AMD Radeon PRO W6600 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data set is clear: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 dominates the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 in every recorded head-to-head comparison. The two available direct comparisons, both Geekbench compute workloads, show a massive performance gap that leaves no ambiguity about the hierarchy between these two accelerators.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 4080 scores 214,739 against 73,514 for the Radeon PRO W6600. That represents a 65.8% deficit for the AMD card relative to NVIDIA's offering. The OpenCL workload is a general-purpose compute benchmark, so this margin reflects raw throughput capabilities rather than a game-specific or driver-optimized scenario. For context, the Radeon PRO W6600's own average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 81,995, which places it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The RTX 4080, despite winning both head-to-head tests by enormous margins, has a lower overall average benchmark score of 54,247 and sits in the 86th percentile. This is a reminder that the two cards have very different benchmark portfolios in the database, with the RTX 4080 carrying many additional workload types, including DirectX and Passmark tests that drag its average down.

The Vulkan head-to-head is even more lopsided. The RTX 4080 posts 263,779 versus 78,428 for the Radeon PRO W6600, a 70.3% lead for NVIDIA. Vulkan is a cross-platform graphics and compute API, and this result indicates that the RTX 4080's architectural advantages scale strongly in low-level, driver-controlled workloads. The Radeon PRO W6600's Vulkan score is actually slightly higher than its OpenCL result, but the RTX 4080 improves by roughly 23% when moving from OpenCL to Vulkan, widening the gap further.

Looking at the nearest rivals of each card helps contextualize where these GPUs sit. The Radeon PRO W6600's closest competitor in the database is the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X, with an average score of 80,959 and a delta of only 1.3%. It also edges out the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 by 2.7% and both Tesla P100 variants by roughly 3%. These are relatively small margins, meaning the W6600 is clustered tightly with several capable accelerators. The RTX 4080, by contrast, sits within 0.1% of the RTX 4080 SUPER, trails the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X by 1.1%, and is 2.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB. The RTX 4080's immediate rivals are all within a narrow band, yet the card itself is leagues ahead of the Radeon PRO W6600 in the direct comparisons.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 wins decisively with a score of 214,739 against 73,514 for the AMD Radeon PRO W6600, a 65.8% advantage.

Q: Is the Vulkan result closer than the OpenCL result?

A: No, it is further apart. The RTX 4080 scores 263,779 in Vulkan, while the Radeon PRO W6600 scores 78,428, giving NVIDIA a 70.3% lead.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 compare to its closest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER?

A: The RTX 4080 and RTX 4080 SUPER are nearly identical, with the RTX 4080 trailing by just 0.1% in average benchmark score.

Q: What is the average benchmark score and percentile ranking for the Radeon PRO W6600?

A: The Radeon PRO W6600 has an average benchmark score of 81,995 and ranks in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: What is the average benchmark score and percentile ranking for the RTX 4080?

A: The RTX 4080 has an average benchmark score of 54,247 and ranks in the 86th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: Which AMD card is the Radeon PRO W6600 most closely matched with?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X, with an average score of 80,959 and a delta of only 1.3% from the W6600.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial and explains much of the performance delta. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 is built on the Navi 23 chip using RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The RTX 4080 uses the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference alone, 7 nm versus 5 nm, contributes to significant efficiency and density gaps.

Transistor counts tell a dramatic story. The Radeon PRO W6600 packs 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter. The RTX 4080 contains 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, achieving 121.1 million per square millimeter. That is over four times the transistor count on a die that is only about 60% larger in area. The density advantage of the RTX 4080, roughly 2.6 times higher, is a direct consequence of the more advanced 5 nm manufacturing process.

Compute resources differ enormously. The Radeon PRO W6600 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The RTX 4080 has 9,728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. In ray tracing, the W6600 has 28 ray accelerators, while the RTX 4080 has 76 dedicated RT cores. The RTX 4080 also features 304 tensor cores for AI-accelerated workloads, a capability the Radeon PRO W6600 lacks entirely, as its tensor core field is null. These resource differences translate directly into the FP32 and FP16 throughput figures: the W6600 delivers 9.247 TFLOPS FP32 and 18.49 TFLOPS FP16 using a 2:1 ratio, while the RTX 4080 delivers 48.74 TFLOPS FP32 and 48.74 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio.

Memory architecture also diverges. The Radeon PRO W6600 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, producing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4080 uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, yielding 716.8 GB/s. The memory clock figures differ as well: the W6600 runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective, while the RTX 4080 runs at 1400 MHz but achieves 22.4 Gbps effective thanks to the faster GDDR6X signaling.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification. Clock speeds show the Radeon PRO W6600 actually has higher base and boost clocks, 2331 MHz base and 2580 MHz boost, versus 2205 MHz and 2505 MHz for the RTX 4080. However, the RTX 4080's vastly larger execution resources more than compensate for the lower clocks.

Memory capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth all favor the RTX 4080: 16 GB versus 8 GB, GDDR6X versus GDDR6, 256-bit versus 128-bit, and 716.8 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s. The pixel rate favors the RTX 4080 at 280.6 GPixel/s versus 165.1 GPixel/s, and texture rate favors it at 761.5 GTexel/s versus 289.0 GTexel/s.

Power and physical characteristics differ sharply. The Radeon PRO W6600 has a TDP of 100 W, is single-slot, and requires a single 6-pin power connector with a 300 W suggested PSU. The RTX 4080 has a TDP of 320 W, is triple-slot, uses a 16-pin connector, and requires a 700 W suggested PSU. The RTX 4080 is also physically larger: 310 mm long, 140 mm tall, and 61 mm wide, compared to 241 mm in length for the W6600 with no recorded height or width.

Bus interface and display outputs differ as well. The W6600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The RTX 4080 uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and has one HDMI 2.1 port plus three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 wins in every direct benchmark comparison recorded in the database. Its OpenCL score of 214,739 and Vulkan score of 263,779 are far beyond anything the Radeon PRO W6600 can produce. The RTX 4080 is also the clear choice for workloads that benefit from 16 GB of memory, GDDR6X bandwidth, tensor cores, and a 1:1 FP16 ratio. Its 76 RT cores give it a substantial ray tracing advantage, and its 304 tensor cores enable AI-accelerated features that the W6600 cannot access at all.

The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 wins in areas outside raw compute performance. Its 100 W TDP makes it far more power-efficient in absolute terms, and its single-slot design with a single 6-pin connector allows installation in compact workstations where the triple-slot, 320 W RTX 4080 would not fit. The W6600 also carries four DisplayPort outputs, matching the RTX 4080's display count but without any HDMI port. Its 165.1 GPixel/s pixel rate and 289.0 GTexel/s texture rate, while lower than the RTX 4080, are still respectable for a card of its class. The W6600's higher base and boost clocks, 2331 MHz and 2580 MHz, are notable but do not translate into a performance win.

Looking at the percentile data, the W6600 sits in the 92nd percentile with an average score of 81,995, which is higher than the RTX 4080's 86th percentile and 54,247 average. This is because the database includes a broader set of workloads for the RTX 4080, including Passmark DirectX 10, 11, 12, and 9 tests, as well as G2D and G3D tests. The Radeon PRO W6600 only has Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan results recorded. The RTX 4080's Passmark scores, such as 204 in DirectX 10 and 132 in DirectX 12, are low relative to its compute scores and skew its average downward.

The Verdict

The verdict is straightforward: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is the superior performer in every head-to-head benchmark recorded. It leads by 65.8% in OpenCL and 70.3% in Vulkan, and it offers substantially more memory, bandwidth, and compute resources. Anyone prioritizing raw compute throughput, ray tracing, or AI-accelerated workloads should choose the RTX 4080 without hesitation.

The AMD Radeon PRO W6600, however, has a clear niche. Its 100 W power draw, single-slot form factor, and modest power connector requirements make it suitable for systems where space and thermal headroom are constrained. Its 92nd percentile ranking and tight clustering with rivals like the Radeon Pro Vega 64X, which it beats by 1.3%, show that it is a competent card within its segment. The RTX 4080, despite its lower percentile ranking, is the more powerful part, and the direct benchmark comparisons confirm that no workload in the shared test set favors the AMD card.

For buyers who need maximum compute performance, the RTX 4080 is the only choice. For buyers who need a low-power, single-slot workstation card with four DisplayPort outputs and modest system requirements, the Radeon PRO W6600 remains viable. The data does not support any scenario where the W6600 outperforms the RTX 4080 in a direct compute comparison, so the decision comes down to physical constraints and workload needs rather than raw performance.