AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 vs AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT Comparison

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT wins decisively with a score of 76,904 against the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100's 66,605. That is a 15.5% delta in favor of the RX 6650M XT.

Q: How does the Radeon Pro WX 9100 perform in other benchmark APIs?

A: The Pro WX 9100 has additional benchmark data in Metal and Vulkan. It scores 71,319 in Geekbench Metal and 54,711 in Geekbench Vulkan. The RX 6650M XT has no corresponding Metal or Vulkan scores in the data.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 6650M XT's average benchmark score is 76,904, placing it in the 91st percentile of all GPUs. The Pro WX 9100's average is 64,212, sitting in the 89th percentile. The RX 6650M XT leads by roughly 19.8% in average score.

Q: Which card has more memory, and does it affect the benchmark outcome?

A: The Pro WX 9100 has 16 GB of HBM2 memory, double the RX 6650M XT's 8 GB of GDDR6. Despite the larger memory pool and a much wider 2048-bit bus, the Pro WX 9100 still loses in OpenCL, indicating that raw memory capacity does not translate to a compute win here.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card based on average scores?

A: For the RX 6650M XT, the nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D at 77,712 (1% higher), followed by the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT at 78,940 (2.6% higher). For the Pro WX 9100, the closest rival is the NVIDIA CMP 30HX at 63,842 (0.6% lower), with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63,830 (0.6% lower) close behind.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life products. The RX 6650M XT was released on January 3, 2022, while the Pro WX 9100 dates back to July 9, 2017.

# Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different architectural eras from AMD. The RX 6650M XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using the Navi 23 chip, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Pro WX 9100 uses the older GCN 5.0 architecture with the Vega 10 chip, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This process gap is substantial: the RX 6650M XT packs 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 46.7 million per mm². The Pro WX 9100 has more transistors overall (12,500 million) but spreads them across a much larger 495 mm² die, yielding only 25.3 million transistors per mm².

The compute topology differs sharply. The RX 6650M XT has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The Pro WX 9100 doubles the shading units to 4,096 and TMUs to 256, while keeping 64 ROPs. The RX 6650M XT includes 32 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Pro WX 9100, which has no RT cores listed. Neither card has tensor cores.

Clock speeds tell a story of efficiency versus brute force. The RX 6650M XT runs at a 2,068 MHz base and 2,416 MHz boost clock, with a game clock of 2,162 MHz. The Pro WX 9100 is much slower in raw clock terms: 1,200 MHz base and 1,500 MHz boost. The RX 6650M XT's memory runs at 2,000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the Pro WX 9100's memory is at 945 MHz (1,890 Mbps effective).

The API support also differs. The RX 6650M XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Pro WX 9100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 6650M XT also has a newer PCIe interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus the Pro WX 9100's PCIe 3.0 x16.

# Where Each One Wins

The RX 6650M XT wins in the only direct head-to-head benchmark available: Geekbench OpenCL, where it beats the Pro WX 9100 by 15.5%. This is a clear compute victory for the younger, more efficient architecture. The data suggests the RX 6650M XT's strength lies in raw compute throughput per clock, driven by its much higher boost clock (2,416 MHz versus 1,500 MHz) and modern RDNA 2.0 design.

The Pro WX 9100 has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head comparison. However, it holds advantages in other specification areas that may matter for specific workloads. It has double the memory capacity (16 GB versus 8 GB) and nearly double the memory bandwidth (483.8 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s) thanks to its 2048-bit HBM2 interface. The Pro WX 9100 also has more shading units (4,096 versus 2,048) and more texture units (256 versus 128), which could benefit certain compute tasks that scale with parallel resource count rather than clock speed.

In terms of display outputs, the Pro WX 9100 offers six mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connections, making it suitable for multi-display professional setups. The RX 6650M XT's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile IGP nature. The Pro WX 9100 also has a higher FP32 throughput at 12.29 TFLOPS versus the RX 6650M XT's 9.896 TFLOPS, and higher texture rate (384.0 GTexel/s versus 309.2 GTexel/s). But the RX 6650M XT wins in pixel rate (154.6 GPixel/s versus 96.00 GPixel/s).

# Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT | AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | 12,500 million |

| Die Size | 237 mm² | 495 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 46.7M / mm² | 25.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2068 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2416 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2162 MHz | N/A |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 483.8 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 128 | 256 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 32 | N/A |

| Pixel Rate | 154.6 GPixel/s | 96.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 309.2 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 9.896 TFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 19.79 TFLOPS (2:1) | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 120 W | 230 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 550 W |

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

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2022-01-03 | 2017-07-09 |

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and it delivers a clear verdict. The RX 6650M XT scores 76,904, while the Pro WX 9100 manages 66,605. That is a 15.5% advantage for the RX 6650M XT, a substantial margin given the Pro WX 9100's advantages in raw compute resources.

Digging into why the RX 6650M XT wins despite having half the shading units and TMUs, the answer lies in clock speed and architecture efficiency. The RX 6650M XT's boost clock of 2,416 MHz is 61% higher than the Pro WX 9100's 1,500 MHz. The RDNA 2.0 architecture is also significantly more power-efficient, as evidenced by the 120 W TDP versus 230 W. The RX 6650M XT achieves its score with less than half the power draw.

The Pro WX 9100's higher FP32 throughput (12.29 TFLOPS versus 9.896 TFLOPS) and higher texture rate (384.0 GTexel/s versus 309.2 GTexel/s) do not translate into a benchmark win. This suggests that the OpenCL workload in question favors the RX 6650M XT's higher pixel rate (154.6 GPixel/s versus 96.00 GPixel/s) and more modern instruction set. The RX 6650M XT also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro WX 9100 is capped at DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, which may affect compute path efficiencies.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the RX 6650M XT's 76,904 average score places it in the 91st percentile of all GPUs. The Pro WX 9100's 64,212 average sits in the 89th percentile. The gap between them is roughly 19.8%, even larger than the head-to-head OpenCL delta. The Pro WX 9100's nearest rivals are all within 0.8% of its average score (CMP 30HX, RX 9060 XT LP, RX 7600M, Pro Vega 56), indicating it sits in a tightly contested performance tier. The RX 6650M XT's nearest rivals are all faster, with the RTX 5090 D at 1% higher, RX 6850M XT at 2.6% higher, and Tesla P100 variants at 3.1-3.4% higher.

# The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture: the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT is the faster GPU in compute workloads. It wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark by 15.5%, has a higher average benchmark score (76,904 versus 64,212), and sits in a higher performance percentile (91st versus 89th). For anyone prioritizing raw compute performance in OpenCL, the RX 6650M XT is the obvious choice based on this data.

The Pro WX 9100's advantages are not in compute speed but in capacity and connectivity. Its 16 GB of HBM2 memory with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth and 2048-bit bus is designed for large datasets that exceed the RX 6650M XT's 8 GB GDDR6 allocation. The six mini-DisplayPort outputs support professional multi-monitor configurations. But the data shows these advantages do not overcome the RX 6650M XT's architectural superiority in the benchmark tested.

The RX 6650M XT is also far more power-efficient, with a 120 W TDP versus 230 W, and requires no external power connectors while the Pro WX 9100 needs a 6-pin and 8-pin. The RX 6650M XT's IGP form factor suits mobile platforms, while the Pro WX 9100's dual-slot design with a 267 mm length is a desktop workstation card.

The verdict is straightforward: the RX 6650M XT wins on compute performance and efficiency. The Pro WX 9100 remains relevant only for workloads that specifically need its larger memory capacity or multi-display professional output capabilities. Given that the RX 6650M XT achieves its win with half the shading units, half the TMUs, and less than half the power, the architectural leap from GCN 5.0 to RDNA 2.0 is evident in the numbers. The Pro WX 9100's launch MSRP was 1,599 USD, but that figure does not change the performance data presented here.