AMD Radeon Pro W6600M vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 and the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M represent two distinct approaches to professional graphics, separated by architecture, process node, and intended form factor. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy in the available benchmarks, but the W6600M’s newer architecture and far lower power envelope make it a more nuanced comparison than a simple score ranking might suggest. This analysis relies exclusively on the provided benchmark results and specifications to determine which card excels in raw compute and which offers superior efficiency per watt.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between these two cards is limited to two Geekbench tests, and the results are decisive in favor of the WX 8200. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the WX 8200 scores 69,774 against the W6600M’s 56,140. This represents a 24.3% advantage for the older, workstation-focused card. This is a substantial gap, indicating that the WX 8200’s 10.75 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 512.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth translate into a significant lead in compute-heavy OpenCL workloads. The W6600M, with its 7.290 TFLOPS and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, simply cannot match the raw throughput of the Vega 10 chip.

The second test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows a much closer contest. The WX 8200 scores 69,076, while the W6600M trails slightly at 67,652. The delta is only 2.1% in favor of the WX 8200. This narrower margin suggests that the W6600M’s RDNA 2.0 architecture, which supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, is more efficient at translating its compute resources into graphics-oriented tasks. The WX 8200 still wins, but the small 2.1% gap is a notable achievement for a mobile chip with half the shading units and a quarter of the memory bandwidth.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the WX 8200’s average benchmark score is 69,870, placing it in the 90th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 with an average score of 69,986 (a -0.2% delta) and the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile at 70,140 (a -0.4% delta). The WX 8200 is effectively neck-and-neck with these professional cards, trailing by less than half a percent. In contrast, the W6600M’s average score is 61,896, putting it in the 89th percentile. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon 8050S, scores 62,108, a -0.3% delta, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 scores 60,347, meaning the W6600M is 2.6% ahead. The data shows the WX 8200 is a top-tier performer, while the W6600M, though slightly lower in absolute score, still competes well within its percentile band.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 has an average benchmark score of 69,870, which is significantly higher than the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M’s 61,896. The WX 8200 also sits in the 90th percentile of all GPUs, while the W6600M is in the 89th.

Q: How much faster is the WX 8200 in OpenCL workloads?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the WX 8200 scores 69,774, which is 24.3% higher than the W6600M’s score of 56,140. This represents the largest performance gap between the two cards in any benchmark.

Q: Is the W6600M competitive in Vulkan performance?

A: Yes, the W6600M is very close in Vulkan. It scores 67,652 against the WX 8200’s 69,076, a difference of only 2.1%. Despite having significantly lower memory bandwidth and fewer shading units, the newer RDNA 2.0 architecture keeps it within striking distance.

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two cards?

A: The WX 8200 has a TDP of 230 W, while the W6600M has a TDP of only 90 W. This makes the W6600M a far more power-efficient option, especially for mobile or compact workstation designs.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The WX 8200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the W6600M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The W6600M also supports Vulkan 1.4, whereas the WX 8200 supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The WX 8200 offers 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth using HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus. The W6600M uses GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s, which is less than half of the WX 8200’s bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split based on workload and form factor. For users prioritizing raw compute performance, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 is the unequivocal choice. Its 24.3% lead in OpenCL and its 90th percentile ranking against all GPUs demonstrate that it is a high-end workstation part designed for demanding professional applications. Its 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is a critical advantage for large datasets, a feature the W6600M cannot match. The WX 8200’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro P6000, is within 0.2% in average score, indicating the WX 8200 is a top-tier competitor in its class.

However, the W6600M is not without its merits. While it loses in pure scores, its 89th percentile ranking is still strong, and its performance in Vulkan is nearly identical to the WX 8200, trailing by only 2.1%. The 90 W TDP is a massive advantage for mobile workstations or any system where thermal and power budgets are constrained. The W6600M’s newer RDNA 2.0 architecture also brings support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, which may be relevant for future software. The data indicates that the WX 8200 is for users who need maximum compute throughput and are willing to accept a dual-slot design with a 230 W power draw, while the W6600M is for those who need capable professional performance in a power-efficient, portable package. The WX 8200 wins 2-0 in head-to-head tests, but the W6600M’s efficiency makes it a more practical choice for a specific set of users.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ fundamentally in their memory subsystems. The WX 8200 uses 8 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus, achieving 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The W6600M also has 8 GB, but it is GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s. The core configurations also diverge sharply: the WX 8200 has 3,584 shading units and 224 TMUs, while the W6600M has 1,792 shading units and 112 TMUs. Both have 64 ROPs. The clock speeds show the W6600M’s advantage in efficiency: it has a base clock of 1224 MHz and a boost of 2034 MHz, compared to the WX 8200’s 1200 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. The WX 8200 has a pixel rate of 96.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 336.0 GTexel/s, while the W6600M has 130.2 GPixel/s and 227.8 GTexel/s, respectively. The WX 8200’s FP32 performance is 10.75 TFLOPS, and its FP16 is 21.50 TFLOPS, whereas the W6600M delivers 7.290 TFLOPS FP32 and 14.58 TFLOPS FP16. The WX 8200 is dual-slot with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors and a 230 W TDP, while the W6600M is an IGP with no power connectors and a 90 W TDP. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the WX 8200 versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for the W6600M.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 is built on the Vega 10 chip using the GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.3M per mm². The W6600M, in contrast, uses the Navi 23 chip with the RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It has 11,060 million transistors on a much smaller 237 mm² die, achieving a higher density of 46.7M per mm². The W6600M is the only one of the two with dedicated ray tracing cores, featuring 28 RT cores. The WX 8200 has no RT cores. The W6600M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 8200 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. The WX 8200’s generation is listed as "Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x200)" and its predecessor is "Radeon Pro GCN," with a successor of "Radeon Pro Vega." The W6600M’s generation is "Radeon Pro Mobile (W6x00M)," its predecessor is "FirePro Mobile," and it has no successor listed. The WX 8200 was released in 2018 and is end-of-life, while the W6600M was released in 2021 and is also end-of-life. The WX 8200 has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the W6600M’s display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent." The WX 8200 has a launch MSRP of 999 USD, while the W6600M has no listed launch MSRP.