AMD Radeon Pro 575X vs AMD Radeon PRO W6400 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 575X and AMD Radeon PRO W6400 are two professional workstation GPUs from different eras and design philosophies. The data shows a split decision: the older GCN-based 575X holds a slight edge in aggregate compute metrics and OpenCL performance, while the newer RDNA 2-based W6400 counters with superior Vulkan results, a vastly more efficient architecture, and modern feature support. Benchmark results indicate that the choice between them depends heavily on whether the workload prioritizes raw floating-point throughput or API-specific rendering efficiency.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 575X establishes its advantage in traditional compute-heavy tasks that leverage its larger silicon. Its GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, packs 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This configuration yields a peak FP32 throughput of 4.489 TFLOPS, which is 26% higher than the W6400’s 3.565 TFLOPS. The 575X also delivers a texture rate of 140.3 GTexel/s compared to 111.4 GTexel/s on the W6400, a 26% advantage. In the head-to-head OpenCL benchmark, the 575X scores 34,773, trailing the W6400 by only 0.7%, but its overall theoretical compute ceiling suggests it handles sustained FP32 workloads with more headroom.

The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 wins decisively in modern API-based rendering and efficiency metrics. Its RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 6 nm node, features 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, along with 12 dedicated ray accelerators. In the head-to-head Vulkan benchmark, the W6400 scores 39,286 versus the 575X’s 37,919, a 3.5% lead. The W6400 also doubles the FP16 throughput at 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) compared to the 575X’s 4.489 TFLOPS (1:1), making it substantially faster for workloads that leverage half-precision arithmetic. Its pixel rate of 74.27 GPixel/s is more than double the 575X’s 35.07 GPixel/s, indicating superior fill-rate performance for resolution-heavy rendering. The W6400’s 50 W TDP is one-third of the 575X’s 150 W, and it features a PCIe 4.0 x4 interface versus the 575X’s PCIe 3.0 x16.

The Verdict

For users prioritizing raw FP32 compute and legacy API compatibility, the AMD Radeon Pro 575X is the stronger choice. Its 4.489 TFLOPS peak, 217.0 GB/s memory bandwidth over a 256-bit bus, and 4 GB of GDDR5 provide a solid foundation for scientific computing and older OpenCL-based applications. The 575X achieves an average benchmark score of 39,116, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, and it sits within 1.1% of the AMD Radeon Pro 580X and NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A in the nearest rivals data.

For modern workstation tasks, especially those using Vulkan or leveraging FP16 acceleration, the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 is clearly superior. Its 3.5% lead in Vulkan, 2:1 FP16 ratio, and 12 ray accelerators make it better suited for contemporary rendering pipelines and DXR-based workloads. The W6400’s average benchmark score of 37,157 places it in the 80th percentile, and it outperforms the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X by 1.7% while staying within 1.3% of the RTX 4070. Its 50 W power draw, single-slot design, and lack of external power connectors make it ideal for compact or power-constrained systems, though the 575X’s integrated form factor (IGP) may be preferable in Mac-based configurations.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows a near-tie that favors the W6400 by the narrowest of margins. The W6400 scores 35,027 against the 575X’s 34,773, a delta of just 0.7%. This result is notable because the 575X has 2.7 times more shading units (2,048 vs. 768) and 1.26 times higher FP32 throughput, yet the W6400’s newer architecture and faster memory clock (16 Gbps effective vs. 6.8 Gbps effective) close the gap almost entirely. The 575X’s 217.0 GB/s bandwidth advantage over the W6400’s 128.0 GB/s is partially offset by the latter’s GDDR6 efficiency and RDNA 2 scheduler improvements.

The Geekbench Vulkan test delivers a more decisive outcome. The W6400 posts 39,286, beating the 575X’s 37,919 by 3.5%. This margin is significant because it reflects architectural differences rather than raw specs. The W6400’s RDNA 2 design includes dedicated hardware for draw call processing and mesh shading that GCN 4.0 lacks. Additionally, the W6400 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the 575X is limited to Vulkan 1.3. The W6400’s higher boost clock of 2321 MHz (versus the 575X’s unspecified boost, with a memory clock of 1695 MHz) contributes to its API-level responsiveness, as does its PCIe 4.0 x4 interface, which offers double the per-lane bandwidth of PCIe 3.0.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute power?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 575X leads with 4.489 TFLOPS FP32, which is 26% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W6400’s 3.565 TFLOPS.

Q: How do they compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with 39,286 points versus the 575X’s 37,919, a 3.5% advantage.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: Both have 4 GB, but the 575X uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the W6400 uses GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has better power efficiency?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 has a 50 W TDP, exactly one-third of the 575X’s 150 W TDP, despite being built on a smaller 6 nm node.

Q: Do they support ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 includes 12 ray accelerators; the 575X has no RT cores listed.

Q: Which GPU is more recent?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 was released on 2022-01-18, while the AMD Radeon Pro 575X came out on 2019-03-17.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Pro 575X is built on the Ellesmere chip using GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6M per mm². Its memory subsystem consists of 4 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, producing 217.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 575X features 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with peak rates of 35.07 GPixel/s and 140.3 GTexel/s. It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, and connects via PCIe 3.0 x16. Its display outputs are portable-device dependent, and it draws 150 W with no external power connectors.

The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 uses the Navi 24 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 6 nm process. It packs 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, achieving a density of 50.5M per mm² — more than double the 575X’s density. Its memory is 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 128.0 GB/s bandwidth, but with a memory clock of 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) that is significantly faster than the 575X’s 1695 MHz. The W6400 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray accelerators. Its pixel rate of 74.27 GPixel/s is 2.1 times higher than the 575X, while its texture rate of 111.4 GTexel/s is 21% lower. The W6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and uses a PCIe 4.0 x4 interface. It is a single-slot card with two DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, a 50 W TDP, and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

The architectural split is stark: the 575X relies on brute-force compute with a wide memory bus and more shading units, while the W6400 leverages a newer process node, higher clocks, and specialized features like ray accelerators and FP16 throughput. The 575X’s 1:1 FP16 ratio caps half-precision performance at 4.489 TFLOPS, whereas the W6400’s 2:1 ratio doubles to 7.130 TFLOPS. The W6400’s predecessor is listed as Radeon Pro Vega, while the 575X has no listed predecessor or successor, and both are end-of-life products.