AMD Radeon PRO W6600 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a clear hierarchy between these two workstation GPUs. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is the dominant performer in every recorded benchmark, with a 99.4% lead over the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 in Geekbench OpenCL and a 57.9% lead in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 135,218 places it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD card sits at the 92nd percentile with an average score of 81,995. For workloads that rely on OpenCL or Vulkan acceleration, the RTX 4000 Ada is the clear choice, provided the system can accommodate its higher 130 W TDP and 16-pin power connector. The Radeon PRO W6600, now end-of-life with a 100 W TDP and a single 6-pin connector, remains a capable option for projects already built around AMD's RDNA 2 feature set, but it cannot match the NVIDIA card in raw compute throughput. The RTX 4000 Ada also offers more than double the memory capacity at 20 GB versus 8 GB, which matters for large datasets that exceed the AMD card's limit. There is no benchmark category in the recorded data where the AMD card wins, so the verdict hinges on whether the user needs maximum performance or a simpler power footprint.

Picking the RTX 4000 Ada means accepting a larger die, 130 W TDP, a 16-pin power connection, and a 300 W suggested PSU, plus a card that is still in active production. Picking the Radeon PRO W6600 means working with an end-of-life product that was released earlier, runs on a smaller 7 nm node, consumes less power at 100 W, and uses a 6-pin power. The AMD card has no recorded wins in the head-to-head tests, so it is not the performance pick. The RTX 4000 Ada wins on every recorded metric, and it carries the advantage in transistor count at 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The database shows the RTX 4000 Ada is the only one of the two that supports Tensor Cores, with 192 of them, while the AMD card has none. For anyone who needs the highest recorded Geekbench scores, the RTX 4000 Ada is the only defensible answer.

The RTX 4000 Ada sits within 0.9% of the AMD Radeon PRO V620, 0.4% of the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo, 0.1% of the AMD Radeon PRO W6800, and 0% of the NVIDIA A10M in average score, which means it trades blows with those cards at the top of the stack. The Radeon PRO W6600, meanwhile, is 1.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 2.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090, 3% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla P100 P100 16 GB, and 3.3% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla P100 12 GB, showing it leads its own immediate rivals by a small margin. The gap between the two cards in the database is far larger than the gaps between each card and its nearest rivals, which confirms that they are not competing in the same performance tier.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on different architectures from different foundries. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip on the Ada Lovelace architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 uses the Navi 23 chip on RDNA 2.0, also from TSMC but on a 7 nm process. The node difference is significant, with the NVIDIA card using a more advanced fabrication that helps pack 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.8 million per mm². The AMD card fits 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die, resulting in a density of 46.7 million per mm². The NVIDIA card has roughly three times the transistor count on a die that is only about 24% larger, which speaks to the density advantage of the newer node.

Core counts differ substantially. The RTX 4000 Ada has 6,144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, 48 ray tracing cores, and 192 tensor cores. The Radeon PRO W6600 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores, but no tensor cores. The lack of tensor cores on the AMD side means no dedicated hardware for AI acceleration, a feature that the NVIDIA card provides. The FP32 throughput tells the story: the RTX 4000 Ada delivers 26.73 TFLOPS, while the Radeon PRO W6600 delivers 9.247 TFLOPS. The AMD card does offer FP16 at 18.49 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, whereas the RTX 4000 Ada achieves 26.73 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA card is ahead in both precision formats.

The memory subsystems are also different. The NVIDIA card has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, with 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The AMD card has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA card provides more capacity and higher bandwidth, which is relevant for large compute workloads. The PCIe interface differs as well: the RTX 4000 Ada uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Radeon PRO W6600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, halving the available lanes for host communication.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada has a TDP of 130 W and uses a 1x 16-pin power connector. The Radeon PRO W6600 has a TDP of 100 W and uses a 1x 6-pin power connector. Both have a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Q: Does either card support ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: Both support ray tracing, with the RTX 4000 Ada having 48 ray tracing cores and the Radeon PRO W6600 having 28. Only the NVIDIA card has tensor cores, with 192 of them; the AMD card has none.

Q: How do the two cards compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada scores 146,593 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Radeon PRO W6600 scores 73,514, a 99.4% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: What are the production statuses of the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is listed as Active in production. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 is listed as End-of-life.

Q: How do the cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada scores 123,842 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Radeon PRO W6600 scores 78,428, a 57.9% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every recorded specification. The RTX 4000 Ada uses the AD104 chip on Ada Lovelace architecture, while the Radeon PRO W6600 uses Navi 23 on RDNA 2.0. The process node is 5 nm for NVIDIA and 7 nm for AMD. Transistor count is 35,800 million versus 11,060 million, and die size is 294 mm² versus 237 mm². Transistor density is 121.8 million per mm² versus 46.7 million per mm². Base clock is 1500 MHz versus 2331 MHz, with boost clocks of 2175 MHz versus 2580 MHz. Memory clocks are 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). Memory capacity is 20 GB versus 8 GB, bus width is 160-bit versus 128-bit, and bandwidth is 360.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s. Shading units are 6,144 versus 1,792, TMUs are 192 versus 112, ROPs are equal at 64, ray tracing cores are 48 versus 28, and tensor cores are 192 versus none. Pixel rate is 139.2 GPixel/s versus 165.1 GPixel/s, texture rate is 417.6 GTexel/s versus 289.0 GTexel/s, FP32 is 26.73 TFLOPS versus 9.247 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 26.73 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 18.49 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP is 130 W versus 100 W. Power connectors are 1x 16-pin versus 1x 6-pin. The PCIe interface is x16 versus x8. Dimensions are 245 mm (9.6 inches) long and 112 mm (4.4 inches) high for NVIDIA, versus 241 mm (9.5 inches) long for AMD. Release dates are August 8, 2023 versus June 7, 2021. The NVIDIA card's predecessor is Workstation Ampere and successor is Blackwell PRO W; the AMD card's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega with no successor listed. The AMD card has a launch MSRP of 649 USD.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains two benchmark results, and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation wins both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4000 Ada scores 146,593 against the Radeon PRO W6600's 73,514, a delta of 99.4%. This is nearly a doubling of performance in raw compute throughput. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4000 Ada scores 123,842 against 78,428, a 57.9% advantage. The Vulkan gap is smaller than the OpenCL gap, but still substantial. The NVIDIA card also has a Geekbench Metal score of 94,042, but that test is not available for the AMD card, so it cannot be compared directly. The Radeon PRO W6600 has no recorded benchmark where it beats the RTX 4000 Ada.

The average benchmark score amplifies the difference. The RTX 4000 Ada has an average score of 135,218, while the Radeon PRO W6600 has an average of 81,995, a gap of roughly 65%. The percentile ranking also differs: the RTX 4000 Ada is at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon PRO W6600 is at the 92nd. Both cards are above average, but the NVIDIA card sits closer to the top. The nearest rivals for the RTX 4000 Ada, the NVIDIA A10M at 135,230, the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 at 135,396, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo at 135,774, and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 at 136,472, are all within 0.9% of its score. The Radeon PRO W6600's nearest rivals, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X at 80,959, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 at 79,842, the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB at 79,605, and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB at 79,396, are all within 3.3% of its score. This means the RTX 4000 Ada competes with much stronger cards, while the Radeon PRO W6600 competes with weaker ones.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation wins in every recorded benchmark category. It is the only card of the two with tensor cores, which makes it the sole option for workloads that leverage dedicated AI acceleration hardware. Its 20 GB memory capacity is more than double the AMD card's 8 GB, so it is the better choice for large datasets, complex scenes, or multi-application workflows that exceed 8 GB. Its FP32 performance of 26.73 TFLOPS is nearly three times the AMD card's 9.247 TFLOPS, so compute-heavy OpenCL tasks will favor it strongly. Its Vulkan score of 123,842 versus 78,428 indicates a significant advantage in Vulkan-based rendering workloads. The RTX 4000 Ada also has a higher texture rate at 417.6 GTexel/s versus 289.0 GTexel/s, which benefits texturing-heavy workloads, though the AMD card has a higher pixel rate at 165.1 GPixel/s versus 139.2 GPixel/s, indicating a slight fill-rate edge for the Radeon in pixel-bound scenarios. The RTX 4000 Ada is also the only card still in active production, while the Radeon PRO W6600 is end-of-life.

The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 wins in fewer measured aspects, but it does have some advantages. Its base clock of 2331 MHz and boost clock of 2580 MHz are higher than the NVIDIA card's 1500 MHz and 2175 MHz. Its pixel rate of 165.1 GPixel/s exceeds the RTX 4000 Ada's 139.2 GPixel/s, which could matter in certain rasterization tasks. Its TDP of 100 W is lower than the RTX 4000 Ada's 130 W, and it uses a standard 6-pin power connector rather than a 16-pin connector, making it easier to integrate into systems without newer power supplies, though both cards suggest a 300 W PSU. Its physical length of 241 mm (9.5 inches) is slightly shorter than the NVIDIA card's 245 mm (9.6 inches). The Radeon PRO W6600 was also released earlier, on June 7, 2021, versus August 8, 2023, so it has a longer market presence. However, in terms of recorded performance, the AMD card has no wins. The RTX 4000 Ada is the pick for anyone who needs maximum compute throughput, larger memory capacity, tensor core acceleration, or a card that is still in active production. The Radeon PRO W6600 is the pick for those who prioritize lower power draw, a simpler power connector, higher base clocks, and a slightly higher pixel fill rate, provided the performance gap is acceptable.