AMD Radeon 780M vs AMD Radeon RX 6600 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 and the AMD Radeon 780M represent two fundamentally different approaches to graphics processing, yet benchmark results show a surprisingly narrow gap in overall standing. The RX 6600 is a dedicated add-in board from the Radeon RX 6000 series, built on the Navi 23 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, while the 780M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) from the Phoenix chip, using the newer RDNA 3.0 architecture. The data reveals a decisive victory for the dedicated card in every head-to-head test, but the integrated solution’s proximity in overall percentile ranking tells a compelling story about modern iGPU capabilities. The RX 6600 holds a 63rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the 780M sits just two points lower at the 61st percentile, despite the former having been released in late 2021 and the latter in early 2024.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result comes from the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where the RX 6600 scores 1492 against the 780M’s 480. This represents a 210.8% advantage for the dedicated card — more than triple the performance. This test is particularly demanding on modern DirectX 12 features, and the gulf here underscores how a discrete GPU with dedicated memory and higher power delivery can dominate in sustained, geometry-heavy workloads. The 780M’s score of 480 places it in a different performance tier entirely for this specific benchmark, indicating that while it can run the workload, it does so at a fraction of the speed.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6600 posts 67623 compared to the 780M’s 33683, a 100.8% lead — exactly double the performance. Vulkan is known for its low overhead and multi-threaded scaling, and the RX 6600’s 1792 shading units versus the 780M’s 768 clearly pays dividends here. The delta of 100.8% suggests that in API-level compute and rendering tasks, the dedicated card offers roughly twice the throughput, which aligns closely with the raw shading unit and texture mapping unit counts. The 780M’s result of 33683 is still respectable for an integrated part, but it cannot bridge the architectural and resource gap.

The narrowest margin comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 6600 scores 28850 against the 780M’s 18602, a 55.1% advantage. OpenCL is often more sensitive to memory bandwidth and driver optimization than raw compute, and here the RX 6600’s dedicated 224.0 GB/s bandwidth versus the 780M’s system-shared memory configuration becomes a significant factor. The 780M’s performance is closer to the RX 6600 in this test than in any other, suggesting that when the workload fits within the iGPU’s capabilities and doesn’t saturate memory access, it can compete more effectively. Overall, the data shows the RX 6600 winning all three head-to-head benchmarks, with deltas ranging from 55.1% to 210.8%, confirming its dominance across different API types and workload characteristics.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark. The RX 6600 uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC with 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die. The 780M uses the Phoenix chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC with 25,390 million transistors on a smaller 178 mm² die. This means the 780M packs more than twice the transistors into a smaller area, achieving a transistor density of 142.6M per mm² versus the RX 6600’s 46.7M per mm². The newer process node and denser design allow the 780M to deliver competitive compute performance at a fraction of the power — its TDP is 15 W versus the RX 6600’s 132 W.

The RX 6600 features 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines, while the 780M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite having fewer than half the shading units, the 780M’s FP32 compute is 8.909 TFLOPS, nearly matching the RX 6600’s 8.928 TFLOPS. This is a remarkable efficiency achievement, driven by the RDNA 3.0 architecture’s improvements in instruction-level parallelism and clock speeds. The 780M boosts to 2900 MHz compared to the RX 6600’s 2491 MHz boost clock, partially compensating for the reduced core count. However, the RX 6600’s pixel rate of 159.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 279.0 GTexel/s dwarf the 780M’s 92.80 GPixel/s and 139.2 GTexel/s, respectively.

Ray tracing capabilities differ as well, with the RX 6600 having 28 ray tracing cores versus the 780M’s 12. The RX 6600 also supports FP16 at 17.86 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the 780M runs FP16 at 8.909 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it doesn’t get the throughput boost for half-precision workloads. Memory architecture is fundamentally different: the RX 6600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the 780M relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and both use a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The RX 6600 is a dual-slot card requiring a 300 W PSU and 1x 8-pin connector, while the 780M is an IGP with no power connectors and motherboard-dependent display outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600 has an average benchmark score of 19036, while the AMD Radeon 780M scores 17588, giving the RX 6600 an 8.2% advantage in overall average performance.

Q: How do the two compare in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12?

A: The RX 6600 scores 1492, which is 210.8% higher than the 780M’s 480. This is the largest performance gap in any shared benchmark test.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The RX 6600 is built on a 7 nm process, while the 780M uses a 4 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC, but the 4 nm node allows the 780M to achieve a much higher transistor density.

Q: Do both support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making them equally capable in terms of modern API feature support.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RX 6600 has a TDP of 132 W and requires a 300 W power supply, while the 780M has a TDP of just 15 W and requires no additional power connectors, reflecting its integrated nature.

Q: How does the 780M’s memory configuration affect performance?

A: The 780M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," whereas the RX 6600 has dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. This dedicated memory gives the RX 6600 a significant advantage in memory-intensive workloads.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The RX 6600 uses the Navi 23 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, while the 780M uses Phoenix with RDNA 3.0. The process node is 7 nm for the RX 6600 versus 4 nm for the 780M. Transistor counts differ dramatically: 11,060 million for the RX 6600 versus 25,390 million for the 780M, with die sizes of 237 mm² and 178 mm² respectively. Transistor density is 46.7M per mm² for the RX 6600 and 142.6M per mm² for the 780M.

Clock speeds are notably different: the RX 6600 has a base clock of 1626 MHz, boost of 2491 MHz, and a game clock of 2044 MHz, while the 780M has a base of 800 MHz and boost of 2900 MHz, with no game clock specified. Memory configurations are entirely different — the RX 6600 has 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the 780M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The RX 6600 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores, versus the 780M’s 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 RT cores.

Pixel rate and texture rate are substantially higher on the RX 6600: 159.4 GPixel/s and 279.0 GTexel/s versus 92.80 GPixel/s and 139.2 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is nearly identical at 8.928 TFLOPS for the RX 6600 and 8.909 TFLOPS for the 780M, but FP16 differs: the RX 6600 delivers 17.86 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the 780M delivers 8.909 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. TDP is 132 W for the RX 6600 versus 15 W for the 780M. The RX 6600 is dual-slot with a 1x 8-pin connector and requires a 300 W PSU, while the 780M is an IGP with no connectors. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 6600, while the 780M is motherboard-dependent. The RX 6600 measures 190 mm x 110 mm x 40 mm, while the 780M has no dimensions listed. Production status: the RX 6600 is end-of-life, the 780M is active. Release dates are October 2021 for the RX 6600 and January 2024 for the 780M. The RX 6600 had a launch MSRP of 329 USD; the 780M has no launch MSRP listed.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Radeon RX 6600 for users who prioritize raw performance and have the power budget and physical space for a dedicated graphics card. It wins all three head-to-head benchmarks with margins from 55.1% to 210.8%, and its average benchmark score of 19036 places it in the 63rd percentile, slightly above the 780M’s 61st percentile. The RX 6600’s dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth is a decisive advantage over the 780M’s system-shared memory, particularly in scenarios that hammer memory bandwidth. Its higher pixel and texture rates, plus double the RT cores, make it the stronger choice for high-resolution gaming, ray tracing workloads, and any application sensitive to fill-rate or rasterization throughput. The RX 6600 is the pick for desktop builders who can accommodate a 132 W dual-slot card with a 300 W PSU.

The AMD Radeon 780M, however, is the compelling option for compact or low-power systems where a discrete GPU is impossible or impractical. Its 15 W TDP, lack of power connectors, and IGP form factor make it suitable for thin laptops or mini PCs. Despite having fewer than half the shading units of the RX 6600, the 780M achieves nearly identical FP32 compute at 8.909 TFLOPS versus 8.928 TFLOPS, thanks to its 2900 MHz boost clock and RDNA 3.0 efficiency. Its 63rd percentile ranking is only two points below the RX 6600, and its average score of 17588 is within 7.6% of the dedicated card’s 19036. For users who need light gaming, media playback, or general compute acceleration in an integrated package, the 780M delivers surprising performance per watt. The trade-off is clear: the RX 6600 wins on absolute performance and memory bandwidth, while the 780M wins on efficiency, density, and integration. Choose the RX 6600 for maximum frame rates and feature headroom; choose the 780M for a zero-footprint solution that gets surprisingly close in compute throughput.