AMD Radeon Pro W6600M vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 7600M and AMD Radeon Pro W6600M are both mobile graphics solutions from AMD, but they target different priorities. The RX 7600M is a consumer-oriented part from the Radeon RX 7000 series, built on the newer RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the Pro W6600M is a professional mobile workstation GPU from the Radeon Pro lineup, based on the older RDNA 2.0 architecture. Benchmark data shows a clear performance gap, but the architecture differences reveal distinct design philosophies. The RX 7600M achieves an average benchmark score of 63,775, while the Pro W6600M sits at 61,896. Both parts hold the 89th percentile among all GPUs, indicating they are positioned similarly in the overall performance hierarchy, yet their individual strengths and weaknesses differ significantly.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a clear split in performance dominance. In the only directly comparable benchmark—Geekbench OpenCL—the AMD Radeon RX 7600M decisively outperforms the Pro W6600M. The RX 7600M scores 63,775 against the Pro W6600M’s 56,140, a substantial 13.6% advantage. This is the sole head-to-head benchmark recorded, and the RX 7600M wins it outright.

However, the Pro W6600M has its own claim to performance. While it lacks an OpenCL score matching the RX 7600M, the Pro W6600M posts a Geekbench Vulkan score of 67,652. This Vulkan result is actually higher than the RX 7600M’s OpenCL score, suggesting that in APIs where the Pro W6600M is optimized, it can deliver strong raw throughput. The RX 7600M does not have a Vulkan benchmark entry in the data, so a direct comparison in that API is not possible. Still, the Pro W6600M’s ability to break the 67,000 mark in Vulkan indicates that its compute capabilities are not negligible, particularly for workloads that leverage that API.

For compute-heavy tasks using OpenCL, the RX 7600M is the clear winner. Its 13.6% lead is decisive and points to better raw compute throughput. In contrast, the Pro W6600M appears to be a more balanced performer across different APIs, even if its peak OpenCL score is lower. The RX 7600M also edges out its closest rivals in the average benchmark data. It sits just 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX, while leading the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 by 0.1% and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 by 0.7%. The Pro W6600M, meanwhile, trails the AMD Radeon 8050S by 0.3% but leads the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 by 2.6% and the Intel Arc Pro A60 by 2.6% in average score.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on different architectures, which explains their performance and feature disparities. The RX 7600M uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed "Hotpink Bonefish," and belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation. In contrast, the Pro W6600M uses the Navi 23 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture and is part of the Radeon Pro Mobile (W6x00M) generation. This generational leap is significant. The RX 7600M is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the Pro W6600M uses a 7 nm process, also at TSMC. The smaller node allows the RX 7600M to pack 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The Pro W6600M, by contrast, has 11,060 million transistors on a larger 237 mm² die, with a density of 46.7M per mm².

Clock speeds also reflect the architectural improvements. The RX 7600M has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 2410 MHz, with a game clock of 2070 MHz. The Pro W6600M runs at a lower 1224 MHz base and 2034 MHz boost, with no game clock listed. This higher frequency headroom on the RX 7600M contributes directly to its compute advantage.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity but differ in speed. Both GPUs use 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. However, the RX 7600M’s memory runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro W6600M’s memory is slower at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), resulting in 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This 32 GB/s difference favors the RX 7600M.

The core counts are identical—both have 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. Neither has tensor cores. Yet the architectural efficiency differs. The RX 7600M achieves a pixel rate of 154.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 269.9 GTexel/s, while the Pro W6600M manages 130.2 GPixel/s and 227.8 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute is where the gap widens dramatically: the RX 7600M delivers 17.27 TFLOPS versus the Pro W6600M’s 7.290 TFLOPS. FP16 performance follows suit, with the RX 7600M at 34.55 TFLOPS (2:1) and the Pro W6600M at 14.58 TFLOPS (2:1). Both GPUs share the same API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. They also have the same TDP of 90 W, slot width of IGP, and no power connectors, making them comparable in power draw.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600M is significantly faster, scoring 63,775 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M’s 56,140, a 13.6% lead.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes, both the RX 7600M and the Pro W6600M come with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the main architectural difference between the two?

A: The RX 7600M uses the newer RDNA 3.0 architecture on a 6 nm process, while the Pro W6600M uses the older RDNA 2.0 architecture on a 7 nm process.

Q: How does their memory bandwidth compare?

A: The RX 7600M offers 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Pro W6600M provides 224.0 GB/s, a difference of 32 GB/s in favor of the RX 7600M.

Q: Are the core counts identical?

A: Yes, both GPUs have 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 performance?

A: The RX 7600M delivers 17.27 TFLOPS, more than double the Pro W6600M’s 7.290 TFLOPS.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7600M | AMD Radeon Pro W6600M |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Chip | Navi 33 | Navi 23 |

| Codename | Hotpink Bonefish | None |

| Generation | Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) | Radeon Pro Mobile (W6x00M) |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 11,060 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 237 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 46.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1500 MHz | 1224 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2410 MHz | 2034 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2070 MHz | None |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Pixel Rate | 154.2 GPixel/s | 130.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 269.9 GTexel/s | 227.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 17.27 TFLOPS | 7.290 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 34.55 TFLOPS (2:1) | 14.58 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2021-06-07 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Predecessor | Polaris Mobile | FirePro Mobile |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single benchmark comparison between the two GPUs is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is lopsided. The AMD Radeon RX 7600M scores 63,775, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 56,140. This gives the RX 7600M a 13.6% victory. This is a substantial margin in compute workloads, reflecting the RX 7600M’s superior FP32 throughput (17.27 TFLOPS versus 7.290 TFLOPS) and higher memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s).

Beyond the direct head-to-head, the average benchmark scores tell a broader story. The RX 7600M has an average benchmark score of 63,775, which is its only benchmark entry. The Pro W6600M averages 61,896 across two benchmarks (OpenCL and Vulkan). The Pro W6600M’s Vulkan score of 67,652 is notably higher than its OpenCL score and exceeds the RX 7600M’s OpenCL result. This suggests that in Vulkan-based workloads, the Pro W6600M could be competitive or even superior, though no direct Vulkan comparison exists for the RX 7600M.

The RX 7600M’s nearest rivals in the data include the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63,830, delta -0.1%), NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842, delta -0.1%), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693, delta +0.1%), and AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 (64,212, delta -0.7%). The Pro W6600M’s rivals include the AMD Radeon 8050S (62,108, delta -0.3%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (60,347, delta +2.6%), Intel Arc Pro A60 (60,326, delta +2.6%), and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60,140, delta +2.9%). These deltas show the RX 7600M is tightly clustered with its peers, while the Pro W6600M holds a more comfortable lead over its nearest competitors, particularly the RTX 4090 and Arc Pro A60.

In summary, the RX 7600M wins the compute performance battle decisively in OpenCL, but the Pro W6600M’s Vulkan capability and its strong standing relative to its own rivals indicate it is not obsolete. The RX 7600M is the newer, faster part with double the FP32 throughput, while the Pro W6600M remains a capable option for specific API workloads, though its end-of-life status and lower memory bandwidth limit its long-term appeal.