AMD Radeon PRO W7600 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains one direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 scores 81,528 points, while the AMD Radeon RX 7600M scores 63,775 points. That is a 27.8% advantage for the PRO W7600 in this compute-oriented workload. This is a substantial margin, placing the desktop card clearly ahead in raw OpenCL performance.

Looking at the broader database context, the PRO W7600 sits at the 93rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 87,108 across its recorded tests. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro GP100, which averages 87,445 points (0.4% higher), and the NVIDIA CMP 40HX, which averages 85,637 points (1.7% lower). The PRO W7600 also trails the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile by 4.4% and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 by 5.0% in average score.

The RX 7600M, by contrast, holds the 89th percentile with an average score of 63,775. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly around it: the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP scores 63,830 (0.1% higher), the NVIDIA CMP 30HX scores 63,842 (0.1% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 scores 63,693 (0.1% lower), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 scores 64,212 (0.7% higher). The RX 7600M is effectively a midpoint in its performance tier, while the PRO W7600 sits near the top of its own.

The OpenCL delta of 27.8% is the only head-to-head measurement available. It is important to note that this is a single workload, so the result reflects compute throughput rather than gaming or mixed-use performance. Still, the magnitude of the gap suggests a clear hierarchy: the PRO W7600 is the stronger compute part by a wide margin.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same underlying silicon: the Navi 33 chip, built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process node, with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The foundry, node, and die are identical.

The differences begin with configuration. The PRO W7600 has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. It also carries 32 ray tracing cores. The RX 7600M is cut down: 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 28 ray tracing cores. That is a reduction of 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 4 ray tracing cores, while the ROP count stays the same.

Clock speeds differ as well. The PRO W7600 runs a base clock of 1720 MHz and a boost clock of 2440 MHz, with no separate game clock listed. The RX 7600M has a lower base of 1500 MHz and a slightly lower boost of 2410 MHz, but it does list a game clock of 2070 MHz. The PRO W7600 also runs faster memory: 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on the RX 7600M.

Memory capacity and bus width are the same: 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit interface. However, the faster memory clock gives the PRO W7600 a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s, compared to 256.0 GB/s for the RX 7600M. That is a 12.5% bandwidth advantage for the desktop card.

The power profiles are very different. The PRO W7600 has a TDP of 130 W, requires a single 6-pin power connector, and is a single-slot card. The RX 7600M is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with a 90 W TDP and no power connectors, as it is designed for portable devices. The PRO W7600 also lists a suggested PSU of 300 W, while the RX 7600M has no such figure.

The bus interface differs too: the PRO W7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 7600M uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The PRO W7600 offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs; the RX 7600M's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

Where Each One Wins

The PRO W7600 wins the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, and it wins by a decisive 27.8% in OpenCL. Its higher shading unit count, faster clocks, and wider memory bandwidth all contribute to that result. For compute-heavy tasks such as rendering, simulation, or any workload that scales with raw FP32 throughput, the PRO W7600 is the clear choice. Its FP32 rating of 19.99 TFLOPS versus 17.27 TFLOPS for the RX 7600M reinforces this. Similarly, FP16 performance is 39.98 TFLOPS versus 34.55 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio.

The RX 7600M has no benchmark wins in the recorded data. However, it does have structural advantages that matter in specific use cases. Its 90 W TDP makes it far more power-efficient on paper, and its IGP form factor means it can be integrated into laptops without a separate power connector. The PCIe 4.0 x16 interface provides double the lane width of the PRO W7600's x8 connection, which could benefit certain data-transfer scenarios. The RX 7600M also has a game clock of 2070 MHz, suggesting it is tuned for sustained gaming workloads within its power envelope.

For gaming specifically, the RX 7600M has a lower TDP and no external power requirement, making it suitable for thin-and-light gaming laptops. The PRO W7600, with its 130 W TDP and single-slot design, is built for workstation desktops where power delivery is not a constraint. The PRO W7600's 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs also make it better suited for multi-monitor professional setups, while the RX 7600M's display outputs depend entirely on the host device.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 is the faster GPU in compute workloads. Its 27.8% OpenCL lead is substantial, and its higher core counts, faster memory, and higher clocks all align in the same direction. If the use case is professional rendering, compute, or any workload where raw throughput matters, the PRO W7600 is the better choice based on the recorded measurements.

The AMD Radeon RX 7600M is not without merit, but its strengths are different. It is a lower-power mobile part designed for portability. Its 90 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for laptops, while the PRO W7600's 130 W TDP and single-slot cooler require a desktop chassis. The RX 7600M also has a wider PCIe interface (x16 versus x8), which could matter for certain I/O-bound tasks, but the benchmark data does not show a scenario where the RX 7600M outperforms the PRO W7600.

For a desktop workstation, the PRO W7600 is the obvious pick. For a mobile gaming or productivity laptop, the RX 7600M is the only one of the two that fits. The choice is less about performance and more about form factor and power constraints. If you need a desktop card, the PRO W7600's 27.8% compute advantage is decisive. If you need a mobile solution, the RX 7600M is the only viable option, and its performance is respectable for its class, sitting at the 89th percentile.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 has an average score of 87,108, while the AMD Radeon RX 7600M averages 63,775. That is a difference of roughly 36.6% in favor of the PRO W7600.

Q: How much faster is the PRO W7600 in OpenCL?

A: The PRO W7600 scores 81,528 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the RX 7600M scores 63,775. The PRO W7600 is 27.8% faster in this workload.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same chip and architecture?

A: Yes, both are based on the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 6 nm process. They share the same transistor count of 13,300 million and die size of 204 mm².

Q: What are the key differences in memory bandwidth?

A: The PRO W7600 has a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The RX 7600M runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) and has 256.0 GB/s. Both use 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The PRO W7600 has 2,048 shading units and 32 ray tracing cores. The RX 7600M has 1,792 shading units and 28 ray tracing cores. The PRO W7600 also has 128 TMUs versus 112, while both have 64 ROPs.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The PRO W7600 has a TDP of 130 W and requires a 6-pin power connector. The RX 7600M has a TDP of 90 W and uses no power connectors, as it is an integrated graphics package for portable devices.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7600 | AMD Radeon RX 7600M |

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

| Generation | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) | Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) |

| Base Clock | 1720 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2440 MHz | 2410 MHz |

| Game Clock | Not listed | 2070 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 1792 |

| TMUs | 128 | 112 |

| RT Cores | 32 | 28 |

| FP32 Performance | 19.99 TFLOPS | 17.27 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 39.98 TFLOPS (2:1) | 34.55 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 130 W | 90 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 241 mm (9.5 inches) long, 115 mm (4.5 inches) high | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2023-08-02 | 2023-01-03 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | Polaris Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | Not listed |

The PRO W7600 leads in every performance-relevant specification: clocks, bandwidth, shading units, TMUs, RT cores, and both FP32 and FP16 throughput. The RX 7600M counters with a lower TDP, a wider PCIe interface, and an IGP form factor. The release dates also differ, with the RX 7600M launching roughly seven months earlier.