ASRock Radeon RX 9060 XT Challenger OC 16GB VS XFX Swift Radeon RX 9060 XT OC Gaming Edition 16GB

The ASRock Radeon RX 9060 XT Challenger OC 16GB and the XFX Swift Radeon RX 9060 XT OC Gaming Edition 16GB have similar specs in terms of raw performance, but with a few notable differences. Starting with GPU clock speed, the XFX model has a slightly higher base clock at 1900 MHz compared to the ASRock's 1700 MHz. For GPU turbo, the XFX reaches 3320 MHz, slightly edging out the ASRock's 3290 MHz.

In terms of pixel rate, the XFX card delivers 212.5 GPixel/s, while the ASRock offers 210.6 GPixel/s, a small difference. Floating-point performance is also close, with the XFX providing 27.2 TFLOPS and the ASRock offering 26.95 TFLOPS. Texture rate is almost identical, with the XFX at 425 GTexels/s and the ASRock at 421.1 GTexels/s, indicating minimal performance variance here as well.

Both products share identical GPU memory speeds of 2518 MHz, shading units at 2048, texture mapping units (TMUs) at 128, and render output units (ROPs) at 64. Additionally, both models support Double Precision Floating Point (DPFP), confirming that neither product lacks any of these features.

The ASRock Radeon RX 9060 XT Challenger OC 16GB and the XFX Swift Radeon RX 9060 XT OC Gaming Edition 16GB share several similarities in terms of memory specifications. Both products feature an effective memory speed of 20000 MHz, 16GB of VRAM, and utilize GDDR6 memory. They also both have a 128-bit memory bus width and support ECC memory.

The main difference between the two is in the maximum memory bandwidth. The XFX model offers a higher bandwidth of 340 GB/s, while the ASRock's maximum memory bandwidth is 322.3 GB/s. This slight difference in bandwidth may translate into slightly faster memory performance on the XFX card, but otherwise, the memory characteristics are very similar between the two.

In summary, the ASRock and XFX cards are nearly identical in memory configuration, with only a marginal difference in maximum memory bandwidth that favors the XFX model.

The ASRock Radeon RX 9060 XT Challenger OC 16GB and the XFX Swift Radeon RX 9060 XT OC Gaming Edition 16GB share nearly identical feature sets. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and OpenCL 2.2. They are also equipped with multi-display technology, ray tracing, 3D support, and FSR4, while neither supports DLSS or XeSS (XMX). Additionally, both cards feature RGB lighting and are compatible with AMD SAM (Resizable BAR), with neither having LHR.

The only difference between the two is the number of supported displays. Both the ASRock and XFX models support up to 3 displays, so in this category, there is no distinction between the two products.

In conclusion, both cards offer the same feature set, including cutting-edge support for technologies like DirectX 12 Ultimate and ray tracing, as well as common gaming and performance features such as multi-display support and FSR4.

The ASRock Radeon RX 9060 XT Challenger OC 16GB and the XFX Swift Radeon RX 9060 XT OC Gaming Edition 16GB have identical port configurations. Both models include one HDMI output with HDMI 2.1b support, two DisplayPort outputs, and no USB-C ports, DVI outputs, or mini DisplayPort outputs. There are no differences between the two cards in terms of the ports available.

In summary, both cards offer the same set of display connectivity options, ensuring compatibility with a variety of display setups.

The ASRock Radeon RX 9060 XT Challenger OC 16GB and the XFX Swift Radeon RX 9060 XT OC Gaming Edition 16GB have almost identical general specifications. Both use the RDNA 4.0 GPU architecture, have a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 160W, and feature PCI Express (PCIe) version 5 support. They also share the same semiconductor size of 4 nm and the same number of transistors at 29,700 million.

The only differences between the two models are in their physical dimensions. The ASRock card measures 249 mm in width and 132 mm in height, while the XFX card is slightly larger, with a width of 270 mm and a height of 124 mm.

Both cards lack air-water cooling, making their cooling systems dependent on traditional fan setups. Other than the slight size variations, the two products are quite similar in terms of general specifications.