AMD Radeon PRO W7700 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one directly comparable benchmark result between the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 and the AMD Radeon RX 7600M: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the PRO W7700 scores 108,245, while the RX 7600M scores 63,775. This yields a delta of 69.7% in favor of the PRO W7700, a substantial margin that places the two cards in very different performance tiers.

To contextualize this gap, consider the nearest rivals recorded in the database. The PRO W7700’s average benchmark score is 118,976, placing it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs. Its closest competitors are the NVIDIA GB10 (average score 117,393, delta 1.3%), the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation (117,088, delta 1.6%), the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395, delta 4%), and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944, delta 4.4%). The PRO W7700 leads all of these, though by modest margins between 1.3% and 4.4%. This indicates that the PRO W7700 sits at the top of its immediate performance neighborhood, but not by a landslide relative to its closest peers.

On the other side, the RX 7600M’s average benchmark score is 63,775, placing it at the 89th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are remarkably close in score: the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63,830, delta -0.1%), the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842, delta -0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693, delta 0.1%), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 (64,212, delta -0.7%). The RX 7600M is effectively tied with these cards, with deltas under 1% in either direction. This suggests that the RX 7600M is a mid-pack performer within its own segment, where tiny score differences separate adjacent products.

The head-to-head delta of 69.7% is substantial. To put that into perspective, the PRO W7700’s OpenCL score is 44,470 points higher than the RX 7600M’s. That is more than two-thirds of the RX 7600M’s entire score. In practical terms, the PRO W7700 is not just faster; it is in a different class of compute capability. The RX 7600M, by comparison, produces a score that is only about 59% of the PRO W7700’s result.

Interestingly, the RX 7600M has no recorded Geekbench Vulkan score, while the PRO W7700 has a Vulkan score of 129,706, which is even higher than its OpenCL score. This further widens the perceived gap if one considers Vulkan workloads, though the head-to-head table only includes the OpenCL test. The data shows a clear and consistent pattern: the PRO W7700 dominates in raw compute benchmarks.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 is the unequivocal winner in benchmark performance. Its OpenCL score of 108,245 versus 63,775 for the RX 7600M represents a 69.7% advantage. The PRO W7700 also holds a higher percentile rank (95th versus 89th) and a much higher average benchmark score (118,976 versus 63,775). For any user whose primary criterion is raw compute throughput, the PRO W7700 is the clear choice.

However, the verdict is not simply about speed. The RX 7600M is a mobile GPU (its generation is listed as Navi Mobile, RX 7000M), while the PRO W7700 is a desktop workstation card. The RX 7600M has a TDP of 90 W and is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The PRO W7700, by contrast, has a TDP of 190 W, requires a 1x 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 450 W power supply. These are fundamentally different products for different physical contexts. The data does not indicate that one is "better" in a universal sense; it indicates that the PRO W7700 is much faster, while the RX 7600M is far more power-efficient and portable.

The verdict, then, is conditional. If the task is stationary, high-throughput compute (as suggested by the PRO W7700’s workstation positioning), the PRO W7700 wins decisively. If the task is mobile computing where power draw and physical footprint are the constraints, the RX 7600M is the only viable option from this pair, and its benchmark score, while lower, is respectable at the 89th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The PRO W7700 wins in every recorded benchmark category. It has 1 win in the head-to-head table, with 0 wins for the RX 7600M. Beyond the single OpenCL test, the PRO W7700 also has a Vulkan score of 129,706, which no comparable RX 7600M score exists for. In terms of raw compute, the PRO W7700 is the clear winner across the board.

The RX 7600M’s wins are not in benchmark scores but in physical and power characteristics. It has a TDP of 90 W, which is less than half of the PRO W7700’s 190 W. It requires no power connectors, whereas the PRO W7700 needs a single 8-pin. It is listed as an IGP, meaning it is designed to be integrated into a portable device, whereas the PRO W7700 is a dual-slot card measuring 241 mm in length and 111 mm in height. The RX 7600M has no recorded dimensions, consistent with its mobile nature. In this sense, the RX 7600M wins on efficiency and form factor, though the database does not provide a direct benchmark for power efficiency.

For use-case segmentation, the PRO W7700 is suited for desktop workstations where space, power, and cooling are available. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 256-bit bus, yielding 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, suggest it is built for memory-intensive workloads. The RX 7600M, with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus (256.0 GB/s bandwidth), is a more modest configuration, appropriate for laptops or compact devices where lower power draw is critical.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 than the RX 7600M in the recorded benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the PRO W7700 scores 108,245 versus 63,775 for the RX 7600M, a delta of 69.7% in favor of the PRO W7700.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile rank among all GPUs?

A: The PRO W7700 is at the 95th percentile, while the RX 7600M is at the 89th percentile.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The PRO W7700 has an average benchmark score of 118,976, while the RX 7600M has an average of 63,775.

Q: Are these cards in the same physical class?

A: No. The PRO W7700 is a dual-slot desktop card with a 190 W TDP and a 1x 8-pin power connector, while the RX 7600M is an IGP with a 90 W TDP and no power connectors.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The PRO W7700 has 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the RX 7600M has 256.0 GB/s.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share the same RDNA 3.0 architecture but are built on different process nodes and use different chips. The PRO W7700 uses the Navi 32 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a codename of Wheat Nas. The RX 7600M uses the Navi 33 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with a codename of Hotpink Bonefish. This process difference contributes to the PRO W7700’s higher transistor count: 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, versus 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die for the RX 7600M. The transistor density also differs, with the PRO W7700 at 81.2M / mm² and the RX 7600M at 65.2M / mm².

The core configurations diverge significantly. The PRO W7700 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 48 ray tracing cores. The RX 7600M has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. These numbers reflect the PRO W7700’s larger silicon and its workstation orientation. The clock speeds also differ: the PRO W7700 has a base clock of 1900 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz, while the RX 7600M has a base of 1500 MHz, a boost of 2410 MHz, and a game clock of 2070 MHz. The PRO W7700’s higher boost clock contributes to its compute advantage.

The memory subsystems are also architecturally different. The PRO W7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), yielding 576.0 GB/s. The RX 7600M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), yielding 256.0 GB/s. Both are PCIe 4.0 x16 cards, and both support the same API set. The PRO W7700 has a pixel rate of 249.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 499.2 GTexel/s, versus 154.2 GPixel/s and 269.9 GTexel/s for the RX 7600M. The FP32 performance is 31.95 TFLOPS for the PRO W7700 and 17.27 TFLOPS for the RX 7600M, with FP16 at 63.90 TFLOPS and 34.55 TFLOPS respectively (both at 2:1 ratio).

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two cards, based on the recorded data:

• Chip: Navi 32 (PRO W7700) versus Navi 33 (RX 7600M)
• Process Node: 5 nm versus 6 nm
• Transistors: 28,100 million versus 13,300 million
• Die Size: 346 mm² versus 204 mm²
• Transistor Density: 81.2M / mm² versus 65.2M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1900 MHz versus 1500 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2600 MHz versus 2410 MHz
• Memory Clock: 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 16 GB versus 8 GB
• Memory Bus Width: 256 bit versus 128 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 576.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 3072 versus 1792
• TMUs: 192 versus 112
• ROPs: 96 versus 64
• RT Cores: 48 versus 28
• Pixel Rate: 249.6 GPixel/s versus 154.2 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 499.2 GTexel/s versus 269.9 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 31.95 TFLOPS versus 17.27 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 63.90 TFLOPS versus 34.55 TFLOPS
• TDP: 190 W versus 90 W
• Slot Width: Dual-slot versus IGP
• Power Connectors: 1x 8-pin versus None
• Suggested PSU: 450 W versus null
• Display Outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.1 versus Portable Device Dependent
• Dimensions: 241 mm length, 111 mm height versus null
• Release Date: 2023-11-12 versus 2023-01-03
• Predecessor: Radeon Pro Vega versus Polaris Mobile
• Launch MSRP: 999 USD versus null

The PRO W7700 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 129,706, which the RX 7600M lacks. The RX 7600M has a game clock of 2070 MHz, which the PRO W7700 does not list. The RX 7600M is marked as Active in production status, while the PRO W7700 has no recorded production status.