AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 vs AMD Radeon RX 6600S Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6600S is the definitive performance leader, delivering a 678.3% higher score in the only shared head-to-head benchmark, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 counters with a lower power draw and a professional feature set. The data indicates a generational and architectural chasm, not a close contest. For any workload requiring raw compute throughput, the RX 6600S is the only choice; the Pro WX 2100 serves a niche for legacy professional applications where its lower power envelope and compact form factor are paramount.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6600S is vastly superior in computational performance. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 66,435 against the Pro WX 2100’s 8,536, a 678.3% advantage. This is not a marginal lead but a multi-generational gap. The RX 6600S achieves an average benchmark score of 10,629, placing it in the 49th percentile of all GPUs, while the Pro WX 2100’s average of 9,653 lands in the 46th percentile. Although the percentile difference appears small, the head-to-head score reveals the true scale of the performance disparity. The RX 6600S, with its RDNA 2.0 architecture, is positioned for modern gaming and general compute, while the Pro WX 2100, based on GCN 4.0, is an older professional solution. The data strongly suggests that the RX 6600S is the pick for any performance-sensitive task, whereas the Pro WX 2100 is only relevant for specific legacy professional workloads that prioritize its lower power consumption and single-slot design. The latter’s launch MSRP was 149 USD.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent distinct eras of AMD design. The RX 6600S is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using a 7 nm process at TSMC, packing 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die. In contrast, the Pro WX 2100 uses the older GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 46.7M per mm² for the RX 6600S versus 21.4M per mm² for the Pro WX 2100, highlighting the efficiency node advantage. The RX 6600S features 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 raster operations pipelines (ROPs), along with 28 dedicated ray tracing cores. The Pro WX 2100 has a far smaller configuration with 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, and lacks ray tracing cores entirely. The RX 6600S also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Pro WX 2100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 6600S has Vulkan 1.4 support compared to the Pro WX 2100’s Vulkan 1.3. The RX 6600S is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a portable-device-dependent display output, whereas the Pro WX 2100 is a single-slot card with 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is a landslide victory for the RX 6600S. The RX 6600S scores 66,435 points, while the Pro WX 2100 manages only 8,536 points. This represents a 678.3% delta, meaning the RX 6600S is nearly eight times faster in this compute-heavy workload. This massive margin is consistent with the architectural differences: the RX 6600S has over three times the shading units, a much higher boost clock (2000 MHz vs 1219 MHz), and significantly faster memory bandwidth (224.0 GB/s vs 48.00 GB/s). While the Pro WX 2100 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 10,770, no comparable Vulkan result exists for the RX 6600S in the data, so it cannot be used for a direct comparison. The RX 6600S also has a Passmark G3D score of 12,649 and a GPU compute score of 4,879, but the Pro WX 2100 lacks these specific test results. The single head-to-head result, however, is decisive enough to establish the RX 6600S as the overwhelming compute winner.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal substantial differences across nearly every category. The process node differs, with the RX 6600S on 7 nm and the Pro WX 2100 on 14 nm. Clock speeds are higher on the RX 6600S: base clock of 1700 MHz and boost of 2000 MHz, compared to 925 MHz base and 1219 MHz boost on the Pro WX 2100. Memory configurations are also starkly different: the RX 6600S has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s, while the Pro WX 2100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, providing only 48.00 GB/s. The RX 6600S has a TDP of 80 W, whereas the Pro WX 2100 is more power-efficient at 35 W. The RX 6600S also has a higher pixel rate (128.0 GPixel/s vs 19.50 GPixel/s) and texture rate (224.0 GTexel/s vs 39.01 GTexel/s). Floating-point performance is vastly different: the RX 6600S delivers 7.168 TFLOPS FP32 and 14.34 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), while the Pro WX 2100 offers 1,248.3 GFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The bus interface also differs, with the RX 6600S using PCIe 4.0 x8 and the Pro WX 2100 using PCIe 3.0 x8. The Pro WX 2100 has physical dimensions of 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the RX 6600S, being an IGP, has no listed dimensions.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600S is overwhelmingly faster. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scored 66,435 compared to the Pro WX 2100’s 8,536, a 678.3% advantage.

Q: What are the main architectural differences?

A: The RX 6600S uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture on a 7 nm process, while the Pro WX 2100 uses the older GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process. The RX 6600S also has 28 ray tracing cores, which the Pro WX 2100 lacks.

Q: How does the memory configuration compare?

A: The RX 6600S has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro WX 2100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus with 48.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU consumes less power?

A: The Pro WX 2100 has a lower TDP of 35 W, compared to the RX 6600S’s 80 W TDP.

Q: Is the Pro WX 2100 a better choice for professional use?

A: The data shows the Pro WX 2100 offers a single-slot form factor and specific DisplayPort outputs, but its compute performance is drastically lower. The RX 6600S has no professional-specific features listed, but its superior compute scores suggest it would outperform the Pro WX 2100 in any GPU-accelerated task.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The RX 6600S has an average benchmark score of 10,629, placing it in the 49th percentile, while the Pro WX 2100 has an average score of 9,653, placing it in the 46th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6600S wins decisively in all compute and gaming-oriented scenarios. Its 678.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL makes it the clear choice for any workload that leverages general-purpose GPU compute, such as rendering, machine learning inference, or content creation. The higher shading unit count, faster clocks, and larger memory bandwidth all contribute to its dominance. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 also makes it suitable for modern gaming applications. The RX 6600S is the superior choice for users who prioritize raw performance and have access to a system capable of cooling its 80 W TDP.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 wins in scenarios where its physical and power characteristics are more important than raw throughput. Its 35 W TDP makes it suitable for low-power or compact systems, and its single-slot design with a 168 mm length allows for installation in space-constrained chassis. The inclusion of 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs provides multi-display capabilities without relying on portable device-dependent outputs. While the Pro WX 2100 has a Vulkan score of 10,770, the lack of a comparable RX 6600S result means this cannot be used as a comparative advantage. For legacy professional applications that do not require high compute throughput and value low power draw and a small footprint, the Pro WX 2100 remains a viable, though outdated, option.