AMD Radeon Pro W6600M vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data splits this comparison cleanly. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile is the outright performance leader, winning both head-to-head benchmark entries by substantial margins. Its average benchmark score of 91,134 places it at the 93rd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M averages 61,896, sitting at the 89th percentile. That is a 47.3% gap in average score, and it reflects a consistent pattern across both recorded workloads.

For professionals running OpenCL-accelerated compute tasks, the choice is unambiguous: the RTX A4500 Mobile delivers 87.6% higher OpenCL performance than the W6600M. Even in Vulkan, where the AMD part is relatively stronger, the NVIDIA GPU still leads by 13.8%. Anyone whose workflow depends on raw throughput should pick the RTX A4500 Mobile without hesitation.

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is not without merit, however. It draws 90 W against the NVIDIA part's 140 W, making it the more power-efficient option for thin mobile workstations where thermal headroom is tight. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon 8050S (0.3% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (2.6% behind), and the Intel Arc Pro A60 (2.6% behind), showing that it competes in a credible mid-tier bracket. If the workload is lighter, Vulkan-centric, or constrained by power limits, the W6600M is the sensible choice. For everything else, the RTX A4500 Mobile dominates.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages and foundries. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile uses the GA104 chip built on Ampere architecture, manufactured by Samsung on an 8 nm process. It packs 17,400 million transistors onto a 392 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 44.4 million per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M uses the Navi 23 chip on RDNA 2.0 architecture, built by TSMC on a 7 nm process. It contains 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, with a slightly higher transistor density of 46.7 million per mm². The AMD chip is smaller in both transistor count and die area, but the more advanced 7 nm node allows for tighter packing.

Core configuration differences are stark. The RTX A4500 Mobile fields 5,888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, 96 raster output units, 46 RT cores, and 184 tensor cores. The W6600M counters with 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed. The NVIDIA part's shading unit count is more than triple the AMD part's, which largely explains its compute advantage.

Clock behavior also diverges. The AMD GPU has a higher base clock at 1,224 MHz versus 930 MHz, and a higher boost clock at 2,034 MHz versus 1,500 MHz. Higher clocks help the W6600M close some of the gap, but the sheer width of the NVIDIA architecture prevails. Memory clocks differ too: the RTX A4500 Mobile runs at 2,000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective data rate, while the W6600M runs at 1,750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective.

Feature sets are comparable at the API level. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA GPU adds tensor cores, which the AMD part lacks, a meaningful difference for machine learning inference workloads. The AMD part, however, offers a 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio (14.58 TFLOPS FP16 versus 7.290 TFLOPS FP32), whereas the NVIDIA part runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 (both at 17.66 TFLOPS). For FP16-heavy tasks, the AMD architecture can double its throughput, though its absolute FP16 number still trails the NVIDIA GPU.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile averages 91,134 across recorded benchmarks, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M averages 61,896. That places the NVIDIA part at the 93rd percentile and the AMD part at the 89th percentile.

Q: How large is the OpenCL performance gap?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A4500 Mobile scores 105,307 against the W6600M's 56,140, a delta of 87.6% in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: Does the AMD card win any benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head results show the NVIDIA card winning both recorded tests. The W6600M's closest recorded result is Vulkan, where it trails by 13.8%.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M has a 90 W TDP, while the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile has a 140 W TDP. The AMD part consumes less power, making it better suited for constrained mobile chassis.

Q: What are the memory differences?

A: The RTX A4500 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The W6600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same modern APIs?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part additionally includes tensor cores, which the AMD part does not list.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification field. Process node: 8 nm for NVIDIA, 7 nm for AMD. Transistors: 17,400 million versus 11,060 million. Die size: 392 mm² versus 237 mm². Transistor density: 44.4M per mm² versus 46.7M per mm². Base clock: 930 MHz versus 1,224 MHz. Boost clock: 1,500 MHz versus 2,034 MHz. Memory clock: 2,000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity differs by half: 16 GB versus 8 GB. Bus width: 256-bit versus 128-bit. Bandwidth: 512.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s, a 128.6% advantage for NVIDIA. Shading units: 5,888 versus 1,792. TMUs: 184 versus 112. ROPs: 96 versus 64. RT cores: 46 versus 28. Tensor cores: 184 on NVIDIA, none listed on AMD.

Pixel rate: 144.0 GPixel/s versus 130.2 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 276.0 GTexel/s versus 227.8 GTexel/s. FP32 compute: 17.66 TFLOPS versus 7.290 TFLOPS. FP16 compute: 17.66 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 14.58 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP: 140 W versus 90 W. Slot width: not specified for NVIDIA, "IGP" for AMD. Release date: 2022-03-21 for NVIDIA, 2021-06-07 for AMD. Production status is end-of-life for both. Neither lists a launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two benchmark comparisons between these GPUs, and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile wins both.

The first is Geekbench OpenCL, where the RTX A4500 Mobile scores 105,307 against the W6600M's 56,140. The delta is 87.6%, meaning the NVIDIA part nearly doubles the AMD part's OpenCL throughput. This is the largest recorded gap between the two and reflects the NVIDIA GPU's much wider compute pipeline: 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs against 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The FP32 numbers align with this result, as the RTX A4500 Mobile delivers 17.66 TFLOPS versus 7.290 TFLOPS for the W6600M, a 142.3% advantage in raw floating-point capability.

The second test is Geekbench Vulkan. Here the RTX A4500 Mobile scores 76,960, and the W6600M scores 67,652, a 13.8% delta. The AMD part closes much of the gap in this API, likely due to its higher boost clock (2,034 MHz versus 1,500 MHz) and the efficiency of the RDNA 2.0 architecture in Vulkan workloads. Still, the NVIDIA GPU holds the lead, and the delta is enough to keep the overall win tally at 2-0 in favor of NVIDIA.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces the hierarchy. The RTX A4500 Mobile's closest competitor in the database is the desktop NVIDIA RTX A4500, which averages 91,671, a 0.6% difference. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 sits 1.4% above the mobile NVIDIA part, while the Quadro GP100 sits 4.2% below. The W6600M, by contrast, sits within 2.9% of a cluster that includes the AMD Radeon 8050S, the GeForce RTX 4090, and the Intel Arc Pro A60. None of those rivals approach the RTX A4500 Mobile's average score.

The practical interpretation is straightforward. In compute-heavy OpenCL scenarios, the RTX A4500 Mobile is in a different class entirely. In Vulkan, the W6600M is competitive enough to matter for lighter workloads, but it still loses. The data does not show a scenario where the AMD part overtakes the NVIDIA part. The RTX A4500 Mobile wins every recorded benchmark, and its 93rd percentile standing versus the W6600M's 89th confirms that it occupies a higher tier in the database's overall rankings.