AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs AMD Radeon RX 6700M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the AMD Radeon RX 6700M across all three shared benchmark tests. The most decisive margin appears in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 6700M scores 77,666 against the Pro Vega 16's 18,268, a delta of 325.1%. This is the largest relative gap in the head-to-head comparison, indicating a massive advantage in compute-oriented workloads that leverage OpenCL.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6700M posts 90,816 versus 21,832 for the Pro Vega 16, a 316% difference. This result reinforces the pattern: the newer architecture handles the Vulkan API with far greater efficiency, delivering more than four times the score of the older part. The Geekbench Metal test shows a comparatively smaller, yet still overwhelming, lead: 91,911 for the RX 6700M against 29,650, a 210% delta. Metal is the native graphics API for Apple platforms, so this result is particularly relevant for Mac users comparing the two.

The average benchmark score for the RX 6700M is 25,633, placing it in the 71st percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Pro Vega 16's average score is 23,250, which sits in the 68th percentile. While the percentile gap is modest, the average score difference is 2,383 points, roughly 10.2% higher for the RX 6700M. The nearest rivals for the RX 6700M include the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 at 25,726 (0.4% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile at 25,740 (0.4% higher), and the AMD FirePro D700 at 25,842 (0.8% higher). This suggests the RX 6700M is competitive with mobile workstation-class GPUs from the same era. For the Pro Vega 16, its nearest rival is the NVIDIA P106-100 at 23,249, essentially a statistical tie at 0% delta, followed by the AMD Radeon RX 6600M at 23,273 (0.1% higher).

Breaking down the individual benchmark suites, the RX 6700M shows a particular strength in Passmark G3D, scoring 13,536, alongside a Passmark G2D score of 555. Its Passmark GPU Compute score is 5,191. In DirectX tests, the RX 6700M scores 155 in DirectX 9, 129 in DirectX 11, 92 in DirectX 10, and 65 in DirectX 12. The Pro Vega 16 has no recorded Passmark or DirectX results in the database, so direct comparison on those tests is not possible. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result for the RX 6700M is 1,845, a score that reflects its modern feature set.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The RX 6700M is built on RDNA 2.0, specifically the Navi 22 chip, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Pro Vega 16 uses GCN 5.0, based on the Vega 12 chip, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The process node difference alone, 7 nm versus 14 nm, explains much of the efficiency and clock speed disparity between the two.

Transistor counts reinforce the gap. The RX 6700M packs 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 51.3 million per square millimeter. The Pro Vega 16's transistor count and die size are not listed in the database, but its older process node implies a lower density. The RX 6700M has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). The Pro Vega 16 is significantly smaller in compute resources: 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 6700M also features 36 ray tracing cores, while the Pro Vega 16 has none, reflecting the RDNA 2.0's support for hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The RX 6700M has a base clock of 1489 MHz, a boost clock of 2400 MHz, and a game clock of 2300 MHz. The Pro Vega 16 operates at a base of 815 MHz and a boost of 1190 MHz, with no game clock specified. The RX 6700M's boost clock is more than double the Pro Vega 16's base clock, and even its game clock is nearly double the Pro Vega 16's boost. Memory configurations differ as well: the RX 6700M uses 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Pro Vega 16 uses 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, providing 307.2 GB/s. Despite the narrower bus, the HBM2 memory on the Pro Vega 16 achieves comparable bandwidth, but the capacity advantage goes decisively to the RX 6700M.

Interface and API support further separate the two. The RX 6700M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Pro Vega 16 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. In terms of API levels, the RX 6700M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The Pro Vega 16 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1), Vulkan 1.3, and OpenGL 4.6. The DirectX version difference is notable: 12_2 includes features like mesh shaders and sampler feedback, which the 12_1 level does not guarantee. Power consumption also differs, with the RX 6700M rated at 135 W TDP versus 75 W for the Pro Vega 16, though both are listed as IGP (integrated graphics processor) slot width with portable device dependent display outputs.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner: the AMD Radeon RX 6700M is the superior GPU in every measurable shared benchmark. Its Geekbench Metal score is 210% higher, its OpenCL score is 325.1% higher, and its Vulkan score is 316% higher than the Pro Vega 16. The RX 6700M also holds a higher average benchmark score (25,633 versus 23,250) and a higher percentile ranking (71st versus 68th). For any workload that relies on compute, graphics rendering, or modern API features, the RX 6700M is the only reasonable choice based on the recorded data.

The Pro Vega 16, however, is not without its niche. Its 75 W TDP is significantly lower than the RX 6700M's 135 W, which could matter in thermally constrained laptop designs. But the performance cost is severe: the Pro Vega 16's FP32 throughput is 2.437 TFLOPS versus 11.06 TFLOPS for the RX 6700M, a 4.5x gap. Its pixel rate is 38.08 GPixel/s versus 153.6 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 76.16 GTexel/s versus 345.6 GTexel/s. The Pro Vega 16's only advantage lies in its HBM2 memory bus width (1024-bit versus 160-bit), but the resulting bandwidth is almost identical (307.2 GB/s versus 320.0 GB/s), so this is a non-factor in practice.

For users choosing between these two, the decision hinges on the platform. The Pro Vega 16 is listed under the Radeon Pro Mac generation, suggesting it was designed for Apple systems around 2018. The RX 6700M is a later product, released in 2021, and targets Windows or Linux mobile platforms. The database does not record any benchmark wins for the Pro Vega 16, and it has zero wins in the head-to-head comparison. The RX 6700M takes all three.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700M has an average benchmark score of 25,633, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16's 23,250.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RX 6700M scores 90,816 versus 21,832 for the Pro Vega 16, resulting in a 316% advantage for the RX 6700M.

Q: Does the Pro Vega 16 support ray tracing?

A: No, the Pro Vega 16 has no ray tracing cores listed in the database. The RX 6700M has 36 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RX 6700M has 10 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the Pro Vega 16 has 4 GB of HBM2 memory.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 6700M has a boost clock of 2400 MHz, whereas the Pro Vega 16's boost clock is 1190 MHz.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: Both are listed as end-of-life in the database. The RX 6700M was released in 2021, and the Pro Vega 16 in 2018.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6700M wins in every category where both have recorded data. Its strengths are most pronounced in compute-heavy benchmarks: OpenCL shows a 325.1% lead, Vulkan shows a 316% lead, and Metal shows a 210% lead. It also wins on raw specifications: more shading units (2,304 versus 1,024), more TMUs (144 versus 64), more ROPs (64 versus 32), higher FP32 throughput (11.06 versus 2.437 TFLOPS), higher pixel rate (153.6 versus 38.08 GPixel/s), and higher texture rate (345.6 versus 76.16 GTexel/s). For gaming or professional rendering, the RX 6700M is the clear choice.

The Pro Vega 16 does not win any shared benchmark, but it has a few specification-level advantages. Its memory bus width is 1024-bit versus 160-bit, which historically helps with certain memory-intensive workloads, though the bandwidth figures are nearly equal. Its TDP is 75 W versus 135 W, making it more power-efficient in absolute terms, though this does not translate into any performance win in the data. The Pro Vega 16 also has a lower base clock (815 MHz versus 1489 MHz) and lower boost clock (1190 MHz versus 2400 MHz), so its power advantage does not compensate for the performance deficit.

Use-case split: for modern gaming, ray tracing, or high-throughput compute, the RX 6700M is the only option. For legacy Mac applications that were optimized for GCN architecture, the Pro Vega 16 might still function, but it will be slower in every measurable way. The database records no scenario where the Pro Vega 16 outperforms the RX 6700M.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Architecture: RDNA 2.0 (RX 6700M) versus GCN 5.0 (Pro Vega 16)
• Chip: Navi 22 versus Vega 12
• Process Node: 7 nm versus 14 nm
• Foundry: TSMC versus GlobalFoundries
• Transistors: 17,200 million versus not listed
• Die Size: 335 mm² versus not listed
• Base Clock: 1489 MHz versus 815 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2400 MHz versus 1190 MHz
• Game Clock: 2300 MHz versus not listed
• Memory Clock: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 10 GB versus 4 GB
• Memory Type: GDDR6 versus HBM2
• Memory Bus Width: 160 bit versus 1024 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 320.0 GB/s versus 307.2 GB/s
• Shading Units: 2304 versus 1024
• TMUs: 144 versus 64
• ROPs: 64 versus 32
• Ray Tracing Cores: 36 versus none
• Pixel Rate: 153.6 GPixel/s versus 38.08 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 345.6 GTexel/s versus 76.16 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 11.06 TFLOPS versus 2.437 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 22.12 TFLOPS versus 4.874 TFLOPS
• TDP: 135 W versus 75 W
• Power Connectors: None versus not listed
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1)
• Vulkan Support: 1.4 versus 1.3
• Release Date: 2021-05-30 versus 2018-11-13
• Generation: Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) versus Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series)
• Predecessor: Polaris Mobile versus not listed