AMD Radeon Pro W6600M vs NVIDIA P102-100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M and NVIDIA P102-100 represent two starkly different design philosophies from different eras, yet benchmark results place them in a near tie in overall standing. The AMD part, a 2021 mobile workstation GPU built on a 7nm process, edges out the NVIDIA Pascal-based mining card from 2018 in both recorded Geekbench tests, though the margin in one is razor-thin. The data shows the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M holds a 13.2% lead in Geekbench OpenCL (56,140 vs. 49,602) and a marginal 0.3% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan (67,652 vs. 67,454), giving it a clean 2-0 win tally in head-to-head comparisons.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most significant performance gap between these two GPUs appears in the Geekbench OpenCL workload, where the Radeon Pro W6600M posts a score of 56,140 against the P102-100’s 49,602. This translates to a 13.2% advantage for the AMD part, a substantial margin that suggests the newer architecture handles compute-heavy OpenCL tasks considerably more efficiently. This is not a trivial gap; in real-world terms, it could mean noticeably faster execution of OpenCL-accelerated professional applications.

The Geekbench Vulkan results tell a different story, however. Here, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 67,652, while the NVIDIA P102-100 trails by just 198 points with 67,454, a delta of only 0.3%. This near-parity in Vulkan performance is remarkable given the architectural gulf between the two cards. It indicates that in raw graphics API throughput, the older Pascal chip can still hold its own against a much newer RDNA 2.0 design, likely due to its sheer number of shading units.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M’s average benchmark score of 61,896 places it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon 8050S, scores 62,108, a delta of -0.3%, meaning the two are effectively identical in aggregate performance. Notably, the W6600M also outperforms the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 by 2.6% (61,896 vs. 60,347 average) and the Intel Arc Pro A60 by the same 2.6% margin, demonstrating that despite its mobile, low-power design, it competes with or beats much larger desktop parts in these specific benchmarks.

The NVIDIA P102-100, with an average score of 58,528, sits in the 88th percentile, just one point behind the AMD card in percentile ranking. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon PRO V710 at 58,657, a delta of -0.2%, again showing statistical equivalence. The P102-100 also edges out the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT by 0.2% and the Intel Arc A570M by 0.5%, reinforcing that this mining-focused card, despite its lack of display outputs and limited feature set, retains respectable raw compute muscle.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge fundamentally in their underlying architectures, processes, and intended purposes. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using the Navi 23 chip, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. This modern node allows AMD to pack 11,060 million transistors into a compact 237 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 46.7M / mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA P102-100 uses the older Pascal architecture with the GP102 chip, manufactured on a 16 nm process, also at TSMC. This results in a much larger 471 mm² die housing 11,800 million transistors, but with a significantly lower density of just 25.1M / mm². The newer process node gives AMD a clear efficiency advantage, which is reflected in the power envelope: the W6600M is rated at 90 W TDP with an IGP slot width and no power connectors, while the P102-100 demands 250 W and requires 2x 8-pin power connectors.

Core configurations also differ markedly. The AMD part features 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 28 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA card counters with 3,200 shading units, 200 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, but has no ray tracing cores at all. Despite having nearly double the shading units, the P102-100’s raw FP32 throughput of 10.77 TFLOPS is only about 48% higher than the W6600M’s 7.290 TFLOPS, highlighting the per-clock efficiency gains of RDNA 2.0. The FP16 comparison is stark: the AMD card delivers 14.58 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the NVIDIA part manages just 168.3 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), a massive difference that reflects Pascal’s poor half-precision support.

Memory subsystems are equally divergent. The W6600M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The P102-100 uses 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus, providing 440.3 GB/s of bandwidth—nearly double the AMD card’s figure. Clock speeds also favor NVIDIA: the P102-100 runs at a base of 1582 MHz and boost of 1683 MHz, while the W6600M operates at a lower 1224 MHz base but boosts aggressively to 2034 MHz. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for AMD and 1376 MHz (11 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M has an average benchmark score of 61,896, which is higher than the NVIDIA P102-100’s 58,528. This places the AMD card in the 89th percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA card sits in the 88th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M in OpenCL performance?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 56,140 compared to the NVIDIA P102-100’s 49,602, giving AMD a 13.2% advantage. This is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any recorded benchmark.

Q: Does the NVIDIA P102-100 support ray tracing?

A: No, the NVIDIA P102-100 has no ray tracing cores. In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M includes 28 ray tracing cores. This is reflected in their DirectX support: AMD supports 12 Ultimate (12_2), while NVIDIA only supports 12 (12_1).

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA P102-100 features 5 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 320-bit bus with 440.3 GB/s bandwidth. Despite having less capacity, the NVIDIA card offers higher memory bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M has a boost clock of 2034 MHz, which is higher than the NVIDIA P102-100’s boost clock of 1683 MHz. The AMD card also has a lower base clock (1224 MHz vs. 1582 MHz), indicating a more aggressive boost curve.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in Vulkan performance?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 67,652, just 198 points ahead of the NVIDIA P102-100’s 67,454. This represents a marginal 0.3% difference, making Vulkan performance effectively a tie between the two.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro W6600M | NVIDIA P102-100 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 16 nm |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | 11,800 million |

| Die Size | 237 mm² | 471 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 46.7M / mm² | 25.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1224 MHz | 1582 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2034 MHz | 1683 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 5 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 320 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 440.3 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 1376 MHz (11 Gbps effective) |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 3200 |

| TMUs | 112 | 200 |

| ROPs | 64 | 80 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 28 | 0 |

| Pixel Rate | 130.2 GPixel/s | 134.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 227.8 GTexel/s | 336.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 7.290 TFLOPS | 10.77 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 14.58 TFLOPS (2:1) | 168.3 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 90 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x4 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |

| DirectX Version | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release Date | 2021-06-07 | 2018-02-11 |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Mobile (W6x00M) | Mining GPUs |

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different use cases. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is the superior choice for professional workstation tasks that leverage modern APIs and features. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and ray tracing cores makes it future-proof for applications that use these advanced rendering paths. The 13.2% OpenCL advantage is significant for compute-heavy workloads, and its 7 nm process node delivers that performance at just 90 W—a fraction of the NVIDIA card’s 250 W power draw. With an 89th percentile ranking and an average score of 61,896, it outperforms even the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 by 2.6% in aggregate benchmarks, making it a highly capable mobile workstation solution.

The NVIDIA P102-100, on the other hand, should only be considered by users with very specific, raw-compute needs that do not involve ray tracing, display output, or modern API features. Its 10.77 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 440.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth are impressive on paper, but the card’s lack of display outputs renders it useless for any interactive or rendering workload. The near-tie in Vulkan performance (0.3% difference) and the 88th percentile ranking show it remains relevant in pure compute scenarios, but the massive power requirements, PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, and absence of modern features like ray tracing make it a poor choice for most users.

For anyone needing a functional, efficient, and feature-complete GPU for professional mobile workstations, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is the clear winner. The NVIDIA P102-100 is a niche product that, despite its competitive benchmark scores, lacks the essential capabilities that most users require. The data unequivocally favors the AMD part in head-to-head competition, with wins in both OpenCL and Vulkan, a higher average score, a better percentile ranking, and superior architectural efficiency.