AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT vs AMD Radeon RX 6600M Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 6600M and AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT are two end-of-life graphics cards from AMD, but they represent different design philosophies and generations. The RX 6600M is a mobile-first part built on RDNA 2.0, while the RX 5600 XT is a desktop-oriented card from the RDNA 1.0 era. The recorded benchmark data shows a near-split in wins: the RX 6600M takes 6 head-to-head tests, while the RX 5600 XT takes 5. However, the margins and the nature of those wins reveal distinct strengths. The RX 6600M leads in modern API workloads and DirectX 11, while the RX 5600 XT counters in compute, legacy DirectX, and 2D throughput. The average benchmark score also favors the RX 6600M: 23,273 versus 20,713, a difference that places the mobile card at the 68th percentile of all GPUs compared to the RX 5600 XT's 66th percentile. This article breaks down where each card wins, what separates them architecturally, and which one the data suggests for specific workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6600M wins decisively in Vulkan and Metal workloads. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, it scores 73,740 against the RX 5600 XT's 56,218, a 31.2% advantage. That is the largest single margin in the entire comparison. The Metal test shows a 14.8% lead as well: 92,237 versus 80,376. These results point to strong driver and hardware optimization for modern, low-level graphics APIs. The RX 6600M also wins the DirectX 11 Passmark test by a wide margin, scoring 136 versus 96, a 41.7% difference. In DirectX 10, it leads 87 to 73, a 19.2% edge. Even in the overall DirectX 12 Passmark test, the two cards tie at 52 each, so the RX 6600M does not lose that round. The Passmark G3D score, which is a general 3D graphics metric, also goes to the RX 6600M: 13,929 versus 13,457, a 3.5% lead.

The RX 5600 XT wins in compute-oriented and legacy workloads. The Passmark GPU Compute test gives it 6,296 versus 5,646, a 10.3% advantage. The OpenCL Geekbench score is close but favors the RX 5600 XT: 68,537 versus 67,765, a 1.1% margin. In DirectX 9, the older card scores 202 against 184, an 8.9% lead. The Passmark G2D test, which measures 2D graphics performance, shows the RX 5600 XT ahead by 16.3%: 870 versus 728. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, a modern ray-traced and DX12 workload, also goes to the RX 5600 XT: 1,669 versus 1,495, a 10.4% lead. So the RX 5600 XT excels in raw compute and older API paths, while the RX 6600M dominates the newer API landscape.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different RDNA revisions. The RX 6600M uses the Navi 23 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, while the RX 5600 XT uses the Navi 10 chip with the original RDNA 1.0 architecture. Both are manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, but the transistor counts and die sizes differ. The RX 6600M packs 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter. The RX 5600 XT has 10,300 million transistors on a larger 251 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 41.0 million per square millimeter. The RX 6600M is the denser chip.

The RX 6600M also introduces hardware ray tracing cores, with 28 RT cores listed, while the RX 5600 XT has no RT core entry. This is a direct generation gap. The shading unit count is lower on the RX 6600M: 1,792 versus 2,304, and the texture mapping units are also fewer: 112 versus 144. Both cards have 64 raster operation units. Clock speeds tell a different story. The RX 6600M has a base clock of 2068 MHz and a boost clock of 2416 MHz, while the RX 5600 XT sits at 1130 MHz base and 1560 MHz boost. The RX 6600M's game clock is listed at 2177 MHz, versus 1375 MHz for the RX 5600 XT. These higher clocks allow the RX 6600M to reach 8.659 TFLOPS FP32 performance, compared to 7.188 TFLOPS for the RX 5600 XT, despite having fewer shading units.

Memory configurations also diverge. The RX 6600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5600 XT has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5600 XT has more bus width and higher bandwidth, while the RX 6600M has more capacity. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the RX 6600M and 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the RX 5600 XT.

Power and physical design differ substantially. The RX 6600M is rated at 100 W TDP and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors, designed for portable devices. The RX 5600 XT is a dual-slot card rated at 150 W TDP, requiring one 8-pin power connector and a suggested 450 W power supply. The RX 5600 XT is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long, while the RX 6600M has no listed dimensions because it is a mobile part. Display outputs also reflect this: the RX 6600M is portable-device dependent, while the RX 5600 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

API support differs at the DirectX level. The RX 6600M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 5600 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 6600M is from the Radeon RX 6000 series and Navi Mobile generation, with a release date of May 30, 2021. The RX 5600 XT is from the Radeon RX 5000 series and Navi generation, released January 20, 2020. The RX 6600M lists a predecessor of Polaris Mobile, while the RX 5600 XT lists a predecessor of Vega and a successor of Navi II.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RX 6600M has an average benchmark score of 23,273, which is higher than the RX 5600 XT's 20,713. This places the RX 6600M at the 68th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5600 XT sits at the 66th percentile.

Q: Does the RX 6600M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RX 6600M includes 28 ray tracing cores as part of its RDNA 2.0 architecture. The RX 5600 XT, based on RDNA 1.0, has no ray tracing core entry in the data.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RX 6600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the RX 5600 XT has 6 GB of GDDR6. The RX 5600 XT has a wider 192-bit memory bus and higher bandwidth at 288.0 GB/s, compared to the RX 6600M's 128-bit bus and 224.0 GB/s.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The RX 6600M is rated at 100 W TDP and requires no external power connectors, making it suitable as an integrated graphics processor. The RX 5600 XT is rated at 150 W TDP and requires a single 8-pin power connector and a 450 W power supply.

Q: In which benchmark does the RX 6600M show its largest win?

A: The largest win for the RX 6600M is in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where it scores 73,740 versus the RX 5600 XT's 56,218, a 31.2% advantage. It also leads the Passmark DirectX 11 test by 41.7%, but that is a lower-magnitude score difference in absolute terms.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both the RX 6600M and the RX 5600 XT are listed as end-of-life production status in the database.

Specification Differences

The recorded specification differences between the two cards are as follows:

• Architecture: RDNA 2.0 for the RX 6600M, RDNA 1.0 for the RX 5600 XT
• Chip: Navi 23 for the RX 6600M, Navi 10 for the RX 5600 XT
• Transistors: 11,060 million for the RX 6600M, 10,300 million for the RX 5600 XT
• Die size: 237 mm² for the RX 6600M, 251 mm² for the RX 5600 XT
• Transistor density: 46.7M / mm² for the RX 6600M, 41.0M / mm² for the RX 5600 XT
• Base clock: 2068 MHz for the RX 6600M, 1130 MHz for the RX 5600 XT
• Boost clock: 2416 MHz for the RX 6600M, 1560 MHz for the RX 5600 XT
• Game clock: 2177 MHz for the RX 6600M, 1375 MHz for the RX 5600 XT
• Memory clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the RX 6600M, 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the RX 5600 XT
• Memory size: 8 GB for the RX 6600M, 6 GB for the RX 5600 XT
• Memory bus width: 128 bit for the RX 6600M, 192 bit for the RX 5600 XT
• Memory bandwidth: 224.0 GB/s for the RX 6600M, 288.0 GB/s for the RX 5600 XT
• Shading units: 1792 for the RX 6600M, 2304 for the RX 5600 XT
• Texture mapping units: 112 for the RX 6600M, 144 for the RX 5600 XT
• Ray tracing cores: 28 for the RX 6600M, none for the RX 5600 XT
• Pixel rate: 154.6 GPixel/s for the RX 6600M, 99.84 GPixel/s for the RX 5600 XT
• Texture rate: 270.6 GTexel/s for the RX 6600M, 224.6 GTexel/s for the RX 5600 XT
• FP32 performance: 8.659 TFLOPS for the RX 6600M, 7.188 TFLOPS for the RX 5600 XT
• FP16 performance: 17.32 TFLOPS (2:1) for the RX 6600M, 14.38 TFLOPS (2:1) for the RX 5600 XT
• TDP: 100 W for the RX 6600M, 150 W for the RX 5600 XT
• Slot width: IGP for the RX 6600M, Dual-slot for the RX 5600 XT
• Power connectors: None for the RX 6600M, 1x 8-pin for the RX 5600 XT
• Suggested power supply: None listed for the RX 6600M, 450 W for the RX 5600 XT
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RX 6600M, PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 5600 XT
• Display outputs: Portable Device Dependent for the RX 6600M, 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 5600 XT
• DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) for the RX 6600M, 12 (12_1) for the RX 5600 XT
• Release date: May 30, 2021 for the RX 6600M, January 20, 2020 for the RX 5600 XT
• Predecessor: Polaris Mobile for the RX 6600M, Vega for the RX 5600 XT
• Successor: None for the RX 6600M, Navi II for the RX 5600 XT

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is the Vulkan score. The RX 6600M posts 73,740 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 31.2% higher than the RX 5600 XT's 56,218. This is a massive gap and suggests that the RDNA 2.0 architecture has significantly better Vulkan execution. The Metal test reinforces this: 92,237 versus 80,376, a 14.8% lead for the RX 6600M. For users focused on Vulkan-based games or Metal on macOS, the RX 6600M is clearly the stronger choice.

The Passmark DirectX 11 test is another blowout. The RX 6600M scores 136, while the RX 5600 XT only manages 96, a 41.7% difference. DirectX 10 also favors the RX 6600M: 87 versus 73, a 19.2% margin. Even in the Passmark G3D overall score, the RX 6600M wins, but by a smaller 3.5% margin: 13,929 versus 13,457.

The RX 5600 XT fights back in compute. In Passmark GPU Compute, it scores 6,296 versus 5,646, a 10.3% advantage. The OpenCL Geekbench test is much closer: 68,537 versus 67,765, a 1.1% edge for the RX 5600 XT. This suggests that for OpenCL compute tasks, the RX 5600 XT has a slight edge, but the difference is small enough that real-world applications may not consistently favor it.

In legacy DirectX 9, the RX 5600 XT wins 202 to 184, an 8.9% lead. The Passmark G2D test, which measures 2D graphics, gives the RX 5600 XT a 16.3% advantage: 870 versus 728. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, which stresses modern DX12 and ray tracing, goes to the RX 5600 XT by 10.4%: 1,669 versus 1,495. This is notable because the RX 6600M has dedicated ray tracing cores, yet the RX 5600 XT still wins this specific DX12 test. However, the Passmark DirectX 12 test is a dead tie at 52 each.

The DirectX 10 and DirectX 11 wins for the RX 6600M are substantial, while the DirectX 9 win for the RX 5600 XT is moderate. The Vulkan and Metal leads for the RX 6600M are the largest of any comparison. The compute wins for the RX 5600 XT are modest, with the 10.3% GPU Compute lead being the most significant.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon RX 6600M as the better overall card for modern graphics workloads. It leads in 6 of the 11 head-to-head benchmarks, including the highest-margin wins in Vulkan, Metal, and DirectX 11. Its average benchmark score is higher at 23,273 versus 20,713, and it sits at a higher percentile of all GPUs. The RX 6600M also brings ray tracing cores, a higher pixel rate of 154.6 GPixel/s, a higher texture rate of 270.6 GTexel/s, and higher FP32 and FP16 performance. Its 8 GB of memory is also larger than the 6 GB on the RX 5600 XT, which matters for modern texture-heavy scenes. For a gamer or a user prioritizing current APIs, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and higher clock speeds, the RX 6600M is the stronger pick.

However, the RX 5600 XT has its own domain. It wins compute benchmarks, including Passmark GPU Compute and OpenCL, and it holds a lead in memory bandwidth at 288.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s. It also wins the DirectX 9 and 2D tests, making it a better choice for older games or applications that rely on legacy API paths. The RX 5600 XT also has a wider 192-bit memory bus and a dual-slot desktop form factor with standard display outputs, which may be more practical for a desktop build. Its launch MSRP was 279 USD, but the database does not provide a launch price for the RX 6600M, so no comparison can be made on that front.

The choice comes down to workload. The RX 6600M is the modern, power-efficient option with a 100 W TDP and no power connectors, designed for mobile or integrated systems. It wins the benchmarks that matter for current games and next-generation APIs. The RX 5600 XT is the compute-oriented desktop card with a higher power draw of 150 W, a single 8-pin connector, and a suggested 450 W power supply. It wins the legacy and compute tests. If the priority is Vulkan, Metal, DirectX 11, and overall 3D performance, the RX 6600M is the clear winner. If the priority is compute throughput, legacy DirectX 9, or 2D acceleration, the RX 5600 XT has the edge. The recorded data does not support one card beating the other across the board; it supports a split based on use case.