AMD Radeon Pro W6600M vs NVIDIA Tesla T4 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla T4 and AMD Radeon Pro W6600M are both end-of-life workstation-oriented GPUs, but they target fundamentally different segments: one is a low-power data-center accelerator, the other a mobile professional part. The benchmark data shows the Tesla T4 leading in both recorded tests, but the margins are modest and the architectural story is more complex than a simple win-loss tally.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The available benchmark results, drawn exclusively from Geekbench compute tests, show a consistent but narrow victory for the NVIDIA Tesla T4. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Tesla T4 scores 61,276 against the Radeon Pro W6600M’s 56,140. That is a 9.1% advantage, a clear but not overwhelming gap. A similar pattern emerges in the Geekbench Vulkan test: the Tesla T4 posts 72,190, while the Radeon Pro W6600M reaches 67,652, giving NVIDIA a 6.7% edge. Across these two tests, the Tesla T4 wins both, holding a 2–0 record in the head-to-head comparison.

These results place the Tesla T4 in the 90th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 66,733. The Radeon Pro W6600M sits just one percentile lower at 89, with an average score of 61,896. The difference in average score, roughly 4,837 points, or about 7.8%, aligns with the per-test deltas. Notably, the Tesla T4’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon VII (average score 66,004, just 1.1% lower) and the NVIDIA Tesla P40 (65,095, 2.5% lower). The Radeon Pro W6600M’s closest competitor is the AMD Radeon 8050S at 62,108, which is only 0.3% higher, meaning the W6600M is essentially neck-and-neck with that part.

The Vulkan result is particularly telling. The Tesla T4’s 72,190 score is its stronger of the two tests, and it represents a 6.7% lead over the W6600M’s 67,652. For a card with no display outputs, designed for server-side compute, this strong Vulkan showing suggests solid driver maturity for compute workloads on that API. The W6600M, despite being a mobile part with a higher boost clock, cannot close the gap in either test. The data does not show a single workload where the AMD card wins, so any analysis must focus on the magnitude of the losses rather than identifying a redeeming benchmark victory.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras and design philosophies. The Tesla T4 uses NVIDIA’s Turing architecture, built on a 12 nm TSMC process. The chip, designated TU104, packs 13,600 million transistors onto a 545 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.0M per mm². In contrast, the Radeon Pro W6600M uses AMD’s RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process. The Navi 23 chip contains 11,060 million transistors on a much smaller 237 mm² die, achieving a significantly higher density of 46.7M per mm². This process advantage allows AMD to fit a competitive feature set in a smaller package, though the Tesla T4’s larger die gives it raw transistor count superiority.

The compute resources differ substantially. The Tesla T4 has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 raster operation units (ROPs). It also includes 40 RT cores and 320 tensor cores, the latter being a defining feature absent from the AMD part. The Radeon Pro W6600M has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 28 ray accelerators (listed as RT cores). The tensor cores on the AMD card are not specified, which is a hardware difference that matters for AI-oriented workloads, though the benchmark data provided does not directly measure tensor performance.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The Tesla T4 has a base clock of 585 MHz and a boost clock of 1590 MHz. The Radeon Pro W6600M runs much higher, with a 1224 MHz base and a 2034 MHz boost. Despite the lower clocks, the Tesla T4 achieves higher FP32 throughput at 8.141 TFLOPS versus the AMD’s 7.290 TFLOPS. This is a direct result of the NVIDIA card having more shading units. The same pattern holds for FP16, where the Tesla T4 manages 16.28 TFLOPS (2:1) against the AMD’s 14.58 TFLOPS (2:1). Pixel fill rates favor AMD, however: the W6600M hits 130.2 GPixel/s versus the Tesla T4’s 101.8 GPixel/s. Texture fill rates are closer, with NVIDIA at 254.4 GTexel/s and AMD at 227.8 GTexel/s.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The Tesla T4 offers 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro W6600M has half the capacity, 8 GB, on a 128-bit bus, yielding 224.0 GB/s. The Tesla T4 runs its memory at 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective), while the AMD part uses 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The AMD’s faster memory clock cannot compensate for its narrower bus. The Tesla T4’s power envelope is lower at 70 W TDP, versus the W6600M’s 90 W, which is notable given the former is a single-slot card with no power connectors while the latter is an integrated GPU (IGP) for mobile systems.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla T4 has an average benchmark score of 66,733, placing it in the 90th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 61,896 on average, which is the 89th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The Tesla T4 scores 61,276, beating the Radeon Pro W6600M’s 56,140 by 9.1%. This is the largest delta between the two cards in any recorded benchmark.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro W6600M win any benchmark?

A: No. In the head-to-head data, the Tesla T4 wins both the Geekbench OpenCL (9.1% delta) and Geekbench Vulkan (6.7% delta) tests. The wins tally is 2 for NVIDIA and 0 for AMD.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Tesla T4 provides 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The Radeon Pro W6600M offers 224.0 GB/s from 8 GB on a 128-bit bus, a 96 GB/s deficit.

Q: Do both cards support the same modern APIs?

A: Yes, both list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 in their specifications. This means feature-level API support is identical on paper.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The Radeon Pro W6600M boosts to 2034 MHz, significantly higher than the Tesla T4’s 1590 MHz. Despite this, the Tesla T4 still leads in FP32 compute due to its larger number of shading units.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification. The Tesla T4 uses the TU104 chip on a 12 nm process with 13,600 million transistors and a 545 mm² die. The Radeon Pro W6600M uses Navi 23 on 7 nm, with 11,060 million transistors and a 237 mm² die. Transistor density follows: 25.0M / mm² for NVIDIA versus 46.7M / mm² for AMD.

Clock speeds are a major differentiator. The Tesla T4 runs at 585 MHz base and 1590 MHz boost. The AMD card is much faster at 1224 MHz base and 2034 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ, with the Tesla T4 at 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) and the AMD at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity and bus width favor NVIDIA: 16 GB on a 256-bit bus versus 8 GB on a 128-bit bus. This results in 320.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Compute units favor NVIDIA as well: 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs for the Tesla T4, against 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs for the W6600M. The Tesla T4 has 40 RT cores and 320 tensor cores; the AMD has 28 RT cores and no listed tensor cores.

Pixel rate goes to AMD at 130.2 GPixel/s versus 101.8 GPixel/s. Texture rate goes to NVIDIA at 254.4 GTexel/s versus 227.8 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 both favor NVIDIA at 8.141 TFLOPS and 16.28 TFLOPS, respectively, against AMD’s 7.290 TFLOPS and 14.58 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specs differ. The Tesla T4 is rated at 70 W TDP, is single-slot, has no power connectors, and requires a suggested 250 W PSU. The W6600M is rated at 90 W, is an IGP, has no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for the Tesla T4 and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the AMD. Display outputs are absent on the Tesla T4, while the AMD is portable-device dependent. The Tesla T4 measures 168 mm (6.6 inches) in length; the AMD has no listed dimensions. Release dates differ: the Tesla T4 came out on 2018-09-12, and the W6600M on 2021-06-07.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward choice for compute performance: the NVIDIA Tesla T4 is the faster card in every benchmark recorded. It leads by 9.1% in OpenCL and 6.7% in Vulkan, and its average score of 66,733 is 7.8% higher than the AMD’s 61,896. If raw compute throughput is the sole criterion, the Tesla T4 is the pick. Its 16 GB memory capacity and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth provide a substantial buffer for large datasets, and its 70 W TDP means it can fit into power-constrained server chassis without external power connectors.

However, the Radeon Pro W6600M is not without merit. It is a mobile part, listed as an IGP, which means it is intended for integration into laptops or compact systems. It offers a higher boost clock at 2034 MHz, a smaller die at 237 mm², and a modern 7 nm process. It also provides display outputs, which the Tesla T4 lacks entirely. For a system builder needing a GPU with video output capability in a portable form factor, the W6600M is the only viable option between the two.

The Tesla T4’s nearest rivals, the Radeon VII and Tesla P40, are within 2.5% of its score, indicating it sits in a competitive performance band. The W6600M’s close competitor, the Radeon 8050S, is only 0.3% faster, meaning the AMD card is not far off its own peer group. But when comparing these two directly, the Tesla T4’s wins are consistent and measurable. The verdict, based strictly on benchmark data: choose the Tesla T4 for dedicated compute, choose the W6600M for a mobile or display-capable system.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Tesla T4 wins decisively in raw compute performance. Its FP32 output of 8.141 TFLOPS exceeds the AMD’s 7.290 TFLOPS, and its FP16 output of 16.28 TFLOPS tops the 14.58 TFLOPS from the Radeon. In all recorded Geekbench tests, OpenCL and Vulkan, the Tesla T4 is ahead. This makes it the stronger choice for server-side workloads such as inference, rendering farms, or any task that prioritizes raw throughput over power efficiency per clock. The 16 GB memory capacity is double the AMD’s, which is a practical advantage for models or datasets that exceed 8 GB.

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M wins in areas not covered by compute benchmarks but visible in specifications. It has a higher pixel rate at 130.2 GPixel/s versus 101.8 GPixel/s, which could benefit certain rasterization tasks, though no benchmark confirms this. Its PCIe 4.0 x16 interface is newer than the Tesla T4’s PCIe 3.0 x16, offering potentially faster host-to-device transfers. It is an IGP designed for mobile systems, meaning it can be used in laptops where the Tesla T4’s single-slot, no-output design is unsuitable. The W6600M also has a higher boost clock, which may improve performance in short, bursty workloads that hit thermal limits quickly.

The Tesla T4 wins on memory bandwidth (320.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s) and texture rate (254.4 GTexel/s versus 227.8 GTexel/s). The AMD wins on process node efficiency and pixel fill rate. The Tesla T4 has tensor cores; the AMD does not. In a practical sense, the Tesla T4 is the compute specialist, and the W6600M is the mobile generalist with display output. The benchmark data only validates the Tesla T4’s compute lead, so that is where the analysis must land.