GPU Comparison

The Intel Arc A750 and AMD Radeon RX 6600 present a fascinating split in benchmark results, with the overall average score favoring Intel but the majority of individual test wins going to AMD. The Arc A750 posts an average benchmark score of 20,582, placing it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 6600 averages 19,036, sitting in the 63rd percentile. This 1,546-point gap in overall averages, however, masks a dramatic divergence in workload-specific performance that defines the rivalry between these two end-of-life cards.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided results come from compute-heavy and modern API tests, where the Intel Arc A750 dominates. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A750 scores 98,554 against the RX 6600’s 28,850, a staggering 241.6% advantage for Intel. This is the single largest delta in the entire comparison, reflecting the A750’s raw compute throughput. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test also heavily favors Intel, with the A750 scoring 2,612 versus 1,492 for AMD, a 75.1% lead. Vulkan performance follows the same trend, though less extremely: the A750’s 85,631 beats the RX 6600’s 67,623 by 26.6%.

PassMark DirectX 12 is another Intel win, with the A750 scoring 70 against AMD’s 51, a 37.3% margin. These four wins for Intel are all in modern, low-level or compute-oriented workloads, suggesting the architecture scales well when drivers are fully utilized.

AMD’s RX 6600, meanwhile, wins the remaining six tests, but with much smaller margins in several cases. The biggest AMD victories come in PassMark DirectX 11 (152 vs. 72, a 52.6% lead for AMD) and DirectX 10 (95 vs. 65, a 31.6% lead). PassMark G3D also favors AMD, with a score of 15,096 versus 12,534, a 17% advantage. In PassMark GPU Compute, AMD leads 6,554 to 5,368, an 18.1% gap. The narrowest AMD wins are in PassMark DirectX 9 (197 vs. 181, just 8.1% ahead) and PassMark G2D (889 vs. 732, a 17.7% margin).

The pattern is clear: Intel wins decisively in tests that stress parallel compute and modern graphics APIs, while AMD wins more consistently across legacy DirectX tests and general 3D rasterization. The 3DMark Steel Nomad result is particularly telling, Intel’s 75.1% advantage there dwarfs any single AMD win in magnitude.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A750 is the clear choice for compute-oriented tasks and modern API workloads. Its OpenCL score of 98,554 is more than triple the RX 6600’s, making it markedly better suited for GPGPU applications, machine learning inference, or any workload that leverages raw FP32 throughput. The A750’s FP32 rating of 17.20 TFLOPS versus AMD’s 8.928 TFLOPS aligns with this compute dominance. For gamers targeting DirectX 12 or Vulkan titles, the data also favors Intel, the 3DMark Steel Nomad and Geekbench Vulkan wins indicate strong performance in current-generation game engines.

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 wins in legacy DirectX scenarios, which remains relevant for older game titles and certain productivity applications. Its PassMark DirectX 11 score of 152 is more than double the A750’s 72, and it also leads in DirectX 10 and DirectX 9. The RX 6600’s PassMark G3D score of 15,096 suggests better general-purpose 3D rasterization performance in the PassMark suite, and its GPU Compute win (6,554 vs. 5,368) shows it is no slouch in compute either, despite the massive OpenCL deficit. For users running a mix of older games or applications that rely on legacy APIs, the RX 6600 is the safer bet.

The score distribution also reveals that the RX 6600 has a narrower but more consistent performance profile across its wins, while the A750’s wins are either very large (OpenCL, Steel Nomad) or moderate (Vulkan, DX12). This suggests the A750 is more specialized, excelling where its architecture can flex, while the RX 6600 offers steadier, if less spectacular, performance.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. Intel’s Arc A750 uses the DG2-512 chip with Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 6 nm process. It packs 21,700 million transistors into a 406 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 53.4 million per square millimeter. AMD’s RX 6600 uses the Navi 23 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC’s 7 nm node, with 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, a density of 46.7 million per square millimeter. The A750’s larger, denser chip explains much of its compute advantage.

The shader configuration is radically different. The A750 features 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, while the RX 6600 has just 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, exactly half in each category. Both cards have 28 ray tracing cores, a notable parity. The A750’s pixel rate of 268.8 GPixel/s and texture rate of 537.6 GTexel/s are significantly higher than AMD’s 159.4 GPixel/s and 279.0 GTexel/s, again reflecting the larger silicon.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. Both have 8 GB of GDDR6, but the A750 uses a 256-bit bus delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the RX 6600 uses a 128-bit bus with just 224.0 GB/s. This 2.3x bandwidth advantage for Intel likely contributes to its strong modern-API performance. Clock speeds tell a different story: the A750 bases at 2050 MHz and boosts to 2400 MHz, while the RX 6600 bases lower at 1626 MHz but boosts higher to 2491 MHz, with a game clock of 2044 MHz. The RX 6600’s higher boost clock helps it remain competitive in lighter workloads.

Power and physical specs also differ. The A750 has a TDP of 225 W and requires a 550 W PSU, while the RX 6600 sips at 132 W with a 300 W PSU recommendation. The A750 needs both a 6-pin and 8-pin power connector; the RX 6600 only needs a single 8-pin. The RX 6600 is a compact 190 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, whereas the A750’s dimensions are not listed. Both are dual-slot cards supporting PCIe 4.0, but the A750 uses x16 while the RX 6600 uses x8. Display outputs are similar, both have one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPorts, though the A750 uses DisplayPort 2.0 while the RX 6600 uses 1.4a.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A750 averages 20,582, which is 1,546 points higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6600’s 19,036 average. The A750 sits in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 6600 is in the 63rd.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A750 win in DirectX 12?

A: Yes. In PassMark DirectX 12, the A750 scores 70 versus the RX 6600’s 51, a 37.3% advantage. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the A750 leads 2,612 to 1,492, a 75.1% margin.

Q: Where does the AMD RX 6600 beat the Intel Arc A750?

A: The RX 6600 wins in PassMark DirectX 11 (152 vs. 72), DirectX 10 (95 vs. 65), DirectX 9 (197 vs. 181), G2D (889 vs. 732), G3D (15,096 vs. 12,534), and GPU Compute (6,554 vs. 5,368).

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc A750 has 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth over a 256-bit bus, compared to the RX 6600’s 224.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The A750 has a 225 W TDP and recommends a 550 W PSU, while the RX 6600 has a 132 W TDP and recommends a 300 W PSU. The A750 needs 6-pin and 8-pin connectors; the RX 6600 needs only a single 8-pin.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life. The Intel Arc A750 was released on 2022-10-11, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 was released on 2021-10-12. The A750’s launch MSRP was 289 USD, while the RX 6600’s was 329 USD.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear split: the Intel Arc A750 is the superior card for modern, compute-heavy workloads, while the AMD Radeon RX 6600 is more consistent in legacy and general 3D scenarios. The A750’s 241.6% OpenCL lead and 75.1% Steel Nomad advantage are overwhelming, indicating that users running DX12 or Vulkan titles, or any GPU compute tasks, should choose Intel. Its higher bandwidth, more shading units, and larger die deliver measurable results in these areas.

The RX 6600, however, wins the majority of individual tests (6 out of 10) and offers much lower power consumption at 132 W versus 225 W. Its wins in PassMark G3D and GPU Compute show it is not far behind in practical gaming terms, and its DirectX 11 dominance is critical for anyone playing older titles. The RX 6600 also has a higher boost clock (2491 MHz vs. 2400 MHz), which helps explain its competitive rasterization performance despite half the shader count.

For a buyer prioritizing modern gaming and compute performance, the Intel Arc A750 is the data-backed pick. For those needing broad legacy API compatibility, lower power draw, or a smaller physical card (190 mm length), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 is the safer choice. The A750’s higher percentile ranking (66th vs. 63rd) and higher average score reinforce its overall edge, but the RX 6600’s consistency across diverse workloads makes it a formidable alternative for less demanding use cases.