AMD Radeon PRO V620 vs AMD Radeon PRO W6600 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V620 records an average benchmark score of 136472, while the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 records 81995. The V620 sits in the 96th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the W6600's 92nd percentile.

Q: How much faster is the V620 in OpenCL workloads?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the V620 scores 128580 versus the W6600's 73514, a lead of 74.9%. This is a substantial gap, placing the V620 far ahead in compute-oriented tasks.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The V620 comes with 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The W6600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s. That is a fourfold capacity difference and over double the bandwidth.

Q: Does the W6600 support display outputs?

A: Yes, the W6600 includes 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The V620 has no display outputs, meaning it is designed for compute or virtualized workloads rather than direct display connection.

Q: What is the power requirement for each card?

A: The V620 has a TDP of 300 W and requires a 700 W suggested power supply with 2x 8-pin connectors. The W6600 has a TDP of 100 W, a 300 W suggested PSU, and uses a single 6-pin connector.

Q: Which card is closer to its nearest rivals in performance?

A: The V620's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo, is only 0.5% behind in average score. The W6600's closest competitor, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X, trails by 1.3%. Both cards are tightly clustered among their peers, but the V620 edges out its top rival by a smaller margin.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the RDNA 2.0 architecture and are fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process, but they diverge sharply in silicon scale. The V620 uses the Navi 21 chip with 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 51.5M per mm². The W6600 uses Navi 23 with 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, giving a density of 46.7M per mm². The V620 packs more than double the transistors into more than double the die area.

The execution resource counts differ dramatically. The V620 has 4608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, 128 render output units, and 72 ray tracing cores. The W6600 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. That means the V620 offers roughly 2.6 times the shader count, 2.6 times the TMUs, double the ROPs, and 2.6 times the RT cores.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The W6600 runs at a base of 2331 MHz and boosts to 2580 MHz, while the V620 operates at 1825 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost. Despite lower clocks, the V620's massive shader array produces far higher throughput: 20.28 TFLOPS FP32 versus 9.247 TFLOPS for the W6600. FP16 performance follows the same pattern, with the V620 at 40.55 TFLOPS (2:1) against 18.49 TFLOPS (2:1) for the W6600.

Memory architecture is another fundamental split. The V620 uses a 256-bit bus with 2000 MHz memory (16 Gbps effective), while the W6600 uses a 128-bit bus with 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). Pixel and texture rates also favor the V620: 281.6 GPixel/s versus 165.1 GPixel/s, and 633.6 GTexel/s versus 289.0 GTexel/s.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has tensor cores. The V620 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, 120 mm in height, and 50 mm in width. The W6600 is a single-slot card at 241 mm in length. The V620 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the W6600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO V620 wins in every recorded benchmark category. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 128580 against 73514 for the W6600. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 144364 against 78428. The V620's wins are decisive, with deltas of 74.9% and 84.1% respectively.

The V620 is built for heavy compute and large memory footprints. Its 32 GB of VRAM and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for datasets that would exhaust the W6600's 8 GB capacity. The lack of display outputs indicates a role in server racks, virtualized environments, or headless rendering farms where direct video output is unnecessary. Its 300 W TDP and 2x 8-pin power requirement are consistent with a performance-first design.

The W6600, by contrast, is a workstation card with practical advantages. It has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, a single-slot form factor, and a modest 100 W TDP with a 300 W suggested PSU. For users who need to drive multiple monitors from one slot without a bulky power setup, the W6600 is the more flexible physical option. Its higher clock speeds, 2331 MHz base and 2580 MHz boost, help narrow the gap in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks, though the benchmark data does not capture such scenarios.

In terms of raw compute, the V620 is the clear choice. In terms of deployment flexibility and display connectivity, the W6600 has the edge. The V620 wins the performance contest outright, but the W6600 wins on integration simplicity.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO V620 | AMD Radeon PRO W6600 |

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

| Chip | Navi 21 | Navi 23 |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 26,800 million | 11,060 million |

| Die Size | 520 mm² | 237 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 51.5M / mm² | 46.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1825 MHz | 2331 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz | 2580 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 32 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4608 | 1792 |

| TMUs | 288 | 112 |

| ROPs | 128 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 72 | 28 |

| Pixel Rate | 281.6 GPixel/s | 165.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 633.6 GTexel/s | 289.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 20.28 TFLOPS | 9.247 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 40.55 TFLOPS (2:1) | 18.49 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 300 W | 100 W |

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

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

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 300 W |

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

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

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

| Height | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | Not specified |

| Width | 50 mm (2 inches) | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2021-11-03 | 2021-06-07 |

| Launch MSRP | Not available | 649 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these cards, and the V620 dominates both.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the V620 scores 128580 while the W6600 scores 73514. That is a 74.9% advantage for the V620. The gap is large enough to place the V620 in a different performance tier entirely. OpenCL workloads, which often stress raw FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth, align perfectly with the V620's 20.28 TFLOPS and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The W6600's 9.247 TFLOPS and 224.0 GB/s simply cannot keep pace.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the V620 widens its lead further. It scores 144364 against 78428 for the W6600, a delta of 84.1%. Vulkan's lower-level API overhead tends to reward cards with more compute units and higher memory throughput, and the V620's 4608 shading units and 72 RT cores provide ample headroom. The W6600's 1792 shading units and 28 RT cores are less than half of that, explaining the larger percentage gap in this test.

The V620's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo, averages 135774, which is only 0.5% behind the V620's 136472. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 sits at 135396 (0.8% behind), and the NVIDIA A10M and RTX 4000 Ada Generation are both 0.9% behind at 135230 and 135218 respectively. This means the V620 is at the top of a very tight cluster, where a few points separate first from fourth.

The W6600's nearest rivals are a different set. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X averages 80959, 1.3% behind the W6600's 81995. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 scores 79842 (2.7% behind), and the Tesla P100 variants score 79605 and 79396 (3% and 3.3% behind). The W6600 leads its peer group by a slightly larger margin than the V620 leads its own, but the absolute performance levels are far lower.

The benchmark results show a clear hierarchy: the V620 is aimed at high-end compute, while the W6600 serves a lower-power workstation niche. The V620's wins are not marginal; they are categorical, with deltas approaching double the W6600's scores in one test. For any workload captured by these benchmarks, the V620 is the superior performer.