AMD Radeon RX 460 vs AMD Radeon RX 6600 Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 6600 vs AMD Radeon RX 460: benchmark results show the RX 6600 as the dominant performer, winning all three shared tests by substantial margins. The data indicates a generational leap between the RDNA 2.0 part and the GCN 4.0 card, with the RX 6600 delivering between 61.6% and 418% higher scores depending on the workload.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600 has an average benchmark score of 19036, while the AMD Radeon RX 460 scores 18373. That puts the RX 6600 roughly 3.6% higher on average, though the gap varies dramatically by test.

Q: Which card wins in Geekbench Metal performance?

A: The RX 6600 scores 88398 in Geekbench Metal versus 17065 for the RX 460. This is the largest single-test advantage, with the RX 6600 leading by 418%.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan compute performance?

A: The RX 6600 achieves a Geekbench Vulkan score of 67623, which is 234.8% higher than the RX 460's 20198. The newer architecture delivers a substantial advantage in this cross-platform API.

Q: What is the difference in OpenCL performance?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6600 scores 28850 compared to 17855 for the RX 460. This represents a 61.6% advantage for the RX 6600, the smallest relative win among the three shared benchmarks.

Q: How does the RX 6600's percentile ranking compare to the RX 460's?

A: The RX 6600 sits at the 63rd percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 460 is at the 62nd percentile. Despite the large performance gap in head-to-head tests, both cards occupy similar positions in the overall distribution.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each card based on average score?

A: For the RX 6600, the closest competitors are the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19030, 0% delta), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19049, -0.1%), and NVIDIA Tesla K20m (19089, -0.3%). The RX 460 sits near the Intel Arc A770M (18383, -0.1%), AMD FirePro D500 (18533, -0.9%), and AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (18189, 1%).

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear choice for most users: the AMD Radeon RX 6600. It wins every shared test, and its smallest margin of victory — 61.6% in OpenCL — is still a decisive advantage. The RX 6600's 418% lead in Metal and 234.8% lead in Vulkan indicate that its RDNA 2.0 architecture is vastly more efficient at extracting performance from modern APIs.

That said, the RX 460 is not without a niche. Its 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it a drop-in upgrade for older systems with minimal power delivery. It also carries a smaller physical footprint at 170 mm length versus 190 mm for the RX 6600. Users constrained by power supply limits or chassis space might still consider the RX 460, but the performance data shows it is outclassed in every measurable way.

The RX 6600 is the appropriate pick for anyone seeking playable frame rates in current titles, given its 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 460's 2 GB GDDR5 and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth place it firmly in legacy territory. For new purchases or upgrades where performance matters, the RX 6600 wins without qualification.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The three shared benchmark tests paint a consistent picture of RX 6600 dominance. In Geekbench Metal, the RX 6600's score of 88398 dwarfs the RX 460's 17065, a 418% delta. This is the single largest performance gap in the dataset, suggesting the RDNA 2.0 architecture is exceptionally well-optimized for Apple's Metal API.

Geekbench Vulkan shows a similar pattern, though less extreme. The RX 6600 posts 67623 against 20198 for the RX 460, a 234.8% advantage. Vulkan is a cross-platform API that stresses driver efficiency and hardware scheduling, and the newer card's 28 ray tracing cores and 1792 shading units give it a massive compute advantage over the RX 460's 896 shading units.

The closest contest comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 6600 scores 28850 versus 17855 for the RX 460. The 61.6% delta is still a commanding win, but notably smaller than the other two tests. OpenCL workloads tend to be more memory-bound, and while the RX 6600's 224.0 GB/s bandwidth is exactly double the RX 460's 112.0 GB/s, the compute scaling is less than linear in this workload.

The RX 6600 also has benchmark scores in tests the RX 460 does not appear in, including PassMark G3D (15096), PassMark GPU Compute (6554), and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (1492). These additional data points reinforce its overall position at the 63rd percentile, just ahead of the RX 460's 62nd percentile despite the massive head-to-head deltas.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is memory: the RX 6600 ships with 8 GB GDDR6, while the RX 460 has 2 GB GDDR5. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the RX 6600's memory clock runs at 14 Gbps effective versus 7 Gbps effective, doubling bandwidth from 112.0 GB/s to 224.0 GB/s.

Compute resources differ substantially. The RX 6600 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The RX 460 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and just 16 ROPs. Pixel rate tells the story: 159.4 GPixel/s for the RX 6600 versus 19.20 GPixel/s for the RX 460, an 8.3x difference. Texture rate is 279.0 GTexel/s versus 67.20 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds also favor the newer card. The RX 6600 has a base clock of 1626 MHz and boost of 2491 MHz, with a game clock of 2044 MHz. The RX 460 runs at 1090 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost. FP32 compute is 8.928 TFLOPS for the RX 6600 versus 2.150 TFLOPS for the RX 460, and FP16 is 17.86 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 2.150 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power requirements differ significantly. The RX 6600 has a 132 W TDP, requires one 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. The RX 460 has a 75 W TDP, needs no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The RX 6600 is also larger: 190 mm x 110 mm x 40 mm versus 170 mm x 6.7 inches for the RX 460 (height and width not listed for the older card).

Architecture Differences

The RX 6600 uses the Navi 23 chip built on TSMC's 7 nm process, packing 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die. The RX 460 uses the Baffin chip on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. Transistor density reflects the process gap: 46.7M / mm² for the RX 6600 versus 24.4M / mm² for the RX 460.

Architecture generation separates the two significantly. The RX 6600 is based on RDNA 2.0, part of the Navi II (RX 6000) generation, and succeeds the original Navi architecture. The RX 460 uses GCN 4.0, from the Arctic Islands (RX 400) generation, succeeding Pirate Islands and preceding Polaris. The architectural leap is evident in API support: the RX 6600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 460 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0).

Hardware features differ as well. The RX 6600 includes 28 ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the RX 460. Vulkan support also advances from 1.3 on the RX 460 to 1.4 on the RX 6600, while OpenGL remains at 4.6 for both. The RX 6600 supports PCIe 4.0 x8, doubling the interface bandwidth of the RX 460's PCIe 3.0 x8.

Display outputs also differ: the RX 6600 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the RX 460 provides 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The newer card drops DVI in favor of additional DisplayPort connections.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6600 wins in every benchmark category where both cards have data. Its 418% lead in Metal, 234.8% lead in Vulkan, and 61.6% lead in OpenCL make it the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads, modern gaming, and any application leveraging DirectX 12 Ultimate features. The 8 GB frame buffer and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth position it for 1080p and 1440p gaming with high texture settings, while the 28 ray tracing cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing where supported.

The RX 460's only advantages are practical rather than performance-based. Its 75 W TDP and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for legacy systems with weak power supplies. Its 170 mm length fits in smaller cases than the RX 6600's 190 mm. The 2 GB memory and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for older titles at lower resolutions and settings, but the data shows no scenario where the RX 460 outperforms the RX 6600 in actual computation.

For users with a 250 W PSU and a tight chassis, the RX 460 remains a viable low-power option. For everyone else, the RX 6600's overwhelming benchmark wins across all shared tests make it the only rational choice from a performance standpoint. The RX 6600's 63rd percentile ranking versus the RX 460's 62nd percentile understates the gap in direct comparison, as the newer card's nearest rivals include workstation GPUs like the NVIDIA Quadro K6000, while the RX 460 competes with mobile parts like the Intel Arc A770M.