AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 vs AMD Radeon PRO W6600 Comparison

AMD Radeon PRO W6600 and AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 are both end-of-life AMD workstation accelerators, but they target different eras and use cases. The W6600 is a Navi 23-based RDNA 2.0 card from 2021, while the MI25 is a Vega 10-based GCN 5.0 card from 2017. The benchmark data shows the W6600 leads in the only shared test, but the MI25 counters with superior raw compute and memory capacity. This analysis separates the two based strictly on measured performance and architectural specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 scores 73,514 against the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25’s 68,562. That is a 7.2% win for the W6600, a clear but not overwhelming margin. In practical terms, the newer RDNA 2.0 architecture extracts more compute efficiency from its hardware, despite the MI25 having more than double the shading units (4,096 vs. 1,792). The W6600’s advantage here is notable because it achieves this lead with a 100 W TDP versus the MI25’s 300 W TDP — a threefold difference in power draw that does not translate into threefold performance.

Looking at broader standings, the W6600 sits at the 92nd percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 81,995. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X at 80,959 (1.3% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 at 79,842 (2.7% slower), and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB at 79,605 (3% slower). This placement indicates the W6600 punches well above its modest power envelope, outperforming even a flagship consumer card like the RTX 5090 in average score. The MI25, by contrast, sits at the 90th percentile with an average score of 68,562, placing it just below the Intel Arc A770 at 68,809 (0.4% faster) and the NVIDIA CMP 90HX at 69,000 (0.6% faster). The MI25’s nearest rivals are all within 2% of its score, showing it competes in a tight mid-range band.

The W6600 also has additional benchmark data in Geekbench Metal (94,042) and Geekbench Vulkan (78,428), which the MI25 lacks entirely. Those scores reinforce the W6600’s versatility across different compute APIs, while the MI25’s single OpenCL result suggests it was designed for a narrower, compute-focused role. In the head-to-head tally, the W6600 wins the only contested benchmark, giving it a 1-0 record against the MI25.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 is the better overall performer in compute workloads, with a 7.2% OpenCL lead and a higher average benchmark score (81,995 vs. 68,562). It also achieves this with far lower power consumption (100 W vs. 300 W) and a single-slot design, making it the practical choice for most workstation builds where space and thermals matter. The W6600’s 92nd percentile ranking versus the MI25’s 90th percentile further confirms its edge in raw compute throughput.

However, the MI25 is not without merit. It offers 16 GB of HBM2 memory with a 436.2 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the W6600’s 8 GB of GDDR6 at 224.0 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-capacity-bound — such as large dataset processing or certain scientific simulations — the MI25’s double memory size provides a decisive advantage that no compute benchmark here captures. The MI25 also has higher raw FP32 throughput at 12.29 TFLOPS versus the W6600’s 9.247 TFLOPS, and higher FP16 at 24.58 TFLOPS versus 18.49 TFLOPS, suggesting it can sustain heavier math loads even if its OpenCL score lags.

Choose the W6600 if you need a balanced, efficient card with display outputs and modern API support. Choose the MI25 if your priority is maximum memory capacity and raw FP32/FP16 throughput, and you can tolerate a 300 W dual-slot card with no display outputs. The MI25’s launch MSRP is not listed, so no pricing comparison is possible from the data.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 wins in compute efficiency and API compatibility. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 73,514 beats the MI25 by 7.2%, and its Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support outpaces the MI25’s Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1). The W6600 also has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it suitable for multi-monitor visualization or desktop workstation use. Its smaller die size (237 mm² vs. 495 mm²) and lower transistor density (46.7M/mm² vs. 25.3M/mm²) reflect a more modern 7 nm process, which contributes to its 100 W power draw — a third of the MI25’s 300 W requirement.

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 wins in memory capacity and raw throughput. Its 16 GB HBM2 memory with a 2048-bit bus offers 436.2 GB/s bandwidth, nearly double the W6600’s 224.0 GB/s. The MI25’s 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 are 33% and 33% higher than the W6600’s respective figures, indicating stronger peak compute for dense math. The MI25 also has more shading units (4,096 vs. 1,792), more TMUs (256 vs. 112), and a higher texture rate (384.0 GTexel/s vs. 289.0 GTexel/s), making it better suited for texture-heavy or parallel compute tasks that can utilize its wider architecture.

The MI25’s PCIe 3.0 x16 interface versus the W6600’s PCIe 4.0 x8 is a mixed trade-off: the MI25 has more lanes but older protocol, while the W6600 has fewer lanes but double the per-lane bandwidth. For memory-bound workloads, the MI25’s HBM2 advantage is decisive; for latency-sensitive or API-diverse workloads, the W6600’s newer architecture wins.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 has an average benchmark score of 81,995, which is significantly higher than the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25’s 68,562.

Q: How much faster is the W6600 in OpenCL?

A: The W6600 scores 73,514 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the MI25’s 68,562, a 7.2% advantage.

Q: Does the MI25 have more memory bandwidth?

A: Yes, the MI25 offers 436.2 GB/s bandwidth from its 16 GB HBM2 memory with a 2048-bit bus, compared to the W6600’s 224.0 GB/s from 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Can the MI25 output to displays?

A: No, the MI25 has no display outputs, while the W6600 has four DisplayPort 1.4a connectors.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute?

A: The MI25 has 12.29 TFLOPS FP32, which is higher than the W6600’s 9.247 TFLOPS.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The W6600 has a 100 W TDP with a single 6-pin connector and a suggested 300 W PSU, while the MI25 has a 300 W TDP with dual 8-pin connectors and a suggested 700 W PSU.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 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 AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries with 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die. The transistor density difference is stark: 46.7 million transistors per mm² for the W6600 versus 25.3 million per mm² for the MI25, reflecting the process node gap.

The W6600 features 28 ray tracing cores, which the MI25 lacks entirely — a key feature for modern rendering workloads. The W6600 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI25 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6. The MI25’s GCN architecture is compute-oriented with 4,096 shading units and 256 TMUs, but it has no hardware ray tracing and no tensor cores; the W6600 also has no tensor cores but compensates with RT cores and a higher clock speed (2331 MHz base, 2580 MHz boost vs. 1400 MHz base, 1500 MHz boost).

The W6600’s memory is GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus, while the MI25 uses HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus, explaining the bandwidth disparity. The MI25’s larger die and older process contribute to its 300 W TDP, while the W6600’s efficient RDNA 2.0 design achieves its performance at just 100 W.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W6600 | AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 |

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

| Chip | Navi 23 | Vega 10 |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | 12,500 million |

| Die Size | 237 mm² | 495 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 46.7M / mm² | 25.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2331 MHz | 1400 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2580 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 436.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 112 | 256 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 28 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 165.1 GPixel/s | 96.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 289.0 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 9.247 TFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 18.49 TFLOPS (2:1) | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 100 W | 300 W |

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

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 700 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Length | 241 mm (9.5 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Height | Not specified | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2021-06-07 | 2017-06-26 |

| Launch MSRP | 649 USD | Not specified |

The W6600 is dramatically more power-efficient, offering higher clock speeds and modern API support in a smaller, single-slot form factor. The MI25 counters with double the memory, wider memory bus, and higher raw compute throughput, but demands over triple the power and occupies dual slots with no display capability. The ROP count is identical at 64, but the MI25’s higher texture rate (384.0 GTexel/s) versus the W6600’s 289.0 GTexel/s shows its advantage in texture-heavy operations. The W6600’s pixel rate is higher (165.1 GPixel/s vs. 96.00 GPixel/s), indicating better fill-rate performance for rasterization tasks.