AMD Radeon Pro W6600X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti Comparison

The data places the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti and AMD Radeon Pro W6600X in different performance tiers, despite their similar overall percentile rankings. The RTX 3090 Ti holds a commanding lead in raw compute, with an average benchmark score of 131,938 compared to the W6600X’s 107,342, a difference of roughly 23%. However, the W6600X is not without merit; its 94th percentile ranking versus the 3090 Ti’s 95th shows that in its specific ecosystem, it remains a highly capable part. The verdict is clear: the RTX 3090 Ti is for users needing maximum compute throughput, while the W6600X serves a niche role defined by its Apple MPX interface and low power draw.

The Verdict

For any workload where raw processing power is the primary criterion, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti is the definitive choice. Its FP32 performance of 40.00 TFLOPS is nearly four times the W6600X’s 10.15 TFLOPS, and its 24 GB of GDDR6X memory with 1.01 TB/s bandwidth dwarfs the W6600X’s 8 GB at 256.0 GB/s. The data shows a 22.9% advantage in average benchmark score (131,938 vs 107,342), which is substantial for rendering or compute tasks. The RTX 3090 Ti also holds a 95th percentile rank among all GPUs, compared to the W6600X’s 94th, reinforcing its position at the very top of the performance curve.

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600X is not a competitor for the RTX 3090 Ti in absolute performance; it is a specialized product. Its defining feature is the Apple MPX bus interface, which makes it exclusively relevant for Mac Pro systems. It also draws only 120 W TDP versus the 450 W TDP of the RTX 3090 Ti, and it requires a suggested PSU of just 300 W compared to 850 W. For a user building or upgrading a Mac Pro who requires a functional GPU without the power and space demands of a flagship card, the W6600X is the appropriate, if not the only, choice. It is end-of-life, but so is the RTX 3090 Ti.

Do not buy the W6600X expecting RTX 3090 Ti-class performance. Buy it for its specific form factor and system compatibility. Conversely, do not buy the RTX 3090 Ti if you have a Mac Pro with an Apple MPX slot, as it will not physically fit. The data does not present a head-to-head contest; it presents two distinct tools for different jobs.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3090 Ti wins every category of raw performance. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 5,741 points—a result that has no equivalent on the W6600X side. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 3090 Ti scores 174,441, and in Vulkan it reaches 215,633. The W6600X has a single benchmark entry: Geekbench Metal, where it scores 107,342. This is not a comparison of direct wins, but a demonstration of different test suites. The 3090 Ti’s wins are in the DirectX and cross-platform compute arenas, while the W6600X’s sole data point is in Apple’s Metal API, where it performs respectably enough to secure a 94th percentile overall ranking.

Looking at their nearest rivals provides context. The RTX 3090 Ti’s average score is 0.7% higher than the NVIDIA L4 (131,072) and 2.4% higher than both the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation (135,218) and NVIDIA A10M (135,230). It trails the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135,396) by 2.6%. The W6600X, in contrast, is 0.6% above the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo (106,750) and 5.4% above the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 (101,872), but it is 2.1% below the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II (109,617) and 3.1% below the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (110,725). This shows that the W6600X sits in the middle of a professional workstation pack, whereas the RTX 3090 Ti is at the top of its own, more powerful group.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti uses the GA102 chip based on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, yielding a density of 45.1M per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro W6600X uses the Navi 23 chip based on RDNA 2.0, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. This chip has 11,060 million transistors on a much smaller 237 mm² die, resulting in a higher density of 46.7M per mm².

The compute configuration is drastically different. The RTX 3090 Ti packs 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. It also includes 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores. The W6600X has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 32 RT cores and no tensor cores. This explains the massive FP32 gap: the 3090 Ti achieves 40.00 TFLOPS, while the W6600X manages 10.15 TFLOPS. The 3090 Ti’s FP16 performance is identical to its FP32 at 40.00 TFLOPS (1:1), whereas the W6600X doubles its FP32 rate to 20.31 TFLOPS (2:1).

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The RTX 3090 Ti features 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, delivering 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth. The W6600X has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s. The clock speeds differ as well: the 3090 Ti has a base clock of 1560 MHz and a boost of 1860 MHz, while the W6600X starts at 2068 MHz and boosts to 2479 MHz. The W6600X’s higher clocks do little to compensate for its much smaller execution units.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti has a significantly higher average benchmark score of 131,938, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X’s 107,342.

Q: Is the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X compatible with standard PCIe slots?

A: No, the W6600X uses an Apple MPX bus interface, not a standard PCIe interface. The RTX 3090 Ti, by contrast, uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6600X has a TDP of 120 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti has a TDP of 450 W and a suggested PSU of 850 W.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti has 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth from its 24 GB GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600X has 256.0 GB/s from 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X have tensor cores?

A: No, the W6600X does not list any tensor cores. The RTX 3090 Ti includes 336 tensor cores.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti achieves a pixel rate of 208.3 GPixel/s, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X has a pixel rate of 158.7 GPixel/s.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no direct head-to-head benchmark entries in the data, so a test-by-test comparison is not possible. However, the available benchmarks show the RTX 3090 Ti’s dominance. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RTX 3090 Ti scores 5,741. This is a modern DirectX 12 test that the W6600X has no recorded result for. The Geekbench results are more telling. The RTX 3090 Ti scores 174,441 in OpenCL and 215,633 in Vulkan. The W6600X’s only score is 107,342 in Geekbench Metal.

If we consider the average benchmark scores as a proxy for head-to-head performance, the RTX 3090 Ti leads by 24,596 points, or 22.9%. This is the single largest gap in the entire comparison. The W6600X’s nearest rival data shows it is 0.6% above the Vega II Duo and 5.4% above the Quadro RTX 6000, but the 3090 Ti is 2.4% above the RTX 4000 Ada Generation and only 2.6% below the Radeon PRO W6800. The performance delta between the two reviewed cards is far larger than any delta within their respective rival groups, confirming they are not in the same class.

Specification Differences

The core specifications where the two cards differ are extensive. The process node is 8 nm for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti versus 7 nm for the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X. The transistor count is 28,300 million versus 11,060 million, and the die size is 628 mm² versus 237 mm². The base clock is 1560 MHz versus 2068 MHz, and the boost clock is 1860 MHz versus 2479 MHz. Memory size is 24 GB versus 8 GB, and memory type is GDDR6X versus GDDR6. The bus width is 384-bit versus 128-bit, and bandwidth is 1.01 TB/s versus 256.0 GB/s.

Shading units are 10,752 versus 2,048, TMUs are 336 versus 128, and ROPs are 112 versus 64. RT cores are 84 versus 32, and the RTX 3090 Ti has 336 tensor cores while the W6600X has none. FP32 performance is 40.00 TFLOPS versus 10.15 TFLOPS. TDP is 450 W versus 120 W. The slot width is triple-slot versus dual-slot, and the power connector is 1x 16-pin versus none listed. The suggested PSU is 850 W versus 300 W. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus Apple MPX. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus no outputs. The release date is 2022-01-26 versus 2021-08-02. The launch MSRP is 1,999 USD versus 699 USD.