AMD FirePro W7100 vs AMD Radeon RX 6600M Comparison

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6600M is the superior performer across every benchmark where both cards were measured. It wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 67,765 against 24,182 for the FirePro W7100, a 64.3% lead. It also wins Geekbench Vulkan with 73,740 versus 27,529, a 62.7% advantage. If you need raw compute and modern API support, the RX 6600M is the only rational choice.

However, the FirePro W7100 is not without a niche. Its 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus gives it a memory bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s, and its 32 ROPs and 112 TMUs are identical to the RX 6600M in TMU count. The W7100 also carries a 1x 6-pin power connector and a single-slot design, making it a fit for older workstations that lack the newer power delivery standards. But its 28 nm Tonga chip, GCN 3.0 architecture, and 2014 release date put it at a severe disadvantage in raw throughput.

For anyone building or upgrading a system today, the RX 6600M is the pick. It delivers more than double the FP32 compute (8.659 TFLOPS versus 3.297 TFLOPS), nearly double the pixel rate (154.6 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s), and a significantly higher texture rate (270.6 GTexel/s versus 103.0 GTexel/s). The FirePro W7100 should only be considered if you are constrained by legacy PCIe 3.0 slots and need a drop-in replacement for an old workstation, but even then, the performance gap is too large to recommend it for any compute-heavy workload.

Architecture Differences

The FirePro W7100 is built on the Tonga chip using GCN 3.0, a 28 nm process from TSMC. The die measures 366 mm² and houses 5,000 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 13.7M per mm². It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Its memory subsystem uses GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 8 GB capacity, running at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), yielding 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The card has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its FP16 and FP32 rates are equal at 3.297 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The card is a single-slot, 241 mm long, with four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and a 150 W TDP.

The Radeon RX 6600M uses the Navi 23 chip on RDNA 2.0, fabricated on a 7 nm process from TSMC. The die is smaller at 237 mm² but packs 11,060 million transistors, resulting in 46.7M per mm², a density more than three times higher. It has a base clock of 2068 MHz, a game clock of 2177 MHz, and a boost clock of 2416 MHz. Memory is GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 8 GB capacity running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), producing 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6600M also has 1792 shading units and 112 TMUs, but doubles the ROP count to 64. It includes 28 ray tracing cores. Its FP32 output is 8.659 TFLOPS, while FP16 reaches 17.32 TFLOPS, a 2:1 ratio. The chip supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The mobile part is an IGP with no power connectors, a 100 W TDP, and its display outputs are portable device dependent. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8.

The key architectural split is node and feature set. The 7 nm process allows the RX 6600M to nearly triple the transistor density while drawing 50 W less power. The RDNA 2.0 architecture also brings ray tracing and a higher API level, plus a much larger FP16 throughput, which matters for workloads that can use packed math. The FirePro W7100 has no ray tracing capability and its FP16 is identical to FP32, making it less efficient for mixed-precision tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better raw compute performance?

A: The RX 6600M is substantially ahead. It scores 67,765 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 24,182 for the W7100, a 64.3% delta. Its FP32 output is 8.659 TFLOPS compared to 3.297 TFLOPS.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory capacity?

A: Yes, both have 8 GB. However, the W7100 uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s, while the RX 6600M uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s. The latter has higher bandwidth despite the narrower bus.

Q: What are the API differences?

A: The W7100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 6600M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, plus it has 28 ray tracing cores.

Q: Which card is more power efficient?

A: The RX 6600M has a 100 W TDP versus 150 W for the W7100, despite delivering more than double the FP32 compute. The 7 nm process is a major factor.

Q: Can the FirePro W7100 be used in a modern system?

A: It can, but it is end-of-life. It uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and a 1x 6-pin power connector. Its 241 mm length and single-slot design fit many chassis, but its performance is far below the RX 6600M in every measured benchmark.

Q: What is the RX 6600M's form factor?

A: It is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors. It is designed for portable devices, and its display outputs are dependent on the host system.

Specification Differences

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

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

| Chip | Tonga | Navi 23 |

| 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 specified | 2068 MHz |

| Game Clock | Not specified | 2177 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not specified | 2416 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz, 5 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| RT Cores | None | 28 |

| Pixel Rate | 29.44 GPixel/s | 154.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 103.0 GTexel/s | 270.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.297 TFLOPS | 8.659 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.297 TFLOPS (1:1) | 17.32 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 100 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | Not specified |

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

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2014-08-11 | 2021-05-30 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two benchmarks that directly compare both cards are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The RX 6600M wins both decisively.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6600M scores 67,765, while the W7100 scores 24,182. The delta is 64.3% in favor of the RX 6600M. This is a massive gap, reflecting the difference in compute architecture and clock speeds. The W7100's 3.297 TFLOPS FP32 is simply outmatched by the RX 6600M's 8.659 TFLOPS, and the newer RDNA 2.0 design extracts far more performance per clock.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6600M scores 73,740, versus 27,529 for the W7100. The delta is 62.7% in favor of the RX 6600M. Vulkan is a low-overhead API, so the gap here is more indicative of raw hardware capability. The RX 6600M's higher memory bandwidth (224.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s), higher texture rate (270.6 GTexel/s versus 103.0 GTexel/s), and doubled ROP count (64 versus 32) all contribute to this result.

The W7100 does not win a single benchmark in the head-to-head set. Its only competitive aspects are the equal TMU count (112 on both) and the identical shading unit count (1792 on both). But the clocks and architecture differences overwhelm those similarities. The RX 6600M's boost clock of 2416 MHz is far above the W7100's unspecified but clearly lower clock, and the 7 nm process allows for much higher efficiency.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6600M wins everywhere that matters for modern workloads. It dominates compute benchmarks, with a 64.3% lead in OpenCL and a 62.7% lead in Vulkan. Its FP32 output is 2.6 times higher, and its FP16 output is over five times higher. For any task that relies on general-purpose GPU compute, from rendering to machine learning inference, the RX 6600M is the clear choice. It also has ray tracing capability via its 28 RT cores, which the W7100 lacks entirely. The higher pixel rate (154.6 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s) and texture rate (270.6 GTexel/s versus 103.0 GTexel/s) mean it will also handle rasterization and shading tasks much faster. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface provides more bandwidth per lane than the W7100's PCIe 3.0 x16, and its GDDR6 memory delivers 224.0 GB/s despite a narrower bus.

The FirePro W7100 has no benchmark wins, but it retains some hardware characteristics that may matter in specific legacy contexts. Its 256-bit memory bus and 8 GB of GDDR5 provide a wide path, even if the total bandwidth is lower. Its single-slot design and 1x 6-pin power connector make it easier to install in older workstation chassis that lack newer power connectors. Its four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs allow multi-monitor setups without adapter dependencies. And its 150 W TDP is lower than the suggested 450 W PSU requirement, so it will run on modest power supplies. However, these are practical, not performance, advantages. For any measurable compute or graphics workload, the RX 6600M is ahead by a wide margin, and the data confirms that the W7100 is best left to specialized, outdated environments.