be no major change in the hierarchy albeit with less of a gap.

Comparisons to RTX 5060 Ti 16GB bear further favourable fruit for RX 9060 XT 16GB still. Though AMD’s graphics card falls behind Nvidia’s by 6-7%, it costs 19% less as MSRP flies ($349 vs. $429). Greater value rests with Radeon in terms of raw gaming performance.

Arc B580 provides food for thought, though, as RX 9060 XT 16GB only manages to beat it by 18-21% despite commanding a 40% higher starting price ($249 vs. $349). Were Battlemage’s frame rates more consistently nipping at RDNA 4’s, I’d give it the value crown. However, Intel still has work to do in making its graphics cards as reliable as AMD or Nvidia, making its offering worth considering but not an outright better buy.

FSR

Proverbial RDNA 4 blood pumping through the traces of its PCB gives RX 9060 XT the power to use FidelityFX Super Resolution 4. This suite of performance enhancements is leaps and bounds better than prior versions, mainly thanks to the introduction of machine learning in the upscaling pipeline. AMD has more improvements in the works for FSR 4 coming later this year via ‘Redstone‘, including machine learning frame generation, ray regeneration, and neural radiance caching.

Check out my RX 9070 XT review for my full FSR 4 analysis, which includes a thorough examination of upscaled image quality through comparisons to FSR 3.1. For readers who just want a TL;DR, FSR 4 is the competitor to Nvidia DLSS that Radeon users have been waiting a long time for and is well worth using. Once AMD bolsters FSR Frame Generation with the same machine learning technology in addition to other Redstone improvements, it’ll only narrow the gap further.

The only problem with FSR 4 is its lacking library. There are now 57 games that natively support the technology, up from the paltry few back in March. You can upgrade anything that already supports FSR 3.1 via AMD Software, but this doesn’t increase the feature’s reach by much. Given time, I’m sure this number will increase exponentially but there’s a long road ahead before FSR 4 matches the prevalence of DLSS 4 with 75 games and counting, let alone the larger repository of DLSS 3.

Case in point, Cyberpunk 2077. CD Projekt Red’s RPG sports the entirety of the DLSS 4 suite but tops out at FSR 3.0, with no sign of change coming to its underlying cyberware to fix this. That distinction between FSR 3.1 is important as it means there’s no way to upgrade to FSR 4 via AMD Software. However, since the newer upscaler has a practically minimal effect on performance prior versions are ultimately still representative of how the newer one performs. With this in mind, let’s see how RX 9060 XT 16GB, RTX 5060, and RTX 5060 Ti 16GB stack up against one another running the ever-demanding RT Overdrive graphics preset.

RT Overdrive pushes graphics cards to their limits through extensive path tracing, placing immense pressure on their hardware ray tracing accelerators. However, such eye-candy demands room to breathe and small buffer sizes simply don’t cut the mustard. It’s for this reason that RTX 5060 just about keeps its head above water at FHD but crumbles at native QHD. A relatively lacking VRAM capacity of 8GB also means Frame Generation can’t operate properly, even with Super Resolution lightening the load, and leads to performance regressions.

RTX 9060 XT 16GB and RX 5060 Ti 16GB don’t suffer the same fate thanks to their larger pools of memory. Horsepower becomes the only bottleneck for these two and it’s clear that the GeForce card simply has more grunt behind it. Nvidia’s offering is within touching distance of 60fps at FHD and runs a little over 30fps at QHD through the use of DLSS alone. Meanwhile, Radeon is decidedly slower at 44fps and 27fps at the same respective resolutions.

Frame Generation does improve average frame rates but RTX 9060 XT 16GB can’t generate the necessary base of 60fps for an ideal experience. In lieu of that baseline, latency is at such a high level that the game feels sluggish to play. RTX 5060 Ti 16GB offers is noticeably feels better to play on at FHD but doesn’t escape the problems that affect its competitor at QHD.

Conclusion

Hot off the heels of RX 9070 Series, expectations were high for RX 9060 XT 16GB. While this Radeon isn’t as much of a slam dunk as its peers, AMD still has another winner on its hands. Summarily, this is the best graphics card in its price class.

RX 9060 XT 16GB is a dab hand at rasterised rendering and is no slouch when it comes to ray tracing either. The graphics card’s VRAM capacity goes a long way, giving the Radeon legs to run at FHD and QHD. I’ve no concerns regarding longevity thanks to this buffer size and upgrading from the lower resolution to the other will be an absolute breeze too.

Although RTX 5060 and RX 9060 XT 8GB are more affordable, the limitations of their 8GB buffers don’t sit comfortably with me. Arc B580 is a compelling alternative if your budget can’t stretch to RX 9060 XT 16GB but know that Battlemage comes part and parcel with some performance quirks despite Intel’s continued improvements.

Spending more for RTX 5060 Ti 16GB does make sense if you’re both a creator and gamer, but anyone exclusively in the latter camp will extract better performance per dollar from RX 9060 XT 16GB. However, there is value in Nvidia’s software suite and the wider adoption of DLSS. AMD is slowly plugging these gaps and FSR 4 is fantastic but GeForce remains more feature rich than Radeon for the moment.

As much as Nitro+ RX 9060 XT 16GB encroaches on the starting cost of RTX 5060 Ti 16GB, the difference in cooler aesthetics and quality you’ll get from your cash won’t come close. If you’re after a graphics card with a little more glamour and grunt, look no further.