AMD Radeon Pro W6600M vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data draws a clear line between these two mobile workstation GPUs. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile wins both head-to-head benchmark tests in the database, and its average benchmark score of 113944 places it far ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, which averages 61896. That is a gap of roughly 84% in aggregate performance, and it is reflected in the percentile standings: the NVIDIA part sits at the 94th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD part reaches the 89th percentile.

For professionals whose workloads are dominated by compute throughput, especially OpenCL-based rendering, simulation, or data processing, the RTX A5500 Mobile is the clear choice from the data. Its OpenCL score of 124287 is more than double the AMD part's 56140, a 121.4% advantage. Even in Vulkan, where the gap narrows, the NVIDIA GPU still leads by 53.1%, scoring 103601 against 67652. The A5500 Mobile is also the only one of the two with tensor cores, which matters for any AI-adjacent or DLSS-style workload that can use them, although the database does not include a direct benchmark for that feature.

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is not without a role. Its 90 W TDP is considerably lower than the 165 W TDP of the NVIDIA part, so it is better suited to thinner mobile workstations or deployments where thermal headroom and battery life are priorities. Its smaller 8 GB frame buffer and 128-bit memory bus are limitations, but for lighter CAD, visualization, or Vulkan-based applications, the data shows it is a capable part, sitting just 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon 8050S and 2.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 in average score among its nearest rivals.

The verdict from the measurements is straightforward: pick the RTX A5500 Mobile if raw compute performance, double the memory capacity, and tensor core support matter most. Pick the Radeon Pro W6600M if power draw is the binding constraint and the workload fits within 8 GB of VRAM.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile uses the GA103 chip built on Ampere architecture, manufactured by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The die is 496 mm² and contains 22,000 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 44.4 million per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M uses the Navi 23 chip on RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 7 nm process. Its die is 237 mm² with 11,060 million transistors, for a density of 46.7 million per mm². The AMD chip is therefore smaller and denser, but the NVIDIA chip packs nearly twice the transistor count.

Core configuration differs substantially. The RTX A5500 Mobile has 7424 shading units, 232 texture mapping units, 96 raster output units, 58 ray tracing cores, and 232 tensor cores. The Radeon Pro W6600M has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores, with no tensor cores listed. That is a 4.1x difference in shading units, a 2.1x difference in TMUs, and a 1.5x difference in ROPs. The NVIDIA part also carries dedicated tensor hardware, which the AMD part lacks entirely.

Clock behavior also differs. The AMD GPU runs higher clocks: 1224 MHz base and 2034 MHz boost, compared to 975 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost for the NVIDIA part. Despite the higher clocks, the AMD part cannot overcome the core count deficit. FP32 compute tells the story: the RTX A5500 Mobile delivers 22.27 TFLOPS, while the Radeon Pro W6600M delivers 7.290 TFLOPS. FP16 is interesting: the NVIDIA part does 22.27 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the AMD part does 14.58 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. So the AMD GPU is relatively stronger in FP16 than in FP32, but still trails in absolute terms.

Memory architecture is another major divider. The NVIDIA part has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, with memory clocked at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD part has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for 224.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA GPU has twice the capacity and more than double the bandwidth. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16 and support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are listed as end-of-life products, with the NVIDIA part released on 2022-03-21 and the AMD part on 2021-06-07.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head data records two wins for the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile and zero for the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M. In OpenCL, the NVIDIA part wins by 121.4%, which is the largest margin in either test. This indicates workloads that scale with raw compute throughput, such as rendering, physics simulation, or data-parallel compute, will strongly favor the A5500 Mobile. The NVIDIA GPU's 22.27 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth provide the underlying resources for that advantage.

In Vulkan, the NVIDIA part wins by 53.1%. The margin is smaller but still decisive. Vulkan workloads often benefit from efficient draw call handling and driver overhead reduction, and the data suggests the RDNA 2.0 part is comparatively closer to Ampere here, though still behind. The AMD part's higher boost clock of 2034 MHz may help narrow the gap in latency-sensitive or lightly threaded scenarios.

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M does not win any recorded benchmark, so its advantage must be inferred from non-benchmark fields. Its 90 W TDP is 75 W lower than the NVIDIA part's 165 W TDP. That makes it the better fit for systems where cooling and power delivery are constrained. Its smaller die size of 237 mm² and lower transistor count also suggest a cheaper and more power-efficient manufacturing profile, though pricing is not recorded in the database. For mobile workstations that prioritize portability over peak performance, the W6600M is the more sensible selection from the recorded specifications.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 113944, compared to 61896 for the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M.

Q: How large is the OpenCL performance gap?

A: The RTX A5500 Mobile scores 124287 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Radeon Pro W6600M scores 56140. That is a 121.4% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Does the AMD GPU win any head-to-head test?

A: No. The database records two head-to-head tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile wins both.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX A5500 Mobile has 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The Radeon Pro W6600M has 224.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro W6600M have tensor cores?

A: No tensor cores are listed for the AMD part. The RTX A5500 Mobile lists 232 tensor cores.

Q: Which GPU consumes less power?

A: The Radeon Pro W6600M has a TDP of 90 W, while the RTX A5500 Mobile has a TDP of 165 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test produces the single largest gap in the comparison. The RTX A5500 Mobile records 124287 points, and the Radeon Pro W6600M records 56140 points. The delta is 121.4%. To put that in context, the NVIDIA part's nearest rival, the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB, sits just 0.4% lower in average score, while the AMD part's nearest rival, the Radeon 8050S, is 0.3% lower. The distance between these two mobile GPUs is far larger than the distance between either one and its closest competitors. The OpenCL result reflects the massive difference in shading units (7424 vs 1792), FP32 throughput (22.27 TFLOPS vs 7.290 TFLOPS), and memory bandwidth (512.0 GB/s vs 224.0 GB/s).

The Geekbench Vulkan test narrows the gap but does not change the outcome. The RTX A5500 Mobile scores 103601, and the Radeon Pro W6600M scores 67652, for a 53.1% NVIDIA lead. The AMD part's higher boost clock of 2034 MHz, compared to 1500 MHz for the NVIDIA part, likely helps it close some of the raw compute deficit in Vulkan, as does its 2:1 FP16 ratio of 14.58 TFLOPS, which can accelerate certain shader workloads. Still, the NVIDIA part's 1:1 FP16 throughput of 22.27 TFLOPS remains higher in absolute terms.

Looking at the nearest rival data, the RTX A5500 Mobile sits slightly below the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation (117088, delta -2.7%) and the NVIDIA GB10 (117393, delta -2.9%), while sitting above the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (110725, delta 2.9%). The Radeon Pro W6600M sits just below the AMD Radeon 8050S (62108, delta -0.3%) and above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (60347, delta 2.6%) and Intel Arc Pro A60 (60326, delta 2.6%). This means the Radeon Pro W6600M is competitive with a broad set of midrange GPUs, while the RTX A5500 Mobile competes at a much higher performance tier, near workstation and data center parts.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification field. The process node is 8 nm for NVIDIA (Samsung) and 7 nm for AMD (TSMC). The RTX A5500 Mobile uses the GA103 chip with 22,000 million transistors on a 496 mm² die. The Radeon Pro W6600M uses Navi 23 with 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die. Transistor density is slightly higher on the AMD part: 46.7M per mm² versus 44.4M per mm².

Clock speeds differ significantly. The NVIDIA part runs at 975 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. The AMD part runs at 1224 MHz base and 2034 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for AMD.

Memory configuration is a major divider. The RTX A5500 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro W6600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources differ across the board. The NVIDIA part has 7424 shading units, 232 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 58 RT cores, and 232 tensor cores. The AMD part has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores, with no tensor core count listed. Pixel rate is 144.0 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 130.2 GPixel/s for AMD. Texture rate is 348.0 GTexel/s versus 227.8 GTexel/s. FP32 is 22.27 TFLOPS versus 7.290 TFLOPS. FP16 is 22.27 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 14.58 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power and physical characteristics also differ. TDP is 165 W for NVIDIA and 90 W for AMD. Both list no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The AMD part is listed as IGP slot width, while the NVIDIA slot width is not recorded. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16 and share the same API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The release dates differ by roughly nine months, with AMD launching on 2021-06-07 and NVIDIA on 2022-03-21. Both are end-of-life.