AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs AMD Radeon Pro W6600X Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600X defeats the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 decisively in the recorded head-to-head data, taking the only directly comparable benchmark by a wide margin and sitting six percentile points higher in the database rankings. The W6600X scores 107342 in Geekbench Metal against the Vega 48's 69010, a 55.5 percent gap that defines this matchup. Both are end-of-life Apple-oriented professional GPUs from AMD, but they represent two different eras of AMD graphics architecture, and the data shows the newer design winning on compute throughput while the older card retains one clear hardware advantage in memory bandwidth.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one shared benchmark between these two cards, and it is not close. In Geekbench Metal, the W6600X posts 107342 against the Vega 48's 69010, a delta of 55.5 percent in favor of the Navi-based card. That is a generational blowout, not a rounding difference: the W6600X delivers roughly one and a half times the graphics API throughput of the Vega 48 in the one test both cards ran.

The Vega 48 also logged Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan results, scoring 53757 and 57653 respectively. Those figures sit well below its own Metal result, which means even the Vega 48's best recorded score falls far short of the W6600X's single benchmark. The W6600X's average benchmark score of 107342 compares to the Vega 48's average of 60140 across its three tests.

Context from the database reinforces the gap. The W6600X sits in the 94th percentile against all GPUs, while the Vega 48 occupies the 88th percentile. The W6600X's nearest rivals include the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo (106750 average, 0.6 percent behind), the Radeon Pro Vega II (109617, 2.1 percent ahead of it), the Radeon PRO W7900 (110725, 3.1 percent ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 (101872, which the W6600X beats by 5.4 percent). In other words, the W6600X trades blows with dual-GPU and workstation-flagship hardware. The Vega 48's neighborhood is far more modest: Intel Arc Pro A60 (60326, 0.3 percent ahead), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (60347, 0.3 percent ahead), AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58657, 2.5 percent behind), and NVIDIA P102-100 (58528, 2.8 percent behind).

Architecture Differences

These cards come from opposite ends of AMD's professional lineup chronologically and technologically. The W6600X is built on the Navi 23 chip using RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. The Vega 48 uses the Vega 10 chip with GCN 5.0 architecture on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process. The node advantage shows plainly in the physical data: the W6600X fits 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die for a density of 46.7M per mm², while the Vega 48 needs 495 mm² to hold 12,500 million transistors, a density of just 25.3M per mm². The newer die is less than half the area with nearly the same transistor count.

The core counts tell a different story. The Vega 48 actually has more shading units, 3072 versus 2048, and more texture units, 192 versus 128. Both cards have 64 ROPs. But clock speed and architecture efficiency dominate core count here: the W6600X boosts to 2479 MHz from a 2068 MHz base, while no core clock figures are recorded for the Vega 48. The result is raw throughput that heavily favors the RDNA 2.0 card, with 10.15 TFLOPS FP32 and 20.31 TFLOPS FP16 against the Vega 48's 7.373 TFLOPS FP32 and 14.75 TFLOPS FP16. Pixel rate stands at 158.7 GPixel/s versus 76.80 GPixel/s, and texture rate at 317.3 GTexel/s versus 230.4 GTexel/s.

Memory is where the Vega 48 fights back. It carries 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus delivering 402.4 GB/s of bandwidth, roughly 57 percent more than the W6600X's 256.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The W6600X's memory runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective) for the HBM2, but the wide HBM2 interface carries the bandwidth victory for the older card.

Feature support also favors the newer design. The W6600X includes 32 RT cores for hardware ray tracing and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) plus Vulkan 1.4. The Vega 48 has no RT cores and tops out at DirectX 12 (12_1) with Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Platform integration differs too: the W6600X uses Apple's MPX bus interface and has no display outputs of its own, with a 120 W TDP and a suggested 300 W PSU, in a dual-slot form. The Vega 48 is an integrated graphics product on PCIe 3.0 x16 with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display output.

Where Each One Wins

The W6600X wins everywhere the benchmarks measure. Its 55.5 percent Geekbench Metal lead, its higher FP32, FP16, pixel, and texture throughput, and its ray tracing hardware make it the clear choice for GPU compute, Metal-based professional rendering, and any workload that benefits from DirectX 12 Ultimate or Vulkan 1.4 features. Its 94th percentile ranking confirms it performs near workstation-flagship level.

The Vega 48's case rests entirely on memory subsystem specs. Its 402.4 GB/s of HBM2 bandwidth substantially exceeds the W6600X's 256.0 GB/s, which matters for bandwidth-hungry workloads that fit within its 8 GB frame buffer. Its higher shading unit and texture unit counts also look strong on paper, though the benchmark data shows those counts do not translate into real throughput against the faster-clocked RDNA 2.0 design.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the W6600X than the Vega 48 in benchmarks?

A: In the shared Geekbench Metal test, the W6600X scores 107342 versus 69010, a 55.5 percent advantage.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Vega 48, with 402.4 GB/s from its 2048-bit HBM2 interface, compared to 256.0 GB/s from the W6600X's 128-bit GDDR6.

Q: Do both cards support ray tracing?

A: No. The W6600X has 32 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate; the Vega 48 has no RT cores.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Vega 48, with 3072 shading units and 192 texture units, versus 2048 and 128 for the W6600X.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No, both are listed as end-of-life. The W6600X launched in August 2021 and the Vega 48 in March 2019.

Q: How do their database rankings compare?

A: The W6600X sits in the 94th percentile against all GPUs; the Vega 48 sits in the 88th percentile.

The Verdict

The data makes this straightforward. The W6600X wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 55.5 percent, delivers higher theoretical throughput across every compute metric, and brings ray tracing plus newer API support. Anyone choosing between these two for professional graphics or compute work should pick the W6600X, accepting its lower memory bandwidth and 120 W TDP as the cost. The Vega 48 only makes sense where its HBM2 bandwidth advantage is decisive for a specific workload and its lower measured performance is acceptable. Both cards carry an 8 GB frame buffer, so capacity is not a differentiator.

Specification Differences

| Field | Radeon Pro W6600X | Radeon Pro Vega 48 |

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

| Chip | Navi 23 | Vega 10 |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 5.0 |

| Process node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | 12,500 million |

| Die size | 237 mm² | 495 mm² |

| Transistor density | 46.7M / mm² | 25.3M / mm² |

| Base clock | 2068 MHz | Not recorded |

| Boost clock | 2479 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Bus width | 128 bit | 2048 bit |

| Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 402.4 GB/s |

| Shading units | 2048 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 128 | 192 |

| RT cores | 32 | None |

| Pixel rate | 158.7 GPixel/s | 76.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 317.3 GTexel/s | 230.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 10.15 TFLOPS | 7.373 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 20.31 TFLOPS | 14.75 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 120 W | Not recorded |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power connectors | None listed | None |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | Not recorded |

| Bus interface | Apple MPX | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release date | 2021-08-02 | 2019-03-18 |

| Launch MSRP | 699 USD | Not listed |