AMD Radeon Pro 460 vs AMD Radeon RX 6600 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data in our database presents a decisive picture: the AMD Radeon RX 6600 wins every single head-to-head comparison against the AMD Radeon Pro 460. The recorded results show a 3 to 0 sweep, with the RX 6600 dominating across all three shared tests. The most dramatic gap appears in Geekbench Metal, where the RX 6600 scores 88398 against the Pro 460's 20426, a delta of 332.8% in favor of the newer card. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational leap that reshapes what users can expect from each product.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6600 again asserts its superiority with a score of 67623 compared to 20426 for the Pro 460, translating to a 302.1% advantage. The Vulkan API is increasingly relevant for modern game engines and compute workloads, so this margin indicates that the RX 6600 is not only faster in raw rasterization but also better optimized for contemporary graphics interfaces. The Pro 460's score of 16816 in this test places it far behind, confirming that its GCN 4.0 architecture lacks the efficiency and feature set required to compete at the same level.

The smallest, though still overwhelming, delta appears in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 6600 scores 28850 against the Pro 460's 15284, a difference of 88.8%. This test measures general-purpose compute performance, and while the margin is narrower than in the graphics-focused tests, it still represents a substantial advantage for the RX 6600. OpenCL workloads, such as video encoding, physics simulations, and certain scientific computations, will run significantly faster on the newer card.

Looking at the broader context, the RX 6600's average benchmark score of 19036 places it in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs in our database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 with an average score of 19030 (a delta of 0%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile at 19049 (delta -0.1%), and the NVIDIA Tesla K20m at 19089 (delta -0.3%). These comparisons show that the RX 6600 sits in a competitive mid-range tier, trading blows with professional and mobile offerings from NVIDIA. The Pro 460, by contrast, has an average score of 17509, which lands it in the 61st percentile. Its closest competitors are the NVIDIA Tesla K40c at 17468 (delta 0.2%), the AMD Radeon Pro 560 at 17551 (delta -0.2%), and the AMD Radeon 780M at 17588 (delta -0.5%). The Pro 460 is effectively in the same performance neighborhood as these older or integrated solutions, but it trails the RX 6600 by a wide margin.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 wins in every measurable category that the database tracks for these two cards. There are no test results where the Pro 460 outperforms the RX 6600, which simplifies the use-case analysis considerably. For any workload that relies on Metal, Vulkan, or OpenCL, the RX 6600 is the superior choice. The Metal score of 88398 is particularly relevant for macOS environments, where Metal is the primary graphics API. Users running professional creative applications, such as video editors, 3D modelers, or compositors that leverage Metal acceleration, will see dramatic performance improvements with the RX 6600.

In Vulkan-based applications, which include many modern PC games and emerging VR titles, the RX 6600's 67623 score provides a smooth and responsive experience. The Pro 460's 16816 score in the same test would struggle with demanding Vulkan titles, likely requiring reduced settings or lower resolutions to maintain playable frame rates. For compute-heavy tasks like machine learning inference, physics calculations, or cryptocurrency mining (though the latter is not recommended), the OpenCL score of 28850 on the RX 6600 offers more than double the throughput of the Pro 460's 15284.

The Pro 460, despite its losses, still finds a niche in specific environments. Its 35 W TDP and integrated form factor (IGP) make it suitable for compact, low-power systems where space and cooling are at a premium. The database records its slot width as IGP, meaning it is designed to be soldered onto a motherboard or integrated into a portable device, with display outputs marked as "Portable Device Dependent." This makes it a viable option for thin-and-light laptops or all-in-one systems where a discrete, replaceable GPU is not feasible. However, for any scenario where raw performance matters, the Pro 460 cannot compete.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6600 is the superior graphics processor in this comparison. It wins all three head-to-head benchmarks with deltas ranging from 88.8% to 332.8%. Users who prioritize gaming, content creation, or any GPU-accelerated workload should select the RX 6600 without hesitation. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, 1792 shading units, and 64 ROPs provide a robust foundation for modern applications, and its 63rd percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms its standing as a capable mid-range performer.

The AMD Radeon Pro 460, on the other hand, is a product of an older era. With only 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, 1024 shading units, and 16 ROPs, it lacks the resources needed for contemporary demanding tasks. Its 61st percentile ranking, while not drastically lower than the RX 6600's 63rd, is achieved against a very different set of rivals, including integrated graphics like the AMD Radeon 780M. The Pro 460 should be reserved for legacy systems that require its specific form factor or power profile, such as older MacBook Pro models that used this GPU as part of their design. For anyone building a new system or upgrading an existing one, the RX 6600 is the only rational choice based on the benchmark evidence.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench Metal score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600 scores 88398 in Geekbench Metal, which is 332.8% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 460's score of 20426.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 6600 compare to the AMD Radeon Pro 460 in Vulkan performance?

A: The RX 6600 achieves 67623 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Pro 460 scores 16816, giving the RX 6600 a 302.1% advantage in this API.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600 has an average benchmark score of 19036, placing it in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon Pro 460 has an average score of 17509, placing it in the 61st percentile.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the AMD Radeon Pro 460 wins?

A: No. Across all three shared tests (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 wins every comparison, resulting in a 3 to 0 head-to-head record.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the AMD Radeon RX 6600 in the database?

A: The nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 with an average score of 19030 (delta 0%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile at 19049 (delta -0.1%), and the NVIDIA Tesla K20m at 19089 (delta -0.3%).

Q: What are the closest rivals to the AMD Radeon Pro 460 in the database?

A: The nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Tesla K40c with an average score of 17468 (delta 0.2%), the AMD Radeon Pro 560 at 17551 (delta -0.2%), and the AMD Radeon 780M at 17588 (delta -0.5%).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural generations, which explains the vast performance gap. The AMD Radeon RX 6600 is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. This node allows for 11,060 million transistors packed into a die size of 237 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 46.7M per mm². The RDNA 2.0 design introduces hardware-accelerated ray tracing, as evidenced by the 28 RT cores, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes features like variable rate shading and mesh shaders. The architecture also supports Vulkan 1.4, a more recent version than what the older card offers.

In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro 460 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This older design houses 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.4M per mm². GCN 4.0 has no dedicated ray tracing cores, and its DirectX support is limited to 12 (12_0), which lacks many of the advanced features found in 12_2. The Pro 460 supports Vulkan 1.3, which is one minor revision behind the RX 6600's 1.4. The difference in transistor count and density is stark: the RX 6600 has over three and a half times more transistors, which enables its additional shading units, TMUs, and ROPs.

The clock speeds also reflect the architectural leap. The RX 6600 has a base clock of 1626 MHz and a boost clock of 2491 MHz, with a game clock of 2044 MHz. The Pro 460's base clock is only 850 MHz, boosting to 907 MHz. This nearly threefold difference in boost clock, combined with the larger shader count, produces the massive performance deltas observed in the benchmarks. The memory system differs as well, with the RX 6600 using 8 GB of GDDR6 at 14 Gbps effective, yielding a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s, while the Pro 460 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 at 5.1 Gbps effective, providing only 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two cards diverge on nearly every measurable field. The RX 6600 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the Pro 460 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. The pixel rate of the RX 6600 is 159.4 GPixel/s, compared to 14.51 GPixel/s for the Pro 460, a difference that directly impacts fill-rate-bound scenes. Texture rate follows a similar pattern: 279.0 GTexel/s versus 58.05 GTexel/s. In terms of FP32 compute, the RX 6600 delivers 8.928 TFLOPS, while the Pro 460 manages just 1.858 TFLOPS. The FP16 performance also differs, with the RX 6600 achieving 17.86 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the Pro 460's FP16 is identical to its FP32 at 1.858 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

Power consumption is another critical differentiator. The RX 6600 has a TDP of 132 W, requiring a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested power supply of 300 W. It is a dual-slot card measuring 190 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The Pro 460, by contrast, has a TDP of just 35 W, requires no power connectors, and is classified as an integrated GPU (IGP), meaning it has no standalone dimensions. The bus interface also differs: the RX 6600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Pro 460 uses the older PCIe 3.0 x8 standard. Display outputs on the RX 6600 include 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, whereas the Pro 460's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile or integrated nature.

The memory specifications further separate the two. The RX 6600 offers 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 460 provides 4 GB of GDDR5, also on a 128-bit bus, but with only 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. The release dates are far apart: the Pro 460 was released on 2016-10-29, while the RX 6600 came later on 2021-10-12. The RX 6600 has a launch MSRP of 329 USD, a figure recorded in the database, while the Pro 460 has no recorded launch MSRP. Both cards are marked as end-of-life in production status, but the RX 6600's successor is listed as Navi III, while the Pro 460 has no recorded successor.