AMD Radeon 660M vs AMD Radeon PRO W7500 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records two shared tests for these GPUs, and in both, the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 delivers a decisive victory. The largest margin appears in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the PRO W7500 scores 68,634 against the Radeon 660M's 14,748, a delta of 365.4%. This is more than a fourfold advantage in raw API performance, suggesting the discrete card's rendering pipeline handles Vulkan workloads with substantially greater throughput.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the PRO W7500 posts 58,213 points, while the 660M manages 12,876, a delta of 352.1%. While slightly smaller in relative terms than the Vulkan gap, this still represents a massive compute advantage for the discrete solution. The consistency across both APIs indicates the performance difference is not workload-specific but rather a fundamental throughput gap.

Looking at the broader database context, the PRO W7500's average benchmark score sits at 16,415, placing it at the 59th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell at 16,408 (a 0% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT at 16,361 (0.3% slower), and the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M at 16,351 (0.4% slower). The PRO W7500 also edges out the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2, which scores 16,504, meaning the PRO W7500 trails that part by 0.5%. These tightly clustered scores indicate the PRO W7500 sits in a competitive mid-range segment where small margins separate adjacent products.

The Radeon 660M, by contrast, averages 13,812 points, placing it at the 55th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile at 13,821 (0.1% faster), the AMD Radeon RX 570X at 13,871 (0.4% faster), and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT at 13,745 (0.5% slower). The NVIDIA Tesla K10 scores 14,029, which is 1.5% higher than the 660M. The delta between the two AMD parts in average score is 2,603 points, or roughly 18.8% in favor of the PRO W7500, though this comparison should be tempered by the fact that the 660M only has two recorded benchmarks while the PRO W7500 has nine.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear hierarchy: the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is the superior performer in every measured category. It wins both head-to-head tests, and its average benchmark score of 16,415 versus 13,812 for the 660M confirms a substantial overall advantage. Any user prioritizing compute throughput, graphics rendering, or API-level performance should select the PRO W7500 without hesitation.

However, the 660M is not without its place. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 40 W TDP, while the PRO W7500 is a single-slot discrete card with a 70 W TDP. The 660M requires no power connectors, no additional cooling solution beyond what the laptop chassis provides, and its dimensions are listed as portable-device dependent. For systems where space, power delivery, and thermal headroom are constrained, the 660M represents the only viable option of the two, despite its lower performance.

The PRO W7500 is actively in production, while the 660M is marked as end-of-life. This production status difference matters for long-term availability and driver support considerations. The PRO W7500 also carries a launch MSRP of 429 USD, whereas the 660M has no recorded launch price, reflecting its role as an integrated component rather than a standalone retail product.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD's RDNA architecture. The PRO W7500 uses RDNA 3.0 on the Navi 33 chip, with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish," while the 660M uses RDNA 2.0 on the Rembrandt chip. Both are manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, and their transistor counts are nearly identical: 13,300 million for the PRO W7500 and 13,100 million for the 660M. Die sizes are also close, with the PRO W7500 at 204 mm² and the 660M at 208 mm², yielding transistor densities of 65.2 million per mm² and 63.0 million per mm² respectively.

The core configurations differ dramatically. The PRO W7500 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 raster output units, and 28 ray tracing cores. The 660M has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. This means the PRO W7500 has roughly 4.7 times the shading units, 4.7 times the TMUs, 4 times the ROPs, and 4.7 times the ray tracing cores of the 660M.

Clock speeds tell a different story. Both have a base clock of 1500 MHz, but the 660M boosts higher at 1900 MHz versus 1700 MHz for the PRO W7500. Despite the higher boost clock, the 660M's far smaller core configuration cannot overcome the PRO W7500's resource advantage. The PRO W7500 achieves a pixel rate of 108.8 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 190.4 GTexel/s, while the 660M manages 30.40 GPixel/s and 45.60 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The PRO W7500 has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 660M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. This means the 660M's memory performance is entirely contingent on the host system's RAM configuration, whereas the PRO W7500 has predictable, dedicated bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 660M boosts to 1900 MHz, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 boosts to 1700 MHz.

Q: How much faster is the PRO W7500 in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The PRO W7500 scores 68,634 versus 14,748 for the 660M, a delta of 365.4%.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX and Vulkan versions?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The PRO W7500 has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 660M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Are both GPUs currently in production?

A: No. The PRO W7500 is listed as active, while the 660M is marked as end-of-life.

Q: What is the transistor count for each chip?

A: The PRO W7500 has 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, while the 660M has 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 wins in every recorded benchmark category. It dominates in Geekbench OpenCL with a 352.1% lead and in Geekbench Vulkan with a 365.4% lead. Its average benchmark score of 16,415 exceeds the 660M's 13,812 by a substantial margin. The PRO W7500 also offers dedicated memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s, which is critical for workloads that repeatedly access large datasets, such as professional rendering, video editing, or compute acceleration. Its 8 GB VRAM capacity allows for larger working sets without spilling into system memory.

The PRO W7500's pixel rate of 108.8 GPixel/s and texture rate of 190.4 GTexel/s make it suitable for high-resolution rendering and texture-heavy scenes. Its 28 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects, while the 660M's 6 ray tracing cores offer only a fraction of that capability.

The Radeon 660M's advantages are not in performance but in integration. It is an IGP with a 40 W TDP, no power connectors, and no slot width requirement. It operates entirely within a portable device's existing thermal and power envelope. For thin-and-light laptops or systems where a discrete card cannot physically fit, the 660M is the only choice between these two. Its higher boost clock of 1900 MHz may also slightly improve single-threaded, lightly-utilized scenarios, though the database does not record any benchmark where this translates into a win.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The PRO W7500 uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the 660M uses Rembrandt with RDNA 2.0. The process node is identical at 6 nm TSMC, but transistor counts differ slightly: 13,300 million versus 13,100 million. Die sizes are 204 mm² and 208 mm² respectively, with transistor densities of 65.2 million per mm² and 63.0 million per mm².

Core counts show the largest gaps. The PRO W7500 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores. The 660M has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 RT cores. Base clocks match at 1500 MHz, but boost clocks differ: 1700 MHz for the PRO W7500 and 1900 MHz for the 660M.

Memory configurations are entirely different. The PRO W7500 features 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 660M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. Pixel rates are 108.8 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 190.4 GTexel/s versus 45.60 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 12.19 TFLOPS for the PRO W7500 versus 1,459.2 GFLOPS for the 660M. FP16 performance is 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 2.918 TFLOPS (2:1).

TDP ratings are 70 W for the PRO W7500 and 40 W for the 660M. The PRO W7500 is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the 660M is an IGP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8 interfaces. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 2.1 on the PRO W7500 versus portable-device dependent on the 660M. The PRO W7500 measures 216 mm in length, 115 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, while the 660M has no recorded dimensions. Production status differs, with the PRO W7500 active and the 660M end-of-life. Release dates are August 2, 2023 for the PRO W7500 and January 3, 2022 for the 660M. The PRO W7500 lists a launch MSRP of 429 USD, while the 660M has none.