AMD Radeon PRO W6600 vs NVIDIA B200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are stark. The NVIDIA B200 records a score of 345,482, while the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 scores 73,514. That is a 370% delta in favor of the B200, meaning the NVIDIA part delivers roughly 4.7 times the OpenCL performance of the AMD workstation card. This is not a close contest; it is a categorical gap that reflects the two products' fundamentally different positions in the market.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces the scale. The B200's average benchmark score is 345,482, placing it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its closest competitor, the NVIDIA H200 NVL, averages 334,891, which is 3.2% behind. The AMD Instinct MI300X trails by 8.6% at 317,994, and the NVIDIA L40S is 16.8% lower at 295,763. The B200 is not merely ahead of the W6600; it is ahead of every other recorded GPU in the database, including other server-class accelerators. Meanwhile, the Radeon PRO W6600 sits at the 92nd percentile with an average score of 81,995. Its nearest rivals are much closer: the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X is 1.3% behind at 80,959, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is 2.7% behind at 79,842, and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB is 3% behind at 79,605. The W6600 leads its immediate peer group, but those peers are nowhere near the B200's performance tier.

The W6600 does have additional benchmark entries in the database that the B200 lacks. It records a Geekbench Metal score of 94,042 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 78,428. The B200 has no corresponding Metal or Vulkan results, and its API support fields are null across DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. This means the B200's measured performance is limited to the OpenCL workload, while the W6600 shows respectable cross-API consistency: its Metal score is higher than its OpenCL score by about 28%, and its Vulkan score is close to its OpenCL result. For the single shared metric, though, the outcome is unambiguous.

Architecture Differences

These two GPUs come from different architectural lineages entirely. The NVIDIA B200 is built on the Blackwell architecture with the GB100 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip, also from TSMC but on a 7 nm node. The process node difference is significant: the B200 packs 104,000 million transistors, while the W6600 has 11,060 million. The B200 does not list a die size in the database, but the W6600's die is recorded at 237 mm² with a transistor density of 46.7M per mm². Even without a die size for the B200, the transistor count alone indicates a vastly larger and more complex chip.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The B200 comes with 90 GB of HBM3e on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 4.10 TB/s of bandwidth. The W6600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 224.0 GB/s. That is an 18.3x difference in memory bandwidth in favor of the B200, a figure that directly explains why the B200 dominates in compute-heavy workloads. Clock speeds tell a different story: the W6600 runs at a base of 2331 MHz and a boost of 2580 MHz, while the B200 is much slower in raw clock terms, with a 700 MHz base and 1965 MHz boost. The W6600's higher clocks help its pixel throughput: it achieves 165.1 GPixel/s versus the B200's 47.16 GPixel/s. The B200's advantage lies in parallelism, not clock speed.

Compute resources are where the B200 pulls away. The B200 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The W6600 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The B200 also includes 592 tensor cores, while the W6600 has none; conversely, the W6600 has 28 ray tracing cores, and the B200 lists none. The FP32 throughput is 74.45 TFLOPS for the B200 versus 9.247 TFLOPS for the W6600. In FP16, the gap widens dramatically: 1,191.2 TFLOPS (16:1 ratio) for the B200 versus 18.49 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) for the W6600. Texture rate favors the B200 at 1,163.3 GTexel/s versus 289.0 GTexel/s.

Power and form factor underline the product class difference. The B200 has a TDP of 1000 W, requires a suggested PSU of 1400 W, and comes as an SXM Module with no display outputs. The W6600 has a TDP of 100 W, a suggested PSU of 300 W, is a single-slot card with a 1x 6-pin power connector, and offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The B200 is not a graphics card in the traditional sense; it is a compute accelerator with no video output capability. The W6600 is a workstation GPU designed to drive displays. Their bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 5.0 x16 for the B200 and PCIe 4.0 x8 for the W6600.

Where Each One Wins

The B200 wins in every compute-heavy scenario that the database can measure. Its OpenCL score of 345,482 versus the W6600's 73,514 means any workload built on OpenCL, such as scientific simulation, AI inference, or large-scale data processing, will favor the B200 overwhelmingly. Its 90 GB of HBM3e memory with 4.10 TB/s bandwidth allows it to hold and process datasets that would simply not fit in the W6600's 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer. The B200's FP16 throughput of 1,191.2 TFLOPS, while the W6600 manages 18.49 TFLOPS, points to a clear advantage in mixed-precision machine learning tasks. The presence of 592 tensor cores on the B200, with none on the W6600, further cements its role for neural network workloads.

The W6600 has its own areas of strength, though they are not captured in raw compute scores. Its pixel rate of 165.1 GPixel/s is 3.5 times higher than the B200's 47.16 GPixel/s, which suggests it can handle rasterization and display-oriented tasks more efficiently. The W6600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the B200 lists no API support at all. For any interactive graphics, rendering to a screen, or gaming-adjacent workstation use, the W6600 is the only one of the two that can even output video. The B200 has no display outputs, so it cannot drive a monitor. The W6600's lower TDP of 100 W also means it can be deployed in workstations without specialized power infrastructure, whereas the B200's 1000 W TDP demands a 1400 W PSU and server-class cooling.

In multi-GPU or heterogeneous environments, the B200's 100th percentile ranking and 3.2% lead over the H200 NVL indicate it is the top performer in the entire database. The W6600, at the 92nd percentile, leads its own peer group by small margins: 1.3% over the Radeon Pro Vega 64X, 2.7% over the RTX 5090, and 3% over the Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB. These are narrow wins, suggesting the W6600 is competitive within its tier but not dominant. The B200, by contrast, is dominant by double-digit margins over most rivals and only trails the B300 SXM6 AC, which is 6.6% ahead at 369,831.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA B200 than the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 in OpenCL?

A: The B200 scores 345,482 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the W6600 scores 73,514. The B200 is 370% faster in this test.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The B200 has 4.10 TB/s of bandwidth from 90 GB of HBM3e on a 4096-bit bus. The W6600 has 224.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Can the NVIDIA B200 output video to a display?

A: No. The B200 has no display outputs and its API fields for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan are all null. The W6600 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How do the two compare in terms of power consumption?

A: The B200 has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The W6600 has a TDP of 100 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to each GPU in the database?

A: The B200's nearest rival is the NVIDIA H200 NVL at 334,891, which is 3.2% behind. The W6600's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X at 80,959, which is 1.3% behind.

Q: Which GPU has ray tracing cores?

A: The W6600 has 28 ray tracing cores. The B200 lists no ray tracing cores but instead has 592 tensor cores.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: these are not competing products. The NVIDIA B200 is a server accelerator aimed at the very top of the compute stack, as evidenced by its 100th percentile ranking, 1000 W TDP, SXM Module form factor, and lack of display outputs. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 is an end-of-life workstation card, released in June 2021 with a launch MSRP of 649 USD, designed for professional graphics and modest compute tasks. The 370% OpenCL gap between them is not a marginal difference; it is a reflection of entirely different design goals.

A user whose primary need is raw compute, large memory capacity, or AI acceleration should look at the B200. Its 90 GB of HBM3e, 4.10 TB/s bandwidth, and FP16 throughput of 1,191.2 TFLOPS place it in a class that the W6600 cannot approach. The B200's 3.2% lead over the H200 NVL and 8.6% lead over the AMD Instinct MI300X show that it is not just better than a workstation card; it is the best in the database.

A user who needs a display-capable GPU with modern API support should choose the W6600. It is the only one of the two with video outputs, and its 92nd percentile ranking with close rival deltas of 1.3% to 3.3% shows it is competitive within its segment. Its 100 W TDP and single-slot design make it practical for standard workstations. The B200 cannot perform any display-related task, so for traditional graphics work, the W6600 is the only option between the two.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA B200 | AMD Radeon PRO W6600 |

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

| Architecture | Blackwell | RDNA 2.0 |

| Chip | GB100 | Navi 23 |

| Process node | 5 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 104,000 million | 11,060 million |

| Die size | Not listed | 237 mm² |

| Base clock | 700 MHz | 2331 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1965 MHz | 2580 MHz |

| Memory size | 90 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory type | HBM3e | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus | 4096 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 4.10 TB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 18,944 | 1,792 |

| TMUs | 592 | 112 |

| ROPs | 24 | 64 |

| Ray tracing cores | None listed | 28 |

| Tensor cores | 592 | None listed |

| Pixel rate | 47.16 GPixel/s | 165.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 1,163.3 GTexel/s | 289.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 74.45 TFLOPS | 9.247 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,191.2 TFLOPS (16:1) | 18.49 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 1000 W | 100 W |

| Slot width | SXM Module | Single-slot |

| Power connector | Not listed | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | 300 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

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

| API support | Not listed | DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4 |

| Production status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release date | Not listed | 2021-06-07 |

| Predecessor | Server Hopper | Radeon Pro Vega |

| Successor | Server Rubin | Not listed |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 649 USD |

| Average benchmark score | 345,482 | 81,995 |

| Percentile vs all GPUs | 100 | 92 |