AMD Radeon Pro W6600M vs AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM Comparison

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins overall in the head-to-head benchmark comparison?

A: The data shows a split result. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 67,652, while the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 62,427. Each GPU takes one win.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM leads the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M by 10.1% in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 62,427 versus 56,140. This is a substantial margin favoring the desktop-oriented card in this compute workload.

Q: What about the Vulkan benchmark — which GPU is faster and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M dominates in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 67,652 against the RX 5600 OEM's 53,743. That represents a 25.9% advantage for the Pro card, a much larger delta than the OpenCL gap in the other direction.

Q: How do these GPUs rank against all other GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M sits at the 89th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 61,896. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM is at the 87th percentile, with an average score of 58,085.

Q: Which GPU has better transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, built on the Navi 23 chip, has a transistor density of 46.7 million transistors per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM, using Navi 10, has a lower density of 41.0 million per square millimeter.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU based on average benchmark score?

A: For the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon 8050S with a delta of -0.3%, followed by the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 at +2.6% and the Intel Arc Pro A60 at +2.6%. For the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM, the Intel Arc A570M is closest at -0.3%, with the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT at -0.5% and the NVIDIA P102-100 at -0.8%.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is built on RDNA 2.0, while the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM uses the older RDNA 1.0 architecture. This generation gap has significant implications for feature support. The Pro W6600M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes hardware ray tracing — it has 28 dedicated ray tracing cores. The RX 5600 OEM, in contrast, only supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and has no ray tracing cores at all. This is a fundamental architectural differentiator that affects which games and applications can run with advanced graphics features.

The chip designs also differ substantially. The Pro W6600M uses the Navi 23 chip, which is smaller in die size at 237 mm² but packs more transistors per area — 11,060 million transistors total, yielding a density of 46.7 million per mm². The RX 5600 OEM uses Navi 10, a larger die at 251 mm², with 10,300 million transistors and a lower density of 41.0 million per mm². Despite the smaller die, the Pro card achieves higher transistor density, reflecting the more advanced RDNA 2.0 design.

Both GPUs are manufactured on the 7 nm process at TSMC, so the process node is identical. However, the clock behavior differs significantly. The Pro W6600M has a base clock of 1224 MHz and a boost clock of 2034 MHz, while the RX 5600 OEM runs at a base of 1130 MHz, a game clock of 1375 MHz, and a boost of only 1560 MHz. The Pro card's much higher boost clock is a direct result of the architectural improvements in RDNA 2.0, which delivers better performance-per-clock and higher achievable frequencies.

Memory architectures also diverge. The Pro W6600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The RX 5600 OEM has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a wider 192-bit bus, achieving 288.0 GB/s at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). So the RX 5600 OEM has more raw memory bandwidth, but the Pro card has more memory capacity.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different use cases. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is the stronger choice for Vulkan-based workloads and modern graphics APIs, with its 25.9% lead in Geekbench Vulkan being the single largest performance differential in this comparison. The presence of ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support makes it the more future-proof option for applications that leverage these features.

The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM, however, wins in OpenCL compute with a 10.1% advantage. This suggests it handles certain general-purpose compute tasks better, despite lacking ray tracing hardware. Its higher memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s likely contributes to this OpenCL advantage, as does its larger shading unit count of 2048 versus 1792.

For users prioritizing raw compute in OpenCL applications, the RX 5600 OEM has the edge. For those needing Vulkan performance, ray tracing capability, or modern DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the Pro W6600M is the clear winner. The Pro card also consumes less power at 90 W TDP versus 125 W, and its IGP form factor means no power connectors are required, making it suitable for mobile workstations. The RX 5600 OEM is a dual-slot card requiring a 1x 8-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The Pro W6600M uses the Navi 23 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, while the RX 5600 OEM uses Navi 10 with RDNA 1.0. The Pro card has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, plus 28 ray tracing cores. The RX 5600 OEM has 2048 shading units and 128 TMUs, but no ray tracing cores; both have 64 ROPs.

Clock speeds favor the Pro card: base 1224 MHz versus 1130 MHz, and boost 2034 MHz versus 1560 MHz. The RX 5600 OEM has a defined game clock of 1375 MHz, which the Pro card lacks. Memory configurations differ: 8 GB versus 6 GB, 128-bit versus 192-bit bus, and 224.0 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

Pixel rate is higher on the Pro card at 130.2 GPixel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s, as is texture rate at 227.8 GTexel/s versus 199.7 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 7.290 TFLOPS versus 6.390 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 14.58 TFLOPS versus 12.78 TFLOPS (both 2:1 ratio). The Pro card has a lower TDP of 90 W versus 125 W, and an IGP slot width versus dual-slot. The RX 5600 OEM requires a 300 W PSU and has display outputs of 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Pro card's outputs are portable device dependent. The Pro card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2); the RX 5600 OEM supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL result is a clear win for the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM. It scores 62,427 against the Pro W6600M's 56,140, a delta of -10.1% from the Pro card's perspective. This 6,287-point gap is significant and likely stems from the RX 5600 OEM's advantages in raw shading resources — 2,048 shading units versus 1,792 — and its substantially higher memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s. The wider 192-bit memory bus gives the RX 5600 OEM a meaningful edge in bandwidth-dependent compute workloads.

The Geekbench Vulkan result flips the script dramatically. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 67,652, while the RX 5600 OEM manages only 53,743. The 25.9% delta — a 13,909-point difference — is more than double the OpenCL gap in percentage terms. This is the standout result of the entire comparison. The Pro card's RDNA 2.0 architecture, with its higher boost clock of 2034 MHz and ray tracing cores, clearly translates into superior Vulkan API performance. The fact that the Pro card achieves this with fewer shading units and lower memory bandwidth underscores the architectural efficiency gains of RDNA 2.0 over RDNA 1.0.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the Pro W6600M averages 61,896 across all tests, while the RX 5600 OEM averages 58,085. This gives the Pro card a roughly 6.6% overall advantage in average score, despite losing the OpenCL test. The Pro card's Vulkan dominance more than compensates for its OpenCL deficit when considering the average.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M wins decisively in Vulkan-based workloads. Its 25.9% lead in Geekbench Vulkan suggests it is the better choice for applications that use this modern cross-platform graphics API, which includes many current games and professional visualization tools. The Pro card's ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support make it suitable for workloads that leverage hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature entirely absent from the RX 5600 OEM. Its higher boost clock of 2034 MHz and lower TDP of 90 W also make it more efficient for sustained mobile workstation use. The 8 GB memory capacity is another advantage for larger datasets and textures.

The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM wins in OpenCL compute. Its 10.1% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL indicates stronger performance in general-purpose GPU compute tasks that rely on this API, such as certain scientific simulations, video encoding, and data processing workloads. The card's higher memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s and greater shading unit count of 2,048 are likely responsible for this edge. The RX 5600 OEM also has a wider 192-bit memory bus, which benefits bandwidth-intensive operations. Its higher TDP of 125 W reflects a more aggressive power envelope for sustained desktop performance.

For users deciding between these two, the choice hinges on the primary API used. Vulkan-centric workflows favor the Pro W6600M by a wide margin. OpenCL-centric workflows favor the RX 5600 OEM by a more modest margin. The Pro card's modern architecture and feature set make it the more versatile long-term option, while the RX 5600 OEM's raw compute resources give it a niche advantage in specific workloads. The data does not support a single overall winner — each GPU dominates in its respective benchmark category.