AMD Radeon PRO W6800 vs AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X and the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 are two professional workstation GPUs built on the same fundamental architecture, yet they are configured for distinctly different environments. The W6800X is designed for Apple’s Mac Pro ecosystem with its proprietary MPX interface, while the PRO W6800 is a more conventional PCIe card. Both share the same Navi 21 chip, 32 GB of GDDR6 memory, and a 256-bit memory bus, but the data reveals meaningful differences in clock speeds, power targets, and benchmark performance. This analysis walks through the head-to-head results, architectural distinctions, and the specific use cases where each card excels, based strictly on the provided benchmark and specification data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between these two cards is drawn from Geekbench results, covering Metal and OpenCL APIs. Across the two tests available, the W6800X wins both, but the margins are not uniform. In the Geekbench Metal test, the W6800X scores 196,844 against the PRO W6800’s 174,420, a decisive 12.9% advantage. This is a substantial gap, indicating that the W6800X holds a clear lead in Apple’s native graphics API, which is critical for macOS-based workflows. The Metal score difference is the largest single performance gap between the two cards, and it aligns with the W6800X’s design as a Mac-specific component.

The Geekbench OpenCL test tells a much closer story. Here, the W6800X scores 124,498, while the PRO W6800 trails slightly at 121,808, giving the W6800X a 2.2% lead. This narrow margin suggests that in cross-platform compute workloads, the two cards perform nearly identically, with the W6800X’s advantage being within the range of run-to-run variance. The data shows that while the W6800X is the consistent winner, the OpenCL test does not reveal the same level of dominance as Metal.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the W6800X posts an average of 160,671 across its two tests, while the PRO W6800 averages 135,396. However, this average is skewed by the fact that the PRO W6800 has three benchmark results, including a Vulkan score of 109,961, which drags its average down. The average benchmark score places the W6800X in the 97th percentile of all GPUs, while the PRO W6800 sits in the 96th percentile, a marginal difference in overall standing.

The nearest rivals for the W6800X provide context for its performance tier. Its average score of 160,671 is 1.1% lower than the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB’s 162,504, 2.6% lower than the AMD Radeon PRO W7800’s 164,894, and 2.8% lower than the NVIDIA RTX A5500’s 165,217. These are all within a narrow band, suggesting the W6800X competes at the high end of workstation performance. The PRO W6800, with its 135,396 average, is essentially tied with the NVIDIA A10M (135,230, 0.1% ahead) and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation (135,218, 0.1% ahead), and it is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (135,774). This places the PRO W6800 in a lower performance tier than the W6800X, despite sharing the same core chip.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is clear from the benchmark data. The W6800X wins decisively in Metal-accelerated workloads, which are the backbone of macOS applications, including creative software like video editors, 3D renderers, and compositing tools. The 12.9% lead in Geekbench Metal over the PRO W6800 is the standout metric, and it positions the W6800X as the stronger choice for users who rely on Apple’s ecosystem for their daily work. The higher base clock of 1800 MHz versus 1575 MHz on the PRO W6800, combined with the lower boost clock of 2087 MHz versus 2322 MHz, suggests the W6800X is tuned for sustained performance in thermally constrained Mac Pro chassis, which may explain its Metal advantage.

In OpenCL, the PRO W6800 is nearly on par, trailing by just 2.2%. For compute tasks that use OpenCL rather than Metal, the PRO W6800 is effectively equivalent to the W6800X, making it a viable alternative for users who do not need the Mac-specific interface. The PRO W6800 also has a Vulkan score of 109,961, which the W6800X does not provide in this data, indicating that the PRO W6800 has broader API support in the benchmark suite. For users working in Linux or Windows environments where Vulkan is common, the PRO W6800’s Vulkan capability is a practical advantage, even if its absolute Vulkan score is lower than its Metal and OpenCL results.

The PRO W6800’s higher boost clock of 2322 MHz versus 2087 MHz on the W6800X contributes to its higher theoretical peak performance in certain workloads. The data shows the PRO W6800 achieves a pixel rate of 222.9 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 557.3 GTexel/s, both higher than the W6800X’s 200.4 GPixel/s and 500.9 GTexel/s. This suggests that in raw rasterization throughput, the PRO W6800 has the edge, which could benefit real-time viewport rendering or non-Metal graphics tasks. The FP32 compute is also higher on the PRO W6800 at 17.83 TFLOPS versus 16.03 TFLOPS, indicating a 11.2% theoretical compute advantage that does not fully translate to the OpenCL benchmark results.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same Navi 21 chip using TSMC’s 7 nm process, with identical transistor counts of 26,800 million and a die size of 520 mm². The transistor density is 51.5M per mm² for both. The core configuration is also identical: 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, 96 raster operation units, and 60 ray tracing cores. Neither card has tensor cores, and both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The memory subsystem is the same on paper: 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth with an effective memory clock of 16 Gbps.

The primary architectural differences lie in clock speeds and power delivery. The W6800X has a base clock of 1800 MHz and a boost clock of 2087 MHz, while the PRO W6800 has a base clock of 1575 MHz and a boost clock of 2322 MHz. This means the W6800X runs faster at idle or low load, but the PRO W6800 has a higher peak boost, allowing it to reach higher clock speeds under heavy load if thermals and power allow. The power target reflects this: the W6800X is rated at 200 W TDP, while the PRO W6800 draws 250 W, and the suggested power supply is 550 W versus 600 W, respectively.

The physical interface differs significantly. The W6800X uses Apple’s proprietary MPX bus interface and power connector, and it occupies a quad-slot form factor. The PRO W6800 uses a standard PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, has a dual-slot design, and requires a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector. The W6800X’s display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 and 4x Thunderbolt, while the PRO W6800 offers 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. Both cards have the same physical dimensions in length and height (267 mm and 120 mm), but the PRO W6800 has a specified width of 50 mm, while the W6800X’s width is not listed. The W6800X is also listed as part of the “Radeon Pro Mac (Navi II Series)” generation, whereas the PRO W6800 belongs to the “Radeon Pro Navi (Navi II Series)” generation, reflecting their target platforms.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X is the stronger performer in the benchmark results, winning both head-to-head tests, with a particularly large lead in Metal. Users who require maximum performance in macOS-based applications, especially those leveraging Metal, should choose the W6800X. Its 12.9% Metal advantage and higher average benchmark score place it in the 97th percentile of all GPUs, making it a top-tier option for Mac Pro users. The W6800X also has a higher base clock, which may provide more consistent performance in sustained workloads.

The AMD Radeon PRO W6800, while trailing in the benchmarks, is not a weak card. It is within 2.2% in OpenCL, making it nearly equivalent for compute tasks that do not rely on Metal. Its higher boost clock and correspondingly higher pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput suggest it can excel in raw rasterization and general compute when properly cooled. The PRO W6800 also offers Vulkan support, which the W6800X lacks in the benchmark data, and it uses a standard PCIe interface, making it compatible with a broader range of systems beyond Apple’s hardware. Users building a PC workstation or working in Linux or Windows environments should choose the PRO W6800, as its performance is competitive and its form factor is more flexible. The PRO W6800’s 96th percentile standing is only one percentile below the W6800X, indicating that the performance gap is modest in the broader GPU landscape.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher Geekbench Metal score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X scores 196,844 in Geekbench Metal, which is 12.9% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W6800’s 174,420.

Q: How close are the two cards in OpenCL performance?

A: The W6800X scores 124,498 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the PRO W6800 scores 121,808, giving the W6800X a narrow 2.2% lead.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both cards feature 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth and an effective memory clock of 16 Gbps.

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

A: The W6800X has a TDP of 200 W and a suggested power supply of 550 W, while the PRO W6800 has a TDP of 250 W and a suggested power supply of 600 W.

Q: Which card supports Vulkan in the benchmark results?

A: Only the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 has a Geekbench Vulkan score, which is 109,961; the W6800X does not have a Vulkan score listed.

Q: What is the physical slot width difference?

A: The W6800X is a quad-slot card, while the PRO W6800 is a dual-slot card, with the PRO W6800 having a width of 50 mm.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro W6800X | AMD Radeon PRO W6800 |

|----------------|-----------------------|----------------------|

| Base Clock | 1800 MHz | 1575 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2087 MHz | 2322 MHz |

| Pixel Rate | 200.4 GPixel/s | 222.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 500.9 GTexel/s | 557.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 16.03 TFLOPS | 17.83 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 32.06 TFLOPS (2:1) | 35.67 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 200 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | Quad-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Apple MPX | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | Apple MPX | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 4x Thunderbolt | 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Width | Not specified | 50 mm |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Mac (Navi II Series) | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi II Series) |

| Release Date | 2021-08-02 | 2021-06-07 |

| Launch MSRP | 2,799 USD | 2,249 USD |

| Predecessor | None | Radeon Pro Vega |