AMD Radeon Pro W6600M vs NVIDIA Quadro GP100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single direct comparison between these two professional graphics solutions: a Geekbench OpenCL test. In that test, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 scored 87,445 points, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scored 56,140 points. The NVIDIA card wins this head-to-head matchup by a decisive 55.8% margin.

The Quadro GP100’s OpenCL result places it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 87,445 puts it 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 (87,108), 2.1% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85,637), but 4% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91,134) and 4.6% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91,671). This places the Quadro GP100 in a competitive mid-range professional segment, narrowly edging out some desktop and mobile rivals while trailing two higher-tier RTX offerings.

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, by contrast, has two recorded benchmark results. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 56,140, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 67,652. Its average benchmark score is 61,896, placing it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs. The W6600M sits 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon 8050S (62,108), but 2.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (60,347) and the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60,326), and 2.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60,140). While the W6600M’s average is lower than the Quadro GP100’s, its Vulkan result demonstrates a different API profile, which is relevant for workloads that leverage that interface.

The OpenCL delta of 55.8% is substantial. It indicates that in raw compute throughput as measured by this specific benchmark, the Pascal-generation NVIDIA card holds a commanding lead over the RDNA 2 mobile AMD card. The data shows one decisive win for the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 and no benchmark wins for the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M in the head-to-head comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different design philosophies and process technologies. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 uses the GP100 chip, built on the Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 16 nm process at TSMC. It packs 15,300 million transistors into a die size of 610 mm², for a transistor density of 25.1 million transistors per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M uses the Navi 23 chip, built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, also fabricated at TSMC but on a newer 7 nm process. It contains 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, achieving a much higher transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter.

Memory configurations differ sharply. The Quadro GP100 features 16 GB of HBM2 memory on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 732.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The W6600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card therefore offers double the capacity and more than three times the memory bandwidth, a critical factor for large data sets in compute workloads.

Compute resources also diverge. The Quadro GP100 has 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. It does not list any ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The W6600M has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, but it does include 28 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA card’s pixel rate is 138.5 GPixel/s versus 130.2 GPixel/s for AMD. Texture rate is 323.2 GTexel/s versus 227.8 GTexel/s. In FP32 compute, the Quadro GP100 delivers 10.34 TFLOPS, while the W6600M delivers 7.290 TFLOPS. Both support FP16 at a 2:1 ratio: 20.69 TFLOPS for NVIDIA and 14.58 TFLOPS for AMD.

Clock behavior differs as well. The Quadro GP100 runs at a base clock of 1304 MHz with a boost of 1443 MHz. The W6600M has a lower base of 1224 MHz but a much higher boost of 2034 MHz. The AMD card’s boost clock is 41% higher than its base, reflecting a mobile-friendly power management strategy.

Process node and power draw tell a complementary story. The Quadro GP100 has a TDP of 235 W and requires a dual-slot form factor with a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested 550 W power supply. The W6600M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 90 W TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested power supply listed. The AMD card is clearly designed for mobile integration, while the NVIDIA card is a desktop-oriented workstation part.

API support also separates the two. The Quadro GP100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The W6600M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD card’s newer feature set includes DirectX 12 Ultimate, which reflects its more recent architecture.

The Quadro GP100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the W6600M uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs for the NVIDIA card are 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the AMD card’s outputs are listed as portable device dependent, consistent with its mobile positioning.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 wins decisively in OpenCL compute performance. Its 87,445 OpenCL score is 55.8% higher than the W6600M’s 56,140. This advantage is supported by its hardware profile: more shading units, higher FP32 throughput, and vastly superior memory bandwidth. For compute-heavy professional tasks such as simulation, rendering, or data processing that rely on OpenCL, the Quadro GP100 is the stronger choice based on the recorded data.

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M’s strengths lie elsewhere. It has a Vulkan benchmark score of 67,652, which is 20.5% higher than its own OpenCL score. This indicates that the AMD card performs relatively better under the Vulkan API, a relevant consideration for workloads that use that interface. The database does not include a Vulkan score for the Quadro GP100, so no direct comparison is possible for that API.

The W6600M also wins on power efficiency as measured by TDP. Its 90 W TDP is 145 W lower than the Quadro GP100’s 235 W. For mobile or space-constrained deployments, this efficiency advantage is significant. The 7 nm process and higher transistor density (46.7M/mm² versus 25.1M/mm²) reflect a more modern manufacturing approach.

The W6600M also supports ray tracing with 28 dedicated RT cores, a feature entirely absent from the Quadro GP100. For applications that use DirectX 12 Ultimate features or ray-traced rendering, the AMD card provides hardware support that the NVIDIA card lacks.

The Quadro GP100 has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs: 93rd versus 89th for the W6600M. Its average benchmark score of 87,445 versus 61,896 for AMD represents a 41.3% advantage in aggregate performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 scores 87,445 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 55.8% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M’s 56,140.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the W6600M includes 28 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 does not list any ray tracing cores.

Q: How do the memory bandwidths compare?

A: The Quadro GP100 provides 732.2 GB/s of bandwidth with 16 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus. The W6600M provides 224.0 GB/s with 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The Quadro GP100 has a TDP of 235 W, while the W6600M has a TDP of 90 W.

Q: Which card has the higher transistor density?

A: The AMD W6600M has 46.7 million transistors per square millimeter on its 7 nm process, versus 25.1 million per square millimeter for the NVIDIA GP100 on 16 nm.

Q: How do their percentile rankings compare?

A: The Quadro GP100 sits in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, while the W6600M sits in the 89th percentile.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear performance hierarchy. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 dominates in OpenCL compute, delivering a 55.8% higher score than the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M. Its hardware specification supports this result: double the memory capacity, more than triple the memory bandwidth, twice the shading units, and 42% higher FP32 throughput. For professional workloads that stress raw compute and large memory buffers, the Quadro GP100 is the stronger option according to the recorded measurements.

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M occupies a different niche. Its 90 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for mobile workstations, a deployment scenario the 235 W dual-slot Quadro GP100 cannot match. Its Vulkan score of 67,652 shows a capable API-specific performance profile, and its 28 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced workflows that the Pascal-generation NVIDIA card cannot offer. Its 7 nm process and higher transistor density also indicate a more modern design.

The choice between these two cards depends on the deployment context. The data shows that for static, power-unconstrained compute tasks using OpenCL, the Quadro GP100 is the decisive winner. For mobile integration, lower power draw, Vulkan-based workloads, or ray-traced rendering, the W6600M offers capabilities that the GP100 lacks. The Quadro GP100 holds the 93rd percentile ranking and a 41.3% higher average benchmark score, but the W6600M’s feature set and efficiency profile address distinct use cases. Based strictly on the recorded data, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 is the superior compute performer, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is the more versatile and efficient mobile option.