AMD Radeon Pro W6600M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 are two GPUs from different worlds: one is a 90 W mobile workstation part, the other a 450 W desktop flagship. Benchmark data shows the RTX 4090 dominates in raw compute, but the W6600M still holds a higher average score in one specific dataset. This analysis sorts out which GPU wins where, based strictly on the available facts.

The Verdict

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is the clear choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance. In the head-to-head benchmarks, it beats the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M by 78% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 75.1% in Geekbench Vulkan. The RTX 4090 also delivers 82.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus the W6600M’s 7.290 TFLOPS, making it more than 11 times faster in that metric. If your workload is GPU-bound and time is money, the RTX 4090 is the only sensible pick.

However, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M has a niche. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 61,896, which is 2.6% higher than the RTX 4090’s 60,347. This is counterintuitive given the RTX 4090’s massive lead in individual tests, but the data shows the W6600M’s two benchmark scores (56,140 OpenCL and 67,652 Vulkan) are more consistent, while the RTX 4090’s average is dragged down by low Passmark scores in DirectX 9 (397), DirectX 10 (224), and DirectX 11 (326). For a system that needs a broad mix of legacy and modern API support, the W6600M might not embarrass itself.

The verdict splits cleanly: pick the RTX 4090 for absolute compute throughput, especially in OpenCL and Vulkan. Pick the W6600M only if you need a low-power, integrated mobile GPU with a better average benchmark profile and you do not need the RTX 4090’s memory or tensor core features. The data does not support the W6600M as a competitor in raw speed—it wins zero head-to-head tests.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M uses the Navi 23 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It contains 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 46.7M per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 uses the AD102 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die, with a much higher density of 125.3M per mm².

Core counts differ dramatically. The W6600M has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). The RTX 4090 has 16,384 shading units, 512 TMUs, and 176 ROPs. The RTX 4090 also has 128 ray tracing cores and 512 tensor cores, while the W6600M has 28 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores listed. This means the RTX 4090 is designed for AI and ray tracing workloads that the W6600M cannot accelerate in the same way.

Memory architecture is another major split. The W6600M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4090 uses 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, with 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth—over four times the memory and over four times the bandwidth. Clock speeds also favor the RTX 4090: its base clock is 2235 MHz and boost is 2520 MHz, versus the W6600M’s 1224 MHz base and 2034 MHz boost. The RTX 4090’s memory runs at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective), while the W6600M’s memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API coverage is identical.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4090 wins in every raw performance category. It has higher pixel rate (443.5 GPixel/s vs 130.2 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (1,290.2 GTexel/s vs 227.8 GTexel/s), and massively higher FP32 throughput (82.58 TFLOPS vs 7.290 TFLOPS). Its FP16 performance is 82.58 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the W6600M offers 14.58 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). For compute-heavy tasks like rendering, simulation, or machine learning, the RTX 4090 is the clear winner.

The W6600M wins only in efficiency and form factor. Its TDP is 90 W versus the RTX 4090’s 450 W, and it is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, while the RTX 4090 is a triple-slot card requiring a 16-pin connector and an 850 W suggested power supply. The W6600M’s display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," making it ideal for laptops, while the RTX 4090 has fixed outputs (1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a). The W6600M also has a higher average benchmark score (61,896 vs 60,347), which is its only numerical win.

In terms of benchmark wins, the head-to-head data shows the RTX 4090 wins 2 out of 2 tests. The W6600M wins zero. However, the W6600M’s percentile rank among all GPUs is 89, which is slightly higher than the RTX 4090’s 88. This suggests that the W6600M’s scores are more consistent across its limited test set, while the RTX 4090’s performance varies more widely depending on the API.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M has an average benchmark score of 61,896, which is 2.6% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090’s 60,347.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4090 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 4090 scores 255,416 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 78% higher than the W6600M’s 56,140.

Q: Does the W6600M have tensor cores?

A: No, the W6600M has no tensor cores listed, while the RTX 4090 has 512 tensor cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 4090 has 1.01 TB/s of memory bandwidth, while the W6600M has 224.0 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The W6600M ranks in the 89th percentile among all GPUs, while the RTX 4090 ranks in the 88th percentile.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The W6600M has a TDP of 90 W, while the RTX 4090 has a TDP of 450 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two shared benchmark tests are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4090 scores 255,416 against the W6600M’s 56,140. That is a delta of -78% for the W6600M, meaning the RTX 4090 is roughly 4.5 times faster. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4090 scores 271,631 against the W6600M’s 67,652, a delta of -75.1%. Again, the RTX 4090 is about 4 times faster.

These are the only head-to-head results available, and the RTX 4090 wins both decisively. The data does not include any 3DMark or Passmark results for the W6600M, so you cannot compare those directly. However, the RTX 4090’s own Passmark scores show a wide spread: it scores 38,194 in G3D but only 224 in DirectX 10 and 397 in DirectX 9. This inconsistency explains why its average score (60,347) ends up lower than the W6600M’s average (61,896), despite the RTX 4090 winning the shared tests by huge margins.

The RTX 4090’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 9,223 is not comparable to the W6600M, but it indicates strong modern API performance. The takeaway is simple: in any compute benchmark where both GPUs are tested, the RTX 4090 wins by a factor of 4 or more. The W6600M’s higher average score is a statistical artifact of the RTX 4090’s poor legacy DirectX performance, not a sign of real competitiveness.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two GPUs differ.

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro W6600M | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | 76,300 million |

| Die Size | 237 mm² | 609 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 46.7M / mm² | 125.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1224 MHz | 2235 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2034 MHz | 2520 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 1.01 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 16384 |

| TMUs | 112 | 512 |

| ROPs | 64 | 176 |

| RT Cores | 28 | 128 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 512 |

| Pixel Rate | 130.2 GPixel/s | 443.5 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 227.8 GTexel/s | 1,290.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 7.290 TFLOPS | 82.58 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 14.58 TFLOPS (2:1) | 82.58 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 90 W | 450 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Triple-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None listed | 850 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 304 mm length, 137 mm height, 61 mm width |

| Release Date | 2021-06-07 | 2022-09-19 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Mobile | GeForce 30 |

| Successor | None listed | GeForce 50 |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | 1,599 USD |

The RTX 4090 is larger, faster, and more feature-rich in every hardware dimension. The W6600M is smaller, more efficient, and designed for mobile integration. The launch MSRP for the RTX 4090 is 1,599 USD; no MSRP is listed for the W6600M. The RTX 4090 also lists a successor (GeForce 50), while the W6600M lists none, and the RTX 4090’s predecessor is GeForce 30, while the W6600M’s is FirePro Mobile. Both are end-of-life products, but the RTX 4090 was released over a year later.