AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 vs AMD Radeon RX 6600S Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data paints an unusually lopsided picture. Across eight recorded tests, the AMD Radeon RX 6600S takes seven victories, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 manages a single win. The margins are not subtle. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6600S scores 66,435 against 24,217 for the Pro WX 5100, a 174.3% advantage. That is more than a doubling of raw compute throughput, and it sets the tone for the rest of the comparison.

Passmark G3D, often treated as a holistic gaming and 3D workload indicator, shows 12,649 for the RX 6600S versus 5,496 for the Pro WX 5100, a 130.1% lead. The GPU compute test follows a similar pattern: 4,879 against 2,053, a 137.7% margin. Even the older DirectX paths, where the Pro WX 5100's GCN architecture might be expected to hold its own, show decisive losses. DirectX 10 scores 81 versus 29 (179.3% delta), DirectX 11 scores 105 versus 36 (191.7% delta), and DirectX 12 scores 56 versus 26 (115.4% delta). DirectX 9 is the closest relative gap at 100% (176 versus 88), but it still goes to the RX 6600S.

The single Pro WX 5100 win comes in Passmark G2D, the 2D graphics and desktop composition test. There, the older card posts 777 against 647, a 16.7% advantage. That is a narrow but real margin, and it suggests that raw 2D blitting and display output processing are not the RX 6600S's strongest suit. The Pro WX 5100's lineage as a workstation-oriented Polaris part, with its focus on stable multi-display output, likely explains this outlier. Still, one win out of eight is not a competitive record.

When placed against their respective nearest rivals, the two cards occupy different tiers. The RX 6600S averages 10,629 across all recorded benchmarks, sitting at the 49th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its closest competitor, the AMD Radeon R9 M275X, scores 10,582, a delta of only 0.4%, meaning the RX 6600S is essentially tied with that older mobile part. The Pro WX 5100, meanwhile, averages 8,863, at the 44th percentile. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R9 M265X, scores 8,851, a 0.1% difference. The gap between the two averaged scores is 1,766 points, or roughly 20% of the Pro WX 5100's average. That is the kind of generational jump that separates a 7nm part from a 14nm part, and it shows up consistently across every compute-heavy test.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6600S is the clear choice for any workload that stresses the GPU's compute units. Its wins in OpenCL, G3D, GPU compute, and all four DirectX tests point to a card that is simply faster at executing shader and compute workloads. The 1792 shading units are identical in count to the Pro WX 5100, but they run at dramatically higher clocks: 1700 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost versus 713 MHz base and 1086 MHz boost. That clock advantage alone explains much of the performance gap, and it is amplified by the RDNA 2.0 architecture's efficiency improvements.

For gaming, the RX 6600S is the only sensible pick from this data. Its DirectX 12 score of 56 versus 26 for the Pro WX 5100, combined with the 130.1% G3D lead, indicates that modern game engines, which rely heavily on DX12 and Vulkan features, will run far better on the newer part. The Pro WX 5100's DirectX 12 support is listed as 12_0, which means it lacks the 12_2 feature set (mesh shaders, sampler feedback, and other advanced features) that the RX 6600S exposes through its 12 Ultimate designation.

The Pro WX 5100's single win in G2D, and its 8 GB of memory, point to a different use case. For 2D desktop work, multi-monitor productivity setups, or applications that need large framebuffers without heavy compute, the Pro WX 5100 holds a niche. Its 8 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while slower in bandwidth (160.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s), offers more capacity than the RX 6600S's 4 GB GDDR6. In professional applications that load large textures or datasets into VRAM but do not saturate the compute units, the extra capacity could matter. However, the benchmark data does not include such a test, so this remains a speculative advantage based on memory size rather than measured performance.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent different generations of AMD GPU design, and the gap in their specifications is stark. The RX 6600S uses the Navi 23 chip, built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Pro WX 5100 uses the Ellesmere chip, built on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The process node difference alone, 7 nm versus 14 nm, explains much of the power and clock gap, but the architectural changes go deeper.

Transistor counts reflect the generational shift: the RX 6600S packs 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die, yielding a density of 46.7 million transistors per mm². The Pro WX 5100 has 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, a density of 24.6 million per mm². Despite nearly identical die sizes, the RX 6600S fits almost twice as many transistors, enabled by the denser 7 nm process. This allows the RDNA 2.0 chip to implement features that GCN 4.0 simply lacks.

Most notably, the RX 6600S includes 28 ray tracing cores. The Pro WX 5100 has none. This is a hard architectural difference: the RX 6600S can accelerate ray-traced effects in games and supported applications, while the Pro WX 5100 would have to rely on compute-based fallbacks, which are typically far slower. The RX 6600S also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Pro WX 5100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support differs as well: version 1.4 on the RX 6600S versus 1.3 on the Pro WX 5100. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Memory configurations are another major divergence. The RX 6600S uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth and an effective 14 Gbps data rate. The Pro WX 5100 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth and an effective 5 Gbps data rate. The RX 6600S has higher bandwidth despite the narrower bus, thanks to faster memory, but the Pro WX 5100 has double the capacity. The RX 6600S also has 64 ROPs versus 32 on the Pro WX 5100, which explains its 128.0 GPixel/s pixel rate versus 34.75 GPixel/s. Texture rates are closer: 224.0 GTexel/s versus 121.6 GTexel/s, reflecting the identical TMU count of 112.

Power consumption is similar on paper: 80 W for the RX 6600S versus 75 W for the Pro WX 5100. But the RX 6600S delivers 7.168 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 3.892 TFLOPS for the Pro WX 5100, meaning it achieves roughly 84% more compute per watt. The RX 6600S also supports FP16 at 14.34 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio, while the Pro WX 5100's FP16 is identical to its FP32 at 3.892 TFLOPS (1:1), a sign that the older card treats half-precision as a full-rate operation rather than a specialized fast path. The RX 6600S is an integrated form factor (IGP) with no power connectors and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the Pro WX 5100 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, and four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Pro WX 5100 also has a suggested PSU of 250 W and measures 173 mm in length, 112 mm in height.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600S delivers 7.168 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 delivers 3.892 TFLOPS. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6600S scores 66,435 versus 24,217, a 174.3% advantage.

Q: Does either card support ray tracing?

A: Only the RX 6600S has dedicated ray tracing cores (28 of them). The Pro WX 5100 has no ray tracing cores, and its architecture (GCN 4.0) does not include hardware support for this feature.

Q: Which card is better for modern DirectX 12 games?

A: The RX 6600S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Pro WX 5100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). In the Passmark DirectX 12 test, the RX 6600S scores 56 versus 26, a 115.4% lead.

Q: Why does the Pro WX 5100 win the G2D test?

A: The Pro WX 5100 scores 777 in Passmark G2D, while the RX 6600S scores 647, a 16.7% margin. This suggests the older card has an advantage in 2D desktop and display composition workloads, likely due to its workstation-oriented design with four DisplayPort outputs.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 6600S has an average benchmark score of 10,629, placing it at the 49th percentile of all GPUs. The Pro WX 5100 averages 8,863, at the 44th percentile. The RX 6600S's score is about 20% higher.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RX 6600S has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro WX 5100 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6600S outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 in nearly every recorded metric. It wins 7 of 8 head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 100% (DirectX 9) to 191.7% (DirectX 11). Its average benchmark score of 10,629 is 20% higher than the Pro WX 5100's 8,863. For any workload that stresses 3D rendering, compute, or modern graphics APIs, the RX 6600S is the superior choice.

The Pro WX 5100's sole advantage, a 16.7% lead in G2D, is narrow and limited to 2D desktop tasks. Its 8 GB memory capacity is double the RX 6600S's 4 GB, but the RX 6600S has higher bandwidth (224.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s), so even memory-heavy workloads that fit within 4 GB will likely favor the newer card. The Pro WX 5100's single-slot form factor and four DisplayPort outputs may appeal to specific workstation setups, but the RX 6600S's integrated design and portable-device-dependent outputs suggest it is aimed at laptops, not fixed multi-display stations.

The architecture comparison reinforces the verdict. The RX 6600S is built on 7 nm RDNA 2.0 with 11,060 million transistors, 28 ray tracing cores, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. The Pro WX 5100 is built on 14 nm GCN 4.0 with 5,700 million transistors, no ray tracing cores, and DirectX 12 (12_0) only. The RX 6600S is not just faster; it is a more modern design with features that the Pro WX 5100 cannot access. For gamers, the RX 6600S is the obvious pick. For professionals who need 2D display output or more than 4 GB of VRAM, the Pro WX 5100 has a niche, but the benchmark data does not support its use for compute-heavy tasks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 6600S | AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 |

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

| Process Node | 7 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | 5,700 million |

| Die Size | 237 mm² | 232 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1700 MHz | 713 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz | 1086 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |

| Effective Memory Clock | 14 Gbps | 5 Gbps |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 28 | 0 |

| Pixel Rate | 128.0 GPixel/s | 34.75 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 224.0 GTexel/s | 121.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 7.168 TFLOPS | 3.892 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 14.34 TFLOPS (2:1) | 3.892 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Suggested PSU | None listed | 250 W |

| Release Date | 2022-01-03 | 2016-11-17 |