AMD Radeon PRO W6600 vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two workstation cards. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation wins both head-to-head tests listed in the database, with no test where the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 comes out ahead. That makes the use-case split straightforward: if the workload is compute-oriented, particularly OpenCL or Vulkan, the NVIDIA card dominates.

The RTX 5000 Ada Generation delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 175,286 and a Vulkan score of 194,041. The Radeon PRO W6600 posts 73,514 in OpenCL and 78,428 in Vulkan. The delta is massive: 138.4% in OpenCL and 147.4% in Vulkan, both in favor of NVIDIA. For professionals running GPU-accelerated rendering, simulation, or AI inference through these APIs, the NVIDIA card is the clear choice.

However, the AMD card does have one unique data point. The database includes a Geekbench Metal score of 94,042 for the Radeon PRO W6600. No Metal result exists for the RTX 5000 Ada Generation. This matters for macOS or Metal-specific workflows, where the AMD card is the only one with recorded performance data. If the target environment relies on Metal, the AMD card is the only option with verified scores.

The RTX 5000 Ada Generation also ranks at the 98th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Radeon PRO W6600 sits at the 92nd percentile. The average benchmark score for the NVIDIA card is 184,664, versus 81,995 for AMD. That is a 102.7% gap in average score, reinforcing that the NVIDIA card is in a different performance tier entirely.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different silicon generations and design philosophies. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation uses the AD102 chip built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, packing 76,300 million transistors into a 609 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 125.3 million per mm². The Radeon PRO W6600 uses the Navi 23 chip on TSMC's 7 nm node, with 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, for a density of 46.7 million per mm².

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The NVIDIA card has 12,800 shading units, 400 texture mapping units, and 176 raster operations pipelines. It also includes 100 ray tracing cores and 400 tensor cores. The AMD card has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 28 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores listed. The absence of tensor cores on the AMD side is notable for any workload that leverages NVIDIA's tensor core acceleration.

Memory configurations are also vastly different. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation carries 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon PRO W6600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus, for 224.0 GB/s. That is a 4x capacity advantage and a 2.57x bandwidth advantage for NVIDIA. For large datasets, 3D scenes, or multi-model AI workloads, the 32 GB frame buffer is a decisive factor.

Clock behavior differs too. The AMD card has a higher base clock at 2331 MHz versus 1155 MHz for NVIDIA, and a similar boost clock at 2580 MHz versus 2550 MHz. But the NVIDIA card compensates with far more execution units. The memory clock also favors NVIDIA: 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, versus 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective for AMD.

Power and physical design diverge as well. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation has a 250 W TDP, requires a 16-pin power connector, and a suggested 600 W power supply. It is a dual-slot card. The Radeon PRO W6600 has a 100 W TDP, uses a single 6-pin connector, and needs only a 300 W PSU. It is a single-slot card. The AMD card is shorter at 241 mm versus 267 mm for NVIDIA. Both use PCIe 4.0, but NVIDIA runs x16 while AMD runs x8.

The NVIDIA card is built on Ada Lovelace architecture, the AMD on RDNA 2.0. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both output 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation was released on August 8, 2023, and remains active in production. The Radeon PRO W6600 launched June 7, 2021, and is now end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct head-to-head comparisons, and both go decisively to the NVIDIA card.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 5000 Ada Generation scores 175,286 against the Radeon PRO W6600's 73,514. That is a 138.4% advantage. This is not a marginal win; it is more than double. OpenCL workloads that are compute-bound, such as physics simulation, video encoding, or general GPU compute, will see roughly a 2.4x performance uplift on the NVIDIA card.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens further. The NVIDIA card scores 194,041, while AMD manages 78,428. The delta is 147.4%. Vulkan is often used in real-time rendering and game engines, but also in scientific visualization and some CAD tools. The NVIDIA card is nearly 2.5x faster in this API.

The average benchmark score tells the same story. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation averages 184,664 across all recorded tests. The Radeon PRO W6600 averages 81,995. The NVIDIA card's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB at 183,725 (0.5% behind), the A100 SXM4 40 GB at 187,147 (1.3% ahead), and the RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell at 182,109 (1.4% behind). The RTX 5000 Ada Generation also sits 3.7% ahead of the GeForce RTX 4090 D, which scores 178,050.

For the AMD card, its nearest rivals are much closer. The Radeon Pro Vega 64X scores 80,959, just 1.3% behind. The GeForce RTX 5090 scores 79,842, 2.7% behind. The Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB and 12 GB sit 3% and 3.3% behind, respectively. This places the Radeon PRO W6600 in a completely different performance bracket, competing with cards that are several generations old.

The Vulkan score for NVIDIA is also noteworthy because it exceeds the OpenCL score by 10.7%. This suggests the Ada Lovelace architecture is particularly efficient in Vulkan compute paths. The AMD card shows a smaller gap between its OpenCL and Vulkan scores, with Vulkan 6.7% higher.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation has 65.28 TFLOPS FP32 and 65.28 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 has 9.247 TFLOPS FP32 and 18.49 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). NVIDIA is 7.06x higher in FP32 and 3.53x higher in FP16.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The NVIDIA card has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 224.0 GB/s. NVIDIA offers 4x the capacity and 2.57x the bandwidth.

Q: Is the AMD card viable for Metal-based workflows?

A: Yes. The database records a Geekbench Metal score of 94,042 for the Radeon PRO W6600. No Metal score is listed for the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation, so the AMD card is the only one with verified Metal performance data.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada Generation has a 250 W TDP and suggests a 600 W power supply. The Radeon PRO W6600 has a 100 W TDP and suggests a 300 W power supply. The AMD card consumes 60% less power.

Q: How does the NVIDIA card compare to its closest rivals?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada Generation averages 184,664, which is 0.5% ahead of the A100 SXM4 80 GB, 1.3% behind the A100 SXM4 40 GB, 1.4% ahead of the RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell, and 3.7% ahead of the GeForce RTX 4090 D.

Q: Which card has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation has 100 ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 has 28. NVIDIA also has 400 tensor cores, while the AMD card has none listed.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation outperforms the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 by 138.4% in OpenCL and 147.4% in Vulkan. It has 4x the memory capacity, 2.57x the memory bandwidth, and 7.06x the FP32 compute throughput. It ranks at the 98th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD card ranks at the 92nd. The NVIDIA card is not just faster; it is in a different performance class.

The RTX 5000 Ada Generation should be chosen for professionals running compute-heavy workloads in OpenCL or Vulkan, particularly if the task involves large datasets, ray tracing, or tensor core acceleration. The 32 GB frame buffer and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for high-resolution rendering, AI inference, and multi-application GPU workloads. Its nearest rivals are data-center class accelerators like the A100 series, which confirms its positioning at the top of the workstation segment.

The Radeon PRO W6600 is the right pick in one specific scenario: if the workflow requires Metal API support. The database shows a Metal score of 94,042 for this card, and no Metal result exists for the NVIDIA option. Beyond that, the AMD card is a lower-power, single-slot solution at 100 W, which may fit in systems with strict power or space constraints. Its 8 GB memory and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for lighter workloads, and it remains competitive with older cards like the Radeon Pro Vega 64X and Tesla P100.

For any user who needs maximum compute performance, the RTX 5000 Ada Generation is the only rational choice from the recorded data. The AMD card is a reasonable secondary option for Metal-specific or power-constrained environments, but it trails by more than double in every shared benchmark.