AMD FirePro W7100 vs AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT decisively outperforms the AMD FirePro W7100 in the shared benchmark tests, with the data showing a 70% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL and a 62% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan. While the FirePro W7100 holds a slightly higher overall percentile ranking at 71 versus the RX 6600 XT's 70, this is a artifact of the different benchmark sets each card was tested with, as the RX 6600 XT's raw scores are overwhelmingly higher in every common workload. The RX 6600 XT is the clear performance victor, though the FirePro W7100 remains relevant for legacy professional workflows.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RX 6600 XT dominates the FirePro W7100 in both shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6600 XT scores 80,503 against the FirePro W7100's 24,182, a delta of -70% (meaning the FirePro trails by 70% of the RX 6600 XT's score). This is a massive gap that highlights the generational leap in compute performance. The RX 6600 XT's advantage is even more pronounced in Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 72,417 versus 27,529 for the FirePro W7100, a 62% delta in favor of the newer card.

These results are not marginal wins; they represent a complete overhaul in performance capability. The FirePro W7100's average benchmark score of 25,856 places it in a cluster with the AMD FirePro D700 (25,842) and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 (25,726), showing it is a mid-tier professional card of its era. In contrast, the RX 6600 XT's average score of 24,442 is misleadingly lower than the FirePro's, but this is because the RX 6600 XT's benchmark suite includes more demanding tests like 3DMark Steel Nomad (1,804) and Passmark G3D (16,461), which pull the average down. The RX 6600 XT's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (24,170) and the Intel Arc A350M (24,647), placing it among much more powerful consumer cards.

When isolating the two head-to-head tests, the RX 6600 XT wins both, giving it a 2-0 record. The FirePro W7100 has zero wins in this comparison. The delta percentages are stark: a 70% deficit in OpenCL and a 62% deficit in Vulkan. These are not close calls; the RX 6600 XT is roughly three times faster in OpenCL and over 2.5 times faster in Vulkan. For any workload that leverages these APIs, the RX 6600 XT is the only rational choice from a pure performance standpoint.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are separated by two full architecture generations and a major process node shrink. The FirePro W7100 uses the Tonga chip built on GCN 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm TSMC process. This is an older design with 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.7 million per mm². The RX 6600 XT uses the Navi 23 chip on RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 7 nm TSMC process. This newer process allows 11,060 million transistors on a much smaller 237 mm² die, achieving a density of 46.7 million per mm²—over three times the transistor density of the FirePro.

The memory subsystems also differ fundamentally. The FirePro W7100 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6600 XT also has 8 GB, but it is GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s—a 60% increase in bandwidth despite half the bus width. This is possible due to the much higher memory clock: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Compute resources are also heavily skewed toward the RX 6600 XT. The FirePro W7100 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 6600 XT has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs—double the render output units. The RX 6600 XT also features 32 dedicated ray tracing cores, which the FirePro W7100 entirely lacks. The FP32 throughput tells the story: 10.60 TFLOPS for the RX 6600 XT versus 3.297 TFLOPS for the FirePro, a 3.2x difference. The RX 6600 XT also offers FP16 at 21.21 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the FirePro manages only 3.297 TFLOPS (1:1).

The feature set confirms the generational gap. The RX 6600 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the FirePro W7100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). The RX 6600 XT also supports Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170 for the FirePro. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The RX 6600 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the FirePro W7100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs differ: the FirePro W7100 has four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the RX 6600 XT has one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT, with 10.60 TFLOPS FP32 versus the AMD FirePro W7100's 3.297 TFLOPS. This is a 3.2x advantage in the RX 6600 XT's favor.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory capacity?

A: Yes, both have 8 GB, but the RX 6600 XT uses faster GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus (256.0 GB/s), while the FirePro W7100 uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus (160.0 GB/s).

Q: Is the FirePro W7100 better at any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The RX 6600 XT wins both Geekbench OpenCL (80,503 vs 24,182) and Geekbench Vulkan (72,417 vs 27,529). The FirePro W7100 has 0 wins out of 2 shared benchmarks.

Q: What is the key architectural advantage of the RX 6600 XT?

A: It uses RDNA 2.0 on a 7 nm process with 32 ray tracing cores, while the FirePro W7100 uses GCN 3.0 on a 28 nm process with no ray tracing support.

Q: How do their transistor densities compare?

A: The RX 6600 XT has 46.7M transistors per mm², over three times the FirePro W7100's 13.7M per mm², despite having more total transistors (11,060M vs 5,000M) on a smaller die (237 mm² vs 366 mm²).

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The RX 6600 XT, with 165.7 GPixel/s versus the FirePro W7100's 29.44 GPixel/s. The RX 6600 XT also has double the ROPs (64 vs 32).

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro W7100 | AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 5,000 million | 11,060 million |

| Die Size | 366 mm² | 237 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.7M / mm² | 46.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 1968 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 2589 MHz |

| Game Clock | Not listed | 2359 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 112 | 128 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 29.44 GPixel/s | 165.7 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 103.0 GTexel/s | 331.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.297 TFLOPS | 10.60 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 3.297 TFLOPS (1:1) | 21.21 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 160 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions (LxHxW) | 241x111 mm, single-slot | 190x110x40 mm |

| Release Date | 2014-08-11 | 2021-07-29 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Terascale | Navi |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Polaris | Navi III |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is the superior performer in every measurable shared benchmark. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 80,503 is 233% higher than the FirePro W7100's 24,182, and its Vulkan score of 72,417 is 163% higher than 27,529. The RX 6600 XT's FP32 throughput of 10.60 TFLOPS versus 3.297 TFLOPS, its 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 160.0 GB/s, and its 165.7 GPixel/s pixel rate versus 29.44 GPixel/s all reinforce this conclusion.

The FirePro W7100's only advantage is its higher percentile ranking (71st vs 70th), which is a statistical quirk of the different benchmark suites. Its average benchmark score of 25,856 is actually higher than the RX 6600 XT's 24,442, but this is because the RX 6600 XT is tested against much harder workloads like 3DMark Steel Nomad (1,804) and Passmark G3D (16,461). When placed against its nearest rivals, the FirePro W7100 sits near the AMD FirePro D700 (25,842) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25,740), while the RX 6600 XT competes with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (24,170) and the Intel Arc A350M (24,647).

For any user prioritizing raw performance, the RX 6600 XT is the only choice. The FirePro W7100's single-slot design and four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs suggest a legacy multi-display professional use case, but its compute capabilities are simply outdated. The RX 6600 XT's dual-slot form factor, HDMI 2.1 output, and ray tracing support make it more versatile for modern workloads. The RX 6600 XT also has a launch MSRP of 379 USD, which is a relevant data point for its positioning, though the FirePro W7100 has no listed launch MSRP for comparison.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6600 XT wins in every category where direct comparison data exists. In compute benchmarks, it wins Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan outright. In architectural capabilities, it wins on FP32 (10.60 vs 3.297 TFLOPS), FP16 (21.21 vs 3.297 TFLOPS), pixel rate (165.7 vs 29.44 GPixel/s), and texture rate (331.4 vs 103.0 GTexel/s). It also wins on memory bandwidth (256.0 vs 160.0 GB/s) despite a narrower bus, and it uniquely offers ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support.

The FirePro W7100's only "wins" are its single-slot form factor and its four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, which could be advantageous in dense multi-GPU professional configurations where space and display count matter more than raw speed. Its 150 W TDP is also slightly lower than the RX 6600 XT's 160 W, and it uses a 6-pin power connector versus the RX 6600 XT's 8-pin. However, these are physical design choices, not performance advantages.

The FirePro W7100 also holds a higher percentile ranking (71 vs 70), but this is misleading given its lower raw scores. Its nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro D700 and AMD Radeon Pro W5700, indicating it belongs to a professional workstation tier. The RX 6600 XT's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER and GTX 780 Ti, showing it competes with high-end consumer gaming cards from multiple generations.

In practical terms, the RX 6600 XT is the winner for any GPU-accelerated task, from gaming to compute workloads. The FirePro W7100 is only preferable if a system specifically requires its single-slot footprint, four DisplayPort outputs, or legacy GCN 3.0 driver support—none of which offset its 70% and 62% benchmark deficits in the head-to-head tests.