AMD Radeon PRO W6600 vs NVIDIA CMP 50HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear and consistent margin for the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 over the NVIDIA CMP 50HX in the two shared compute workloads. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD card scores 73,514 against the NVIDIA card's 56,135, a 31% advantage. The gap widens substantially in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the AMD card posts 78,428 versus 47,445 for the NVIDIA card, a 65.3% lead. Across both benchmarks, the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 wins 2 out of 2 comparisons.

The Vulkan result is particularly striking. A 65.3% delta in a cross-vendor API test suggests the AMD architecture translates its hardware resources into frame or compute throughput more efficiently under Vulkan's explicit control model. The OpenCL result, while still a solid win for AMD, shows a narrower gap, indicating that NVIDIA's Turing design remains competitive in that API's execution model. Notably, the NVIDIA CMP 50HX has no Metal benchmark recorded in the database, while the AMD card's Geekbench Metal score of 94,042 is its strongest result, a data point that will matter for any macOS or Metal-centric workload analysis.

Looking at the aggregate benchmark averages, the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 holds an 81,995 average score across its three recorded tests, placing it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA CMP 50HX, with only two tests recorded, averages 51,790 and sits in the 86th percentile. The percentile gap of 6 points understates the raw score difference, because the NVIDIA card's percentile is buoyed by a sparse test set. The AMD card's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X (1.3% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 (2.7% slower), and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 variants (3% and 3.3% slower). The NVIDIA CMP 50HX sits near the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT (1.6% faster than the CMP card), the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (3.6% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (3.7% faster), and the Intel Arc A550M (4.1% faster). This means the NVIDIA card, despite its lower raw scores, is clustered with a set of high-end gaming and workstation parts, whereas the AMD card outperforms even some flagship-class GPUs in the database's average score metric.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different design philosophies separated by a generation and a process node. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. The NVIDIA CMP 50HX uses the TU102 chip on the Turing architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 12 nm process. The process gap is reflected in transistor density: the AMD chip packs 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die, yielding 46.7 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip carries 18,600 million transistors across a much larger 754 mm² die, for a density of 24.7 million per square millimeter. The AMD design is nearly twice as dense, a direct consequence of the smaller manufacturing node.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The AMD card runs a base clock of 2331 MHz and a boost clock of 2580 MHz, far above the NVIDIA card's 1350 MHz base and 1545 MHz boost. Both cards use GDDR6 memory at an identical effective data rate of 14 Gbps, but the memory subsystems diverge sharply. The AMD card has 8 GB on a 128-bit bus, yielding 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has 10 GB on a 320-bit bus, yielding 560.0 GB/s, more than double the AMD bandwidth. This is the one hardware category where the NVIDIA card holds a clear specification advantage.

Compute resources also favor the NVIDIA card on raw counts. The CMP 50HX has 3,584 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, 80 raster output units, 56 RT cores, and 448 tensor cores. The AMD card has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores. Yet the measured performance does not scale with these counts. The AMD card achieves 165.1 GPixel/s pixel rate and 289.0 GTexel/s texture rate, while the NVIDIA card posts 123.6 GPixel/s and 296.6 GTexel/s. The texture rates are nearly identical despite the NVIDIA card's 80 extra TMUs, and the AMD card is significantly faster in pixel throughput despite having 16 fewer ROPs. In FP32 compute, the NVIDIA card's 11.07 TFLOPS exceeds the AMD card's 9.247 TFLOPS, and the same pattern holds for FP16 (22.15 TFLOPS versus 18.49 TFLOPS). The benchmark data, however, shows the AMD card winning by wide margins, suggesting that clock speed and architecture efficiency outweigh raw shader counts in these workloads.

Power and physical design differ as well. The AMD card is rated at 100 W TDP with a single 6-pin power connector and a suggested 300 W PSU, while the NVIDIA card draws 250 W with two 8-pin connectors and a suggested 600 W PSU. The AMD card is single-slot and 241 mm long; the NVIDIA card is dual-slot, 267 mm long, 116 mm tall, and 35 mm wide. The NVIDIA card has no display outputs, a deliberate choice for its mining-oriented role, while the AMD card offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature parity is not a differentiator.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 has an average benchmark score of 81,995, placing it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA CMP 50HX has an average score of 51,790, placing it in the 86th percentile.

Q: Why does the NVIDIA card have more shading units but lose in benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 50HX has 3,584 shading units versus 1,792 for the AMD Radeon PRO W6600, but the AMD card operates at much higher clock speeds (2331 MHz base, 2580 MHz boost versus 1350 MHz base, 1545 MHz boost). The benchmark results show AMD winning the OpenCL test by 31% and the Vulkan test by 65.3%, indicating that clock speed and architecture efficiency outweigh raw unit counts in these workloads.

Q: What memory configuration does each card use?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA CMP 50HX has 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus with 560.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both run at the same effective memory speed of 14 Gbps.

Q: Can either card output video to a display?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The NVIDIA CMP 50HX has no display outputs at all, which is consistent with its mining-focused design and means it cannot be used as a primary display adapter.

Q: What process nodes are the two chips built on?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 uses the Navi 23 chip on TSMC's 7 nm process. The NVIDIA CMP 50HX uses the TU102 chip on TSMC's 12 nm process. The AMD chip achieves a transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter versus 24.7 million for the NVIDIA chip.

Q: Which card has a higher power requirement?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 50HX is rated at 250 W TDP with a suggested 600 W power supply and two 8-pin connectors. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 is rated at 100 W TDP with a suggested 300 W power supply and a single 6-pin connector.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 as the stronger performer in every measured workload. It wins the OpenCL test by 31% and the Vulkan test by 65.3%, and it holds a higher average benchmark score (81,995 versus 51,790) with a higher percentile ranking (92nd versus 86th). For any user whose priority is raw compute performance in these APIs, the AMD card is the clear choice.

The NVIDIA CMP 50HX, however, is not without its strengths. It offers 10 GB of memory versus 8 GB, and its 560.0 GB/s bandwidth is more than double the AMD card's 224.0 GB/s. It also has more shading units, TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, and tensor cores, plus a higher FP32 throughput at 11.07 TFLOPS versus 9.247 TFLOPS. The data suggests these specifications are not translating into wins in the recorded benchmarks, but they could matter in workloads that stress memory bandwidth or use APIs not covered by the database. The card's lack of display outputs, however, limits its utility to compute-only tasks.

The power profile also favors AMD. The 100 W TDP and single 6-pin connector make the Radeon PRO W6600 far easier to integrate into a system, while the CMP 50HX's 250 W TDP and dual 8-pin connectors demand a more substantial power supply (600 W suggested versus 300 W). For a workstation or compute node, the AMD card delivers superior measured performance at lower power draw, a combination that the data strongly supports.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon PRO W6600 | NVIDIA CMP 50HX |

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

| Chip | Navi 23 | TU102 |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Turing |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi II Series) | Mining GPUs |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 12 nm |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | 18,600 million |

| Die Size | 237 mm² | 754 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 46.7M / mm² | 24.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2331 MHz | 1350 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2580 MHz | 1545 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 10 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 320 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 560.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 3584 |

| TMUs | 112 | 192 |

| ROPs | 64 | 80 |

| RT Cores | 28 | 56 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 448 |

| Pixel Rate | 165.1 GPixel/s | 123.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 289.0 GTexel/s | 296.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 9.247 TFLOPS | 11.07 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 18.49 TFLOPS (2:1) | 22.15 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 100 W | 250 W |

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

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

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 1.0 x4 |

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

| Dimensions | 241 mm (9.5 inches) long | 267 mm (10.5 inches) long, 116 mm (4.6 inches) tall, 35 mm (1.4 inches) wide |

| Launch MSRP | 649 USD | None |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 wins in all recorded benchmark comparisons. Its 31% OpenCL advantage and 65.3% Vulkan advantage make it the default pick for any workload that relies on these APIs. Its higher pixel rate (165.1 GPixel/s versus 123.6 GPixel/s) and nearly identical texture rate (289.0 GTexel/s versus 296.6 GTexel/s) reinforce that it can handle rasterization-heavy tasks despite having fewer hardware units. Its lower power draw (100 W versus 250 W) and single-slot form factor also make it the better choice for dense or power-constrained systems. The launch MSRP of 649 USD is the only recorded price data point, and the card's end-of-life status means it may still be found in some channels.

The NVIDIA CMP 50HX wins in specific hardware specifications that the benchmarks do not cover. Its 560.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is more than double the AMD card's, which could benefit workloads that are bandwidth-bound rather than compute-bound. Its 10 GB memory capacity exceeds the AMD card's 8 GB, and its 448 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for tensor operations that the AMD card entirely lacks. The higher FP32 throughput of 11.07 TFLOPS versus 9.247 TFLOPS gives it a theoretical compute ceiling above the AMD card, even though the recorded benchmarks do not reflect that advantage. The card's mining-oriented design, with no display outputs and a dual-slot, 250 W footprint, means it is best suited for dedicated compute or mining installations where display output is irrelevant and power is available. Its PCIe 1.0 x4 bus interface, however, is a significant bottleneck that could limit performance in systems where data transfer between the GPU and host is critical. The AMD card's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is far more modern and offers substantially higher host bandwidth, which may explain some of the benchmark gap in real-world system contexts.