AMD Radeon PRO W6400 vs AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is decisive: the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT wins both recorded head-to-head tests outright. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6800 XT scores 171,304 against the Radeon PRO W6400's 35,027, a lead of 389.1%. This is the single largest gap in the comparison. The margin is so wide that it does not represent a close contest but rather a fundamentally different performance tier.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6800 XT again dominates, posting 136,875 points versus the PRO W6400's 39,286. The delta here is 248.4%, still a massive advantage but notably smaller than the OpenCL gap. This suggests the RX 6800 XT's advantage is slightly less pronounced under the Vulkan API, though it remains overwhelming. The recorded data shows a 2-0 sweep for the RX 6800 XT, with zero wins for the PRO W6400 across the shared test suite.

Context from the database's nearest rival lists reinforces how different these cards are. The RX 6800 XT sits with an average benchmark score of 48,477, placing it within 1.5% of the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile (47,743) and 2.5% behind the Intel Arc A550M (49,737). The PRO W6400, by contrast, averages 37,157, which is 0.9% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37,507) and 1.3% behind both the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37,628) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 (37,648). The RX 6800 XT's average score exceeds the PRO W6400's average by roughly 11,320 points, a difference that places them in entirely separate performance brackets despite both being RDNA 2.0 products.

The percentile data also tells a clear story. The RX 6800 XT ranks in the 85th percentile among all GPUs, while the PRO W6400 sits in the 80th percentile. That five-point gap is modest in percentile terms, but the actual benchmark scores reveal a chasm. The RX 6800 XT's strongest individual result in the database is its Geekbench OpenCL score of 171,304, which is nearly five times the PRO W6400's best recorded score of 39,286 in Vulkan. Even the PRO W6400's OpenCL score of 35,027 is dwarfed by the RX 6800 XT's weakest relevant result, its Geekbench Vulkan score of 136,875.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a clear use-case split, but it is heavily skewed toward the RX 6800 XT. Across every benchmark where both cards were tested, the RX 6800 XT wins. The PRO W6400 does not hold a single recorded victory. However, the nature of the wins matters. The RX 6800 XT's OpenCL performance is its strongest suit, with a 389.1% advantage. This suggests compute-heavy workloads, such as rendering, machine learning inference, or scientific calculations that leverage OpenCL, are where the RX 6800 XT excels most dramatically.

For Vulkan-based gaming or workloads, the RX 6800 XT still wins decisively at 248.4%, but the relative gap narrows. This indicates that while the RX 6800 XT is unquestionably faster in real-world graphics tasks, the PRO W6400's Vulkan implementation is relatively more competitive than its OpenCL path. The PRO W6400's 39,286 Vulkan score is higher than its 35,027 OpenCL score, suggesting the card is better optimized for Vulkan or that its smaller architecture handles that API more efficiently.

From a pure workload perspective, the RX 6800 XT is the choice for any task requiring maximum throughput. Its 20.74 TFLOPS FP32 performance versus 3.565 TFLOPS for the PRO W6400 means it can process over five times the floating-point operations per second. The PRO W6400, with its 50 W TDP and single-slot design, is positioned for low-power or space-constrained environments, but the benchmark results indicate it cannot match the RX 6800 XT in raw performance. The PRO W6400 wins only in the sense of efficiency relative to its physical footprint, but the database contains no efficiency metrics, so this remains a qualitative observation rather than a measured conclusion.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the RDNA 2.0 architecture and are manufactured by TSMC, but they diverge significantly in implementation. The RX 6800 XT uses the Navi 21 chip on a 7 nm process with 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die. The PRO W6400 uses the smaller Navi 24 chip on a more advanced 6 nm process with 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die. Despite the newer node, the PRO W6400 has a lower transistor density: 50.5M per mm² versus 51.5M per mm² for the RX 6800 XT. This is a marginal difference, but it shows the RX 6800 XT packs its larger chip slightly more densely.

The compute resources are starkly different. The RX 6800 XT has 4,608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, and 128 raster output units. The PRO W6400 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This means the RX 6800 XT has exactly six times the shading units, six times the TMUs, and four times the ROPs. Ray tracing cores follow a similar pattern: the RX 6800 XT has 72, while the PRO W6400 has 12, a sixfold difference.

Memory is another major divergence. The RX 6800 XT features 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The PRO W6400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 128.0 GB/s. That is a fourfold difference in capacity and a fourfold difference in bandwidth. Both use 16 Gbps effective memory, but the wider bus on the RX 6800 XT is what enables the massive bandwidth advantage.

Clock speeds tell a more nuanced story. The PRO W6400 actually has higher base and boost clocks: 2039 MHz base and 2321 MHz boost, compared to the RX 6800 XT's 1825 MHz base and 2250 MHz boost. The RX 6800 XT has a game clock of 2015 MHz, which the PRO W6400 lacks. Despite lower clocks, the RX 6800 XT's far larger execution units produce pixel rates of 288.0 GPixel/s and texture rates of 648.0 GTexel/s, versus 74.27 GPixel/s and 111.4 GTexel/s for the PRO W6400.

Power and physical design differ equally. The RX 6800 XT is a dual-slot card with a 300 W TDP, requiring two 8-pin power connectors and a 700 W suggested PSU. The PRO W6400 is single-slot with a 50 W TDP, no power connectors, and a 250 W suggested PSU. The RX 6800 XT measures 267 mm in length, 120 mm in height, and 50 mm in width, while the PRO W6400's dimensions are not recorded in the database. Bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 6800 XT versus PCIe 4.0 x4 for the PRO W6400, which limits the PRO W6400's bandwidth to the host system.

The RX 6800 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C outputs. The PRO W6400 provides only 2x DisplayPort 1.4a. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature parity is complete.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT averages 48,477 points, while the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 averages 37,157 points. The RX 6800 XT is ahead by roughly 11,320 points.

Q: How much faster is the RX 6800 XT in OpenCL?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6800 XT scores 171,304 versus 35,027 for the PRO W6400, a lead of 389.1%.

Q: Does the PRO W6400 win any benchmark?

A: No. Across the two shared tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, the PRO W6400 records zero wins. The RX 6800 XT wins both.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RX 6800 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The PRO W6400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are both cards based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use RDNA 2.0, but the RX 6800 XT uses the Navi 21 chip on 7 nm, while the PRO W6400 uses the Navi 24 chip on 6 nm.

Q: Which card has higher clock speeds?

A: The PRO W6400 has higher base and boost clocks at 2039 MHz and 2321 MHz, compared to 1825 MHz and 2250 MHz for the RX 6800 XT. The RX 6800 XT has a game clock of 2015 MHz, which the PRO W6400 lacks.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT is the overwhelmingly faster GPU. Every measured benchmark, every compute metric, and every memory specification favors it. The 389.1% OpenCL advantage and 248.4% Vulkan advantage are not close margins; they are generational gaps. For any user prioritizing raw performance in compute or graphics, the RX 6800 XT is the only defensible choice based on the recorded data.

The PRO W6400's case rests on its physical and power profile. It is a single-slot, 50 W card with no external power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The RX 6800 XT demands 300 W, two 8-pin connectors, a 700 W PSU, and dual-slot space. For a system where power draw and physical footprint are the absolute constraints, the PRO W6400 is functional, but it sacrifices over 80% of the RX 6800 XT's FP32 throughput (3.565 TFLOPS versus 20.74 TFLOPS). The PRO W6400 also has a higher base and boost clock, but this does not translate into competitive performance.

The nearest rival data adds context. The RX 6800 XT is within 3% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, while the PRO W6400 is within 1.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X. These are different performance strata entirely. Buyers should choose the RX 6800 XT for any workload where speed matters. Choose the PRO W6400 only if the system cannot physically or thermally accommodate a high-power card, and even then, expect a massive performance penalty.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT | AMD Radeon PRO W6400 |

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

| Chip | Navi 21 | Navi 24 |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 26,800 million | 5,400 million |

| Die Size | 520 mm² | 107 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 51.5M / mm² | 50.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1825 MHz | 2039 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2250 MHz | 2321 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2015 MHz | None |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 128.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4608 | 768 |

| TMUs | 288 | 48 |

| ROPs | 128 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 72 | 12 |

| Pixel Rate | 288.0 GPixel/s | 74.27 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 648.0 GTexel/s | 111.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 20.74 TFLOPS | 3.565 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 41.47 TFLOPS (2:1) | 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 300 W | 50 W |

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

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C | 2x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Release Date | 2020-10-27 | 2022-01-18 |

| Predecessor | Navi | Radeon Pro Vega |

| Successor | Navi III | None |

| Launch MSRP | 649 USD | None |