AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 vs AMD Radeon Pro W6600X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains a single recorded score for each of these cards, and they were measured under different test suites. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600X returns a Geekbench Metal score of 107,342, placing it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs tracked. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 returns a Geekbench OpenCL score of 68,562, placing it in the 90th percentile. Because the tests differ, direct numeric comparison is not apples-to-apples, but the percentile standings give context: the W6600X sits above the MI25 in overall ranking among all GPUs.

Looking at the W6600X against its nearest rivals in the database, it edges out the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo by 0.6% (106,750 vs 107,342). It trails the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II by 2.1% (109,617) and the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 by 3.1% (110,725). Against the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000, the W6600X leads by 5.4% (101,872). These are tight margins, indicating the W6600X sits in a competitive band near the top of the professional GPU stack.

For the MI25, its nearest rivals cluster closely. The Intel Arc A770 scores 68,809, just 0.4% higher. The NVIDIA CMP 90HX scores 69,000, 0.6% higher. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 scores 69,870, 1.9% higher, and the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 scores 69,986, 2.0% higher. The MI25 is therefore at the bottom of its immediate peer group, though the deltas are small, all within 2 percentage points.

The data shows no head-to-head benchmark entries between the two cards, and neither card records a win in direct comparison. The practical takeaway: the W6600X is a newer, higher-percentile part, while the MI25 is an older accelerator that still holds near-90th-percentile standing but is outclassed in raw ranking by the W6600X.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6600X sits in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 sits in the 90th percentile.

Q: How does the W6600X compare to the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000?

A: The W6600X scores 107,342 in Geekbench Metal, which is 5.4% higher than the Quadro RTX 6000's 101,872.

Q: What is the closest rival to the MI25 in the database?

A: The Intel Arc A770 is closest, with a score of 68,809, which is 0.4% higher than the MI25's 68,562.

Q: Do these cards have display outputs?

A: Neither card has display outputs. Both are compute-oriented accelerators.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The W6600X has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI25 has 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 436.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card requires a more powerful power supply?

A: The MI25 lists a suggested PSU of 700 W, while the W6600X lists a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations. The W6600X uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0, fabricated on a 7 nm process by TSMC. The MI25 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0, fabricated on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. The process node difference is substantial: 7 nm versus 14 nm, which explains the transistor density gap. The W6600X packs 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die, yielding a density of 46.7 million transistors per square millimeter. The MI25 has 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, yielding only 25.3 million per square millimeter.

The compute architectures diverge sharply. RDNA 2.0 is a modern gaming-derived architecture with dedicated ray tracing hardware. The W6600X includes 32 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the MI25, which has no RT cores and no tensor cores. The W6600X also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the MI25 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Vulkan support differs as well: the W6600X reports Vulkan 1.4, the MI25 reports Vulkan 1.3. OpenGL is identical at 4.6.

The MI25 belongs to the GCN 5.0 lineage, a compute-first design oriented toward data center workloads. Its Vega 10 chip uses a wide 2048-bit memory bus to feed its 4096 shading units. The W6600X, by contrast, uses a narrower 128-bit bus but compensates with faster GDDR6 memory and a higher clock speed. The W6600X has 2048 shading units, half the MI25's count, but runs at a much higher boost clock. These architectural choices reflect different design goals: the W6600X targets efficiency and modern feature support, the MI25 targets raw throughput and memory capacity for acceleration tasks.

Specification Differences

The W6600X and MI25 differ in nearly every measurable specification. The W6600X has a base clock of 2068 MHz and a boost clock of 2479 MHz, while the MI25 runs at 1400 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. Memory speed also differs: the W6600X uses 2000 MHz GDDR6 with 16 Gbps effective bandwidth, while the MI25 uses 852 MHz HBM2 with 1704 Mbps effective. Memory capacity favors the MI25 at 16 GB versus 8 GB, and bandwidth favors it too at 436.2 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s.

Shading units: 2048 on the W6600X, 4096 on the MI25. Texture mapping units: 128 versus 256. Raster output units are equal at 64. Pixel rate favors the W6600X at 158.7 GPixel/s versus 96.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate favors the MI25 at 384.0 GTexel/s versus 317.3 GTexel/s. FP32 compute favors the MI25 at 12.29 TFLOPS versus 10.15 TFLOPS. FP16 compute also favors the MI25 at 24.58 TFLOPS versus 20.31 TFLOPS, both at 2:1 ratio.

Power draw differs significantly: the W6600X has a TDP of 120 W, the MI25 has a TDP of 300 W. The MI25 requires 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 700 W suggested PSU, while the W6600X lists no power connectors and a 300 W suggested PSU. The bus interface also differs: the W6600X uses Apple MPX, the MI25 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Physical dimensions are only recorded for the MI25: 267 mm length, 111 mm height. Both are dual-slot cards, and both lack display outputs.

The MI25 has a longer history: released June 2017, with a predecessor listed as FirePro Data Center. The W6600X released August 2021 with no predecessor listed. Both are end-of-life products. The W6600X has a launch MSRP of 699 USD; the MI25 has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload priorities. The W6600X is the better choice for modern graphics and rendering tasks. It carries RDNA 2.0 architecture with ray tracing cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, Vulkan 1.4, and a higher pixel rate. Its 94th percentile standing and 5.4% lead over the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 show it competes with top-tier professional cards. Its lower TDP of 120 W and 300 W suggested PSU make it far easier to integrate into a workstation.

The MI25 is the better choice for memory-bound compute workloads. It offers 16 GB of HBM2 with 436.2 GB/s bandwidth, double the capacity and 70% more bandwidth than the W6600X. Its FP32 and FP16 throughput are higher: 12.29 TFLOPS versus 10.15 TFLOPS, and 24.58 TFLOPS versus 20.31 TFLOPS. Its 4096 shading units and 256 texture mapping units give it raw parallel throughput that the W6600X cannot match. However, it lacks ray tracing, supports only DirectX 12 (12_1), and requires a 700 W PSU.

The verdict depends on the application. For graphics, rendering, and any workload that benefits from modern API features, the W6600X wins on architecture and efficiency. For large datasets, high-bandwidth memory access, and raw FP32/FP16 compute, the MI25 wins on capacity and throughput.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon Pro W6600X wins in:

• Overall GPU ranking: 94th percentile versus 90th.
• Modern graphics API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4.
• Ray tracing: 32 dedicated RT cores, absent on the MI25.
• Pixel throughput: 158.7 GPixel/s versus 96.00 GPixel/s.
• Power efficiency: 120 W TDP versus 300 W, with a 300 W suggested PSU versus 700 W.
• Clock speeds: 2479 MHz boost versus 1500 MHz boost.
• Competitive standing: 5.4% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000.

AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 wins in:

• Memory capacity: 16 GB versus 8 GB.
• Memory bandwidth: 436.2 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s.
• FP32 compute: 12.29 TFLOPS versus 10.15 TFLOPS.
• FP16 compute: 24.58 TFLOPS versus 20.31 TFLOPS.
• Shading units: 4096 versus 2048.
• Texture mapping units: 256 versus 128.
• Texture rate: 384.0 GTexel/s versus 317.3 GTexel/s.
• Bus width: 2048-bit versus 128-bit.

The W6600X is the card for anyone building a Mac workstation (Apple MPX interface) with modern rendering needs. The MI25 is the card for server-style compute deployments where memory capacity and raw FP throughput matter more than API features or power draw. Both are end-of-life, so availability is a secondary concern, but the recorded data gives a clear functional split.