AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE vs NVIDIA Tesla P40 Comparison

The Verdict

The data positions the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE as the clear performance leader in this pairing, winning both head-to-head benchmark comparisons. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6600 LE scores 69,229 against the Tesla P40’s 62,017, a decisive 11.6% advantage. The Vulkan gap narrows but remains meaningful: 72,428 versus 68,172, a 6.2% lead. This is not a marginal victory; it is a consistent pattern across both API tests. The RX 6600 LE also holds a higher percentile rank (91st vs. 89th), reinforcing its position as the stronger general-purpose compute device.

Who should pick which, strictly from the data? The RX 6600 LE is the choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance, modern API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate vs. DirectX 12), and efficiency, given its 132 W TDP versus the P40’s 250 W. It also offers display outputs, making it viable for interactive workloads. The Tesla P40, however, is the only option when capacity is paramount: its 24 GB of VRAM is triple the RX 6600 LE’s 8 GB, with a wider 384-bit bus and higher 347.1 GB/s bandwidth. The P40 is end-of-life and has no display outputs, so it is strictly a compute or server card. The RX 6600 LE is Active in production status, suggesting ongoing availability and driver support. For a user with workloads that fit within 8 GB, the RX 6600 LE is the data-backed winner. For datasets that demand more than 8 GB, the P40’s memory capacity is the sole decisive factor, despite its lower compute scores.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE averages 70,829, while the NVIDIA Tesla P40 averages 65,095. That is a 5.7% difference in favor of the AMD card, consistent with its 91st percentile ranking versus the P40’s 89th.

Q: Is the RX 6600 LE faster in both Vulkan and OpenCL?

A: Yes. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6600 LE scores 72,428 versus 68,172 for the P40, a 6.2% win. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6600 LE scores 69,229 versus 62,017, an 11.6% win. The AMD card wins both head-to-head tests.

Q: What is the biggest advantage the Tesla P40 has over the RX 6600 LE?

A: Memory capacity. The P40 has 24 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 347.1 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6600 LE has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s. For workloads exceeding 8 GB, the P40 is the only viable option.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient according to the data?

A: The RX 6600 LE. Its TDP is 132 W, nearly half the Tesla P40’s 250 W. The AMD card also suggests a 300 W PSU, while the P40 suggests a 600 W unit. The efficiency gap is substantial, with the RX 6600 LE delivering higher performance at lower power.

Q: Can the Tesla P40 be used for display output?

A: No. The P40’s specification lists “No outputs,” making it a headless compute accelerator. The RX 6600 LE includes 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, so it can drive displays directly.

Q: Which card supports the newer graphics API features?

A: The RX 6600 LE supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Tesla P40 supports only DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the AMD card has a more advanced DirectX feature set.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide here is generational and fundamental. The AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA Tesla P40 uses the GP102 chip built on the older Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 16 nm process at the same foundry. The process node difference is stark: 7 nm versus 16 nm, which explains the transistor density disparity. The RX 6600 LE packs 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die, yielding 46.7 million transistors per mm². The P40 has slightly more transistors (11,800 million) but on a much larger 471 mm² die, resulting in only 25.1 million transistors per mm². That is a 46% density advantage for the AMD part, a direct consequence of the newer node.

The architectures themselves diverge on key features. RDNA 2.0 includes dedicated ray tracing cores — the RX 6600 LE has 28 RT cores — while Pascal has none. The RX 6600 LE also has a more modern compute unit layout with 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The P40 has 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the RX 6600 LE achieves higher pixel rate (159.7 GPixel/s vs. 147.0 GPixel/s) but lower texture rate (279.4 GTexel/s vs. 367.4 GTexel/s). The FP32 compute is telling: the P40 reaches 11.76 TFLOPS, while the RX 6600 LE manages 8.942 TFLOPS. Yet in real-world Geekbench tests, the AMD card wins. The explanation lies in architectural efficiency — RDNA 2.0 extracts more usable performance per FLOP than Pascal.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The RX 6600 LE uses GDDR6 at 14 Gbps effective on a 128-bit bus. The P40 uses GDDR5 at 7.2 Gbps effective on a 384-bit bus. The P40’s bus width gives it 347.1 GB/s bandwidth, 55% more than the RX 6600 LE’s 224.0 GB/s. The P40 also has a much larger frame buffer at 24 GB. The RX 6600 LE supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the P40 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The newer PCIe standard may offset some bandwidth limitations in certain workloads, but the raw memory bandwidth advantage clearly belongs to NVIDIA.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on nearly every measurable specification. The RX 6600 LE has a base clock of 1626 MHz and a boost clock of 2495 MHz, while the P40 runs at 1303 MHz base and 1531 MHz boost. The AMD card’s game clock is listed at 2045 MHz; the P40 has no game clock listed. Memory clocks also differ: the RX 6600 LE runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the P40 runs at 1808 MHz (7.2 Gbps effective). The effective data rates are where the GDDR6 advantage shows.

Memory size and type are major differentiators: 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus for AMD versus 24 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus for NVIDIA. Bandwidth favors the P40 at 347.1 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s. The compute unit counts differ significantly: the RX 6600 LE has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs; the P40 has 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The RX 6600 LE includes 28 RT cores; the P40 has none. Neither card has tensor cores.

Power and physical specifications are equally divergent. The RX 6600 LE is rated at 132 W TDP with a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested 300 W PSU. The P40 consumes 250 W, uses an 8-pin EPS connector, and suggests a 600 W PSU. Both are dual-slot cards, but the P40 is longer at 267 mm versus 190 mm. The RX 6600 LE is 110 mm tall and 40 mm wide; the P40 is 111 mm tall with no width listed. The bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD, PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA.

Display outputs are a critical difference. The RX 6600 LE has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The P40 has no outputs whatsoever. API support also differs: the RX 6600 LE supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the P40 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. Production status separates them further: the RX 6600 LE is Active, released on 2023-12-07, while the P40 is End-of-life, released on 2016-09-12. The P40 has a launch MSRP of 5,699 USD; the RX 6600 LE has no listed launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6600 LE scores 69,229 against the P40’s 62,017, a delta of 11.6% in favor of AMD. This is the larger of the two wins. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6600 LE scores 72,428 against the P40’s 68,172, a delta of 6.2%. The AMD card wins both tests, giving it a 2-0 record in winsA versus winsB.

The OpenCL result is particularly telling. The P40 has 3,840 shading units and 11.76 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, yet it loses by double digits to a card with 1,792 shading units and 8.942 TFLOPS. This suggests the RDNA 2.0 architecture achieves far higher utilization in OpenCL workloads. The RX 6600 LE also has a significant clock speed advantage (2495 MHz boost vs. 1531 MHz boost), which likely contributes to its efficiency. The 11.6% margin is substantial, placing the RX 6600 LE well above the P40 in the performance hierarchy.

The Vulkan test narrows the gap but does not change the outcome. The RX 6600 LE’s 6.2% lead in Vulkan is notable because both cards support Vulkan 1.4, so the API is not a limiting factor. The result likely reflects architectural maturity — RDNA 2.0 is a newer design with better instruction scheduling and memory access patterns. The P40’s larger memory bandwidth (347.1 GB/s) does not translate into a Vulkan advantage, suggesting the test is not bandwidth-bound. The RX 6600 LE’s higher pixel rate (159.7 GPixel/s vs. 147.0 GPixel/s) may contribute to its Vulkan performance, as geometry and rasterization tasks benefit from that throughput.

When comparing to their respective nearest rivals, the RX 6600 LE sits close to the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile (70,140, 1% delta) and AMD Radeon RX 6650M (71,768, -1.3% delta). The P40’s closest competitor is the AMD Radeon VII (66,004, -1.4% delta) and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842, 2% delta). The RX 6600 LE’s average score of 70,829 places it above the P40’s 65,095 by a margin that the head-to-head tests confirm.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6600 LE wins in every benchmark test recorded. It is the faster card in both OpenCL and Vulkan, and it holds a higher percentile ranking (91st vs. 89th). Its architectural advantages — RDNA 2.0, 7 nm process, ray tracing support, and DirectX 12 Ultimate — make it the superior choice for modern gaming and compute workloads. The card’s lower TDP (132 W vs. 250 W) and display outputs make it suitable for desktop use, including gaming, content creation, and general-purpose GPU compute. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming, and its PCIe 4.0 interface ensures compatibility with current platforms. The RX 6600 LE is also an Active product, meaning it is still in production and likely to receive ongoing driver optimizations.

The Tesla P40’s wins are not in performance but in capacity and legacy compatibility. Its 24 GB of VRAM is the single largest advantage, offering three times the memory of the RX 6600 LE. For machine learning inference, large dataset processing, or any workload where model weights or data exceed 8 GB, the P40 is the only choice between these two. Its 347.1 GB/s bandwidth and 384-bit bus are better suited for memory-intensive tasks. The P40 also has more raw compute units (3,840 shading units) and higher FP32 throughput (11.76 TFLOPS), which could benefit workloads that are not limited by architecture efficiency. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while older, offers full-width connectivity.

The P40’s 24 GB frame buffer is its trump card. No amount of architectural efficiency can compensate for running out of memory. If the workload fits within 8 GB, the RX 6600 LE wins outright. If the workload exceeds 8 GB, the P40 is the only viable option, despite its lower benchmark scores and end-of-life status. This is a classic compute-versus-capacity trade-off. The data also shows the P40 has a launch MSRP of 5,699 USD, positioning it as a high-end professional card, whereas the RX 6600 LE has no listed MSRP, suggesting a consumer-oriented release. For most users, the RX 6600 LE is the data-backed winner. For specific high-memory workloads, the P40 remains relevant solely due to its 24 GB capacity.