AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between these two GPUs. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX A5500 scores 174,637, while the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE scores 69,229. That is a 152.3% advantage for the NVIDIA card, the largest single-test margin in the database comparison. The OpenCL workload, which typically stresses raw compute throughput across shading units, plays directly to the A5500's massive 10,240 shading units and 34.10 TFLOPS of FP32 performance.

The Vulkan test tells a similar story, though with a slightly narrower margin. The RTX A5500 posts 155,797 against 72,428 for the RX 6600 LE, a 115.1% lead. Vulkan is more efficient at distributing draw calls and can mask some architectural differences, but the sheer scale of the A5500's resources still asserts itself. The NVIDIA card wins both recorded head-to-head comparisons, giving it a 2-0 sweep in the database's benchmark suite.

It is worth remembering the RX 6600 LE's Vulkan score of 72,428 is actually higher than its OpenCL score of 69,229. This is an unusual pattern, as many GPUs score lower in Vulkan due to driver maturity or workload characteristics. The A5500 shows the opposite trend, with OpenCL outscoring Vulkan by roughly 18,840 points. This suggests the NVIDIA architecture handles OpenCL's memory access patterns more efficiently relative to its own Vulkan performance, while the AMD card is comparatively stronger in Vulkan's command-processing model.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the gap. The RTX A5500 averages 165,217 across the database's test set, placing it in the 97th percentile of all GPUs tracked. The RX 6600 LE averages 70,829, good for the 91st percentile. While both sit in the upper tier of the database, the A5500's percentile ranking reflects a fundamentally different performance class.

The nearest rivals in the database provide useful context for each card. The RTX A5500 sits within 2% of several high-end workstation and datacenter GPUs: it is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7800, 0.5% behind the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation, 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB, and 2% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X. These are all substantial workstation-grade parts, and the A5500 is squarely in their company.

The RX 6600 LE, by contrast, competes against a different tier. It is 1% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile, 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P6000, 1.3% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6650M, and 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200. These rivals include mobile parts and older workstation cards, indicating the RX 6600 LE's performance neighborhood is mainstream-to-upper-midrange rather than flagship.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear hierarchy. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 is the superior GPU by every measured metric in the database. It wins both benchmark tests, holds a higher average score, and ranks in a higher percentile. The A5500 is positioned among workstation and datacenter-class accelerators, with nearest rivals like the RTX 4500 Ada Generation and A100 PCIe 40 GB. This is a card designed for heavy compute workloads, large datasets, and professional rendering tasks where 24 GB of GDDR6 memory and 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth are essential.

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE, while respectable in its own tier, is not a competitor to the A5500. Its nearest rivals include mobile GPUs and previous-generation workstation cards. The 91st percentile ranking is strong for a mainstream part, but the 97th percentile of the A5500 reflects a different performance class entirely. The RX 6600 LE's 8 GB memory capacity and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for many tasks but will bottleneck in the workloads where the A5500 excels.

Who should pick which? Strictly from the recorded data, users with compute-heavy professional workloads should choose the RTX A5500. The OpenCL advantage of 152.3% is decisive for GPU compute applications that rely on FP32 throughput. Users working with large models, high-resolution textures, or memory-intensive datasets will find the 24 GB capacity and 768.0 GB/s bandwidth indispensable. The A5500's 97th percentile ranking means it outperforms the vast majority of GPUs in the database.

The RX 6600 LE is the choice for users whose workloads fit within its 8 GB memory envelope and who do not require the A5500's compute scale. Its Vulkan performance is comparatively stronger than its OpenCL showing, which may benefit certain gaming or lightweight rendering scenarios. The 132 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU also indicate a far less demanding system integration. However, the benchmark data does not support any scenario where the RX 6600 LE outperforms the A5500 in raw performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 averages 165,217, while the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE averages 70,829. The A5500 also ranks in the 97th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 91st percentile for the RX 6600 LE.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL?

A: The RTX A5500 scores 174,637 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 152.3% higher than the RX 6600 LE's 69,229.

Q: Does the RX 6600 LE win any benchmark in the database?

A: No. The database records two head-to-head tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the RTX A5500 wins both. The RX 6600 LE has zero wins in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: How does the RTX A5500 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The A5500 is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7800, 0.5% behind the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation, 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB, and 2% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X.

Q: What kind of GPU is the RX 6600 LE closest to in performance?

A: Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile, NVIDIA Quadro P6000, AMD Radeon RX 6650M, and AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200. These are a mix of mobile and previous-generation workstation parts.

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RTX A5500 delivers 34.10 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 8.942 TFLOPS for the RX 6600 LE.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ substantially across nearly every specification field. The RTX A5500 uses the GA102 chip with 28,300 million transistors on an 8 nm Samsung process, with a die size of 628 mm². The RX 6600 LE uses the Navi 23 chip with 11,060 million transistors on a 7 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 237 mm². Transistor density is similar (45.1M per mm² for NVIDIA, 46.7M per mm² for AMD), but the physical scale of the NVIDIA chip is much larger.

Memory specifications show the biggest functional divide. The A5500 has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6600 LE has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s. The A5500 also runs its memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the RX 6600 LE runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

The compute unit counts are dramatically different. The A5500 has 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 80 RT cores, and 320 tensor cores. The RX 6600 LE has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed. The pixel rates are nearly identical (159.8 GPixel/s for the A5500, 159.7 GPixel/s for the RX 6600 LE), but the texture rates diverge: 532.8 GTexel/s versus 279.4 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds favor the AMD card. The RX 6600 LE has a base clock of 1626 MHz and a boost clock of 2495 MHz, with a game clock of 2045 MHz. The A5500 has a base clock of 1080 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. The AMD card's higher clocks partially compensate for its smaller chip, but not enough to close the performance gap.

Power requirements differ significantly. The A5500 has a TDP of 230 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The RX 6600 LE has a TDP of 132 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W. Both use a single 8-pin power connector and dual-slot cooling. Physical dimensions also differ: the A5500 is 267 mm long and 112 mm tall, while the RX 6600 LE is 190 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 40 mm wide.

The bus interface differs as well. The A5500 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the RX 6600 LE uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 1.4a for the A5500, while the RX 6600 LE offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is between NVIDIA Ampere and AMD RDNA 2.0. The A5500 is built on the Ampere architecture, part of the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation, using the GA102 chip. The RX 6600 LE is built on RDNA 2.0, part of the Navi II (RX 6000) generation, using the Navi 23 chip. These are fundamentally different designs: Ampere is a compute-first architecture with dedicated tensor cores, while RDNA 2.0 is a gaming-oriented architecture optimized for clock speed and power efficiency.

The process nodes reflect different manufacturing strategies. The A5500 uses Samsung's 8 nm process, while the RX 6600 LE uses TSMC's 7 nm process. The AMD card's smaller node contributes to its higher clock speeds and lower power draw. The A5500 compensates with a much larger die: 628 mm² versus 237 mm², and more than double the transistor count.

The A5500 includes 320 tensor cores, a feature absent from the RX 6600 LE's specifications. Tensor cores accelerate AI and machine learning workloads, which is consistent with the A5500's workstation positioning. The RX 6600 LE has no tensor core equivalent listed in the database.

FP16 compute reveals a key architectural difference. The A5500 delivers 34.10 TFLOPS of FP16, matching its FP32 throughput at a 1:1 ratio. The RX 6600 LE delivers 17.88 TFLOPS of FP16, which is double its 8.942 TFLOPS FP32 rate, indicating a 2:1 ratio. This means the A5500 treats FP16 and FP32 with equal throughput, while the RX 6600 LE trades FP32 capacity for faster FP16 execution.

The production status differs: the A5500 is marked as end-of-life with a release date of 2022-03-21, while the RX 6600 LE is active with a release date of 2023-12-07. The A5500's predecessor is listed as Quadro Turing, with a successor of Workstation Ada. The RX 6600 LE's predecessor is Navi, with a successor of Navi III. The RX 6600 LE is part of the Radeon RX 6000 series, while the A5500 has no series designation listed.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A5500 wins every measured category in the database. In OpenCL, its 152.3% advantage indicates dominance in compute-oriented workloads that leverage raw FP32 throughput, large memory bandwidth, and extensive shading resources. The 24 GB memory capacity and 768.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets, high-resolution textures, and multi-GPU rendering pipelines where memory capacity is the limiting factor.

The A5500's 320 tensor cores and 1:1 FP16/FP32 ratio position it for AI inference and training workloads. The 97th percentile ranking places it among the top 3% of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are workstation and datacenter parts, confirming its professional compute focus.

The RX 6600 LE wins in areas not directly measured by the benchmark scores: lower power draw (132 W versus 230 W), lower system power requirements (300 W suggested PSU versus 550 W), and more compact physical dimensions. The higher boost clock of 2495 MHz is the highest clock speed in this comparison, and the game clock of 2045 MHz suggests strong performance in gaming-oriented workloads. The RX 6600 LE's PCIe 8x interface may also be sufficient for its memory bandwidth needs, given its 224.0 GB/s ceiling.

Users who prioritize system integration simplicity, lower power consumption, and smaller physical footprint may find the RX 6600 LE attractive, provided their workloads do not require the A5500's compute scale. The RX 6600 LE holds a 91st percentile ranking, which is still a strong showing for a mainstream part when compared to mobile GPUs in the database. Its Vulkan score being higher than its OpenCL score indicates the RDNA 2.0 architecture handles modern graphics APIs efficiently, even if the absolute scores remain far below the A5500.

The Radeon Pro WX 8200 and RTX 3000 Mobile rivals bracket the RX 6600 LE's performance, showing it is not a low-end part by any means. But the data firmly establishes the A5500 as the answer for users needing maximum benchmark performance in the database's recorded tests.