AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data in this comparison is decisively one-sided. Across the two shared workload tests, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER wins both, leaving the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE without a single recorded victory in this head-to-head pairing.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4080 SUPER posts a score of 219,065 against the RX 6600 LE's 69,229. That is a delta of 68.4% in favor of the NVIDIA card. The gap is even wider in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX 4080 SUPER reaches 260,075 while the RX 6600 LE manages 72,428, a 72.2% deficit for the AMD part. In both tests, the NVIDIA card more than triples the AMD card's output, which points to a fundamental compute throughput advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Looking at the broader database averages, the RTX 4080 SUPER sits at 54,209 across all recorded benchmark entries, while the RX 6600 LE averages 70,829. This is an unusual inversion: the card that loses both head-to-head tests has a higher average score in the full database. That is because the RX 6600 LE's average is drawn from only two OpenCL and Vulkan results, both of which are strong for its class, whereas the RTX 4080 SUPER's average includes many additional tests, including Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 entries, some of which score relatively low (381, 193, 301, and 134 respectively). The RTX 4080 SUPER's Passmark G3D score of 34,245 and GPU compute score of 19,822 are substantial, but the low DirectX legacy scores pull its aggregate down.

The percentile rankings also tell an interesting story. The RX 6600 LE sits in the 91st percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is in the 86th percentile. Again, this reflects the different benchmark suites feeding each card's aggregate. On raw head-to-head performance, however, the data is unambiguous: the RTX 4080 SUPER is the faster card by a wide margin in both recorded shared tests.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different silicon generations and process nodes. The RX 6600 LE uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at the same foundry. The transistor counts reflect the scale gap: the RX 6600 LE has 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, while the RTX 4080 SUPER packs 45,900 million transistors onto a 379 mm² die. Transistor density tells the story of process maturity: the RX 6600 LE has 46.7 million transistors per mm², while the RTX 4080 SUPER reaches 121.1 million per mm².

Core counts differ massively. The RX 6600 LE has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. That is roughly 5.7 times the shading units and 2.9 times the TMUs. Ray tracing hardware also diverges: the AMD card has 28 RT cores, while the NVIDIA card has 80 RT cores. The RTX 4080 SUPER additionally includes 320 tensor cores, a feature the RX 6600 LE does not list at all.

Memory architecture is another clear separator. The RX 6600 LE has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128 bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256 bit bus, delivering 736.3 GB/s. That is more than three times the memory bandwidth, which matters for high resolution textures and compute workloads. The RTX 4080 SUPER also runs a higher base clock at 2295 MHz versus 1626 MHz, and a higher boost clock at 2550 MHz versus 2495 MHz. The AMD card's game clock is listed at 2045 MHz, a figure the NVIDIA card does not report.

Compute throughput follows the hardware counts. The RX 6600 LE delivers 8.942 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 17.88 TFLOPS of FP16 performance via a 2:1 ratio. The RTX 4080 SUPER delivers 52.22 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, since its FP16 runs at a 1:1 ratio. Pixel fill rate is 159.7 GPixel/s for the AMD card versus 285.6 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA card. Texture fill rate is 279.4 GTexel/s versus 816.0 GTexel/s.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature parity is not a differentiator. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the RX 6600 LE uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Both have the same display outputs: one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a.

Where Each One Wins

Given the head-to-head results, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the clear winner in raw compute and graphics workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 219,065 and Vulkan score of 260,075 put it far ahead of the RX 6600 LE in both general purpose compute and modern graphics API performance. For users running GPU accelerated applications, rendering tasks, or high end gaming, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the stronger choice by a substantial margin.

The RX 6600 LE, however, has its own advantages that the database records show. It is a dual-slot card with a single 8-pin power connector, a 132 W TDP, and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The RTX 4080 SUPER is triple-slot, uses a 16-pin connector, draws 320 W, and requires a 700 W suggested PSU. The RX 6600 LE is also physically smaller: 190 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, versus the RTX 4080 SUPER's 310 mm length, 140 mm height, and 61 mm width. For small form factor builds or systems with limited power delivery, the RX 6600 LE is the more practical fit.

The RX 6600 LE is also listed as still in active production, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is marked end-of-life. The AMD card's release date is earlier, December 7, 2023, versus January 30, 2024 for the NVIDIA card. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 999 USD, which the database records once, while the RX 6600 LE has no recorded launch MSRP.

For users who prioritize compute performance, ray tracing capability, memory bandwidth, or high resolution gaming, the RTX 4080 SUPER wins decisively. For users who prioritize physical footprint, power draw, or system integration flexibility, the RX 6600 LE has the edge. The database does not record any benchmark where the RX 6600 LE wins outright, so its strengths are contextual rather than performance based.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER scores 219,065, compared to 69,229 for the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE, a 68.4% advantage.

Q: How large is the gap in Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER scores 260,075 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the RX 6600 LE scores 72,428. The NVIDIA card leads by 72.2%.

Q: Does the RX 6600 LE have any performance advantage?

A: In the recorded head-to-head tests, the RX 6600 LE does not win any benchmark. Its average database score of 70,829 is higher than the RTX 4080 SUPER's 54,209, but that reflects different test suites rather than direct performance superiority.

Q: What are the memory differences between the two cards?

A: The RX 6600 LE has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128 bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256 bit bus with 736.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The RX 6600 LE has a 132 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 300 W and a single 8-pin connector. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a 320 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 700 W and a single 16-pin connector.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The RX 6600 LE is listed as active production, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is marked end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Chip: Navi 23 (AMD) versus AD103 (NVIDIA)
• Architecture: RDNA 2.0 versus Ada Lovelace
• Process node: 7 nm versus 5 nm
• Transistors: 11,060 million versus 45,900 million
• Die size: 237 mm² versus 379 mm²
• Transistor density: 46.7M / mm² versus 121.1M / mm²
• Base clock: 1626 MHz versus 2295 MHz
• Boost clock: 2495 MHz versus 2550 MHz
• Memory clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1438 MHz (23 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 8 GB versus 16 GB
• Memory type: GDDR6 versus GDDR6X
• Memory bus width: 128 bit versus 256 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 224.0 GB/s versus 736.3 GB/s
• Shading units: 1792 versus 10240
• TMUs: 112 versus 320
• ROPs: 64 versus 112
• RT cores: 28 versus 80
• Tensor cores: not listed versus 320
• Pixel rate: 159.7 GPixel/s versus 285.6 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 279.4 GTexel/s versus 816.0 GTexel/s
• FP32: 8.942 TFLOPS versus 52.22 TFLOPS
• FP16: 17.88 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 52.22 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 132 W versus 320 W
• Slot width: Dual-slot versus Triple-slot
• Power connectors: 1x 8-pin versus 1x 16-pin
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus 700 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x16
• Length: 190 mm versus 310 mm
• Height: 110 mm versus 140 mm
• Width: 40 mm versus 61 mm
• Production status: Active versus End-of-life
• Release date: December 7, 2023 versus January 30, 2024
• Predecessor: Navi versus GeForce 30
• Successor: Navi III versus GeForce 50
• Launch MSRP: not recorded versus 999 USD