GPU Comparison

# Intel Arc A770 vs AMD Radeon Pro W6600M

The Intel Arc A770 and AMD Radeon Pro W6600M occupy very different corners of the GPU market, yet both land within one percentile point of each other in overall standing (90th vs 89th percentile among all GPUs). The Arc A770 is a desktop-focused discrete card built on Intel's Xe-HPG architecture, while the W6600M is a mobile workstation part using AMD's RDNA 2.0 design. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the story is more nuanced than simple score comparisons, these are products engineered for different physical and thermal realities.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A770 averages 68,809 points across its benchmark suite, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M averages 61,896 points. That gives the Arc A770 an 11.2% advantage in aggregate performance, though the W6600M's percentile ranking (89th) trails the A770's (90th) by only one position.

Q: How much faster is the Arc A770 in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Arc A770 scores 109,175 versus the W6600M's 56,140, a 94.5% delta. This is the single largest performance gap between the two cards in any shared benchmark, nearly doubling the AMD part's output.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between these two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc A770 ships with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, capping at 224.0 GB/s. That is exactly half the capacity and less than half the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count and what is the density?

A: The Arc A770 packs 21,700 million transistors across a 406 mm² die, yielding 53.4 million transistors per mm². The W6600M contains 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, with a density of 46.7 million per mm². Intel's chip has roughly 96% more transistors overall.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. The Intel Arc A770 is listed as end-of-life, released on 2022-10-11, with a successor named Battlemage. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is also end-of-life, released on 2021-06-07, and has no listed successor. Both have production statuses of "End-of-life."

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Arc A770 has a TDP of 225 W and requires a 550 W suggested PSU, using 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors. The W6600M has a 90 W TDP, requires no external power connectors, and lists no suggested PSU.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct buyer profiles. The Intel Arc A770 is the pick for anyone needing raw compute throughput, larger memory capacity, or desktop expansion, it wins both shared benchmarks decisively and offers double the VRAM. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, however, is the choice for mobile workstation deployments where the 90 W TDP and IGP form factor matter more than peak performance. Its 225 W power draw difference versus the A770's 225 W TDP is not a minor detail; it is the defining characteristic separating a plug-in desktop card from an integrated mobile solution. Neither GPU is currently in production, but for legacy systems, the Arc A770 dominates on performance while the W6600M wins on efficiency and physical adaptability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two benchmarks are shared between these cards, and the Intel Arc A770 wins both. The Geekbench OpenCL result is the headline: 109,175 for the A770 versus 56,140 for the W6600M, a 94.5% delta. This near-doubling of compute output suggests the A770's 4096 shading units and 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 throughput simply overwhelm the W6600M's 1792 shading units and 7.290 TFLOPS FP32 capability. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows but remains substantial, 94,284 for Intel versus 67,652 for AMD, a 39.4% delta. The Vulkan result shows the W6600M performing relatively better, likely because API overhead is reduced and the mobile card's 28 ray accelerators contribute meaningfully. Still, the A770's 32 RT cores and higher raw shader count carry the day.

The deltaPct values in the nearestRivals fields provide additional context. The A770's closest rival is the NVIDIA CMP 90HX at 69,000 (0.3% behind), with the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 at 68,562 (0.4% ahead) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 at 69,870 (1.5% behind). The W6600M's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon 8050S at 62,108 (0.3% behind), with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 at 60,347 (2.6% ahead) and the Intel Arc Pro A60 at 60,326 (2.6% ahead). These groupings show both cards sitting in competitive neighborhoods relative to their form factors.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet reveals fundamental divergences. The Arc A770 uses a DG2-512 chip with 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, while the W6600M's Navi 23 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, exactly half the ROPs and less than half the shading units. Clock speeds differ substantially: the A770 runs at a 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, while the W6600M starts at 1224 MHz and boosts to 2034 MHz. Memory clocks also diverge: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on Intel versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) on AMD. The A770's pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s more than doubles the W6600M's 130.2 GPixel/s, and the texture rate of 614.4 GTexel/s versus 227.8 GTexel/s shows a 2.7x gap. The A770 requires dual-slot spacing and external power; the W6600M is an IGP with no power connectors. Display outputs differ as well: the A770 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0, while the W6600M is "Portable Device Dependent."

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is stark: Intel's Xe-HPG on a 6 nm TSMC process versus AMD's RDNA 2.0 on a 7 nm TSMC process. The A770's die size of 406 mm² dwarfs the W6600M's 237 mm², and the transistor counts, 21,700 million versus 11,060 million, reflect that physical advantage. Transistor density is also higher on Intel: 53.4 million per mm² versus 46.7 million per mm². The A770 belongs to the Alchemist generation (Arc 7), while the W6600M is part of Radeon Pro Mobile (W6x00M). Intel lists its predecessor as Xe Graphics and successor as Battlemage; AMD lists FirePro Mobile as the predecessor with no successor named. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical. The A770 has 32 RT cores against the W6600M's 28 ray accelerators, giving Intel a 14.3% advantage in ray-tracing hardware count. FP16 throughput follows the same 2:1 ratio on both cards relative to FP32, but the absolute numbers differ: 39.32 TFLOPS on Intel versus 14.58 TFLOPS on AMD. The A770's bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16, matching the W6600M's PCIe 4.0 x16, so bandwidth to the host is equal.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A770 wins in every measured performance category. It triumphs in OpenCL compute with a 94.5% margin, in Vulkan rendering with a 39.4% margin, and offers double the memory capacity (16 GB versus 8 GB) with more than double the bandwidth (512.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s). Its higher pixel rate and texture rate make it the clear choice for demanding rendering workloads, and its 32 RT cores provide more ray-tracing headroom than the W6600M's 28. The A770's 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 versus the W6600M's 7.290 TFLOPS means compute-heavy tasks like simulation or AI inference will favor Intel overwhelmingly.

The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M wins where physical constraints dominate. Its 90 W TDP is 135 W lower than the A770's 225 W TDP, making it suitable for laptop or compact form factors where heat dissipation and battery life are critical. The IGP slot width means no expansion slot is needed, and the absence of power connectors simplifies integration. Its smaller die (237 mm² vs 406 mm²) and lower transistor count (11,060 million vs 21,700 million) suggest lower manufacturing complexity and potentially better yields, though that is not stated in the data. In scenarios where the workload fits within 8 GB of VRAM and performance requirements are modest, the W6600M's efficiency profile is the deciding factor. The benchmark scores prove the A770 is faster, but the W6600M is the only one of the two that can exist in a slim mobile chassis, and that is a categorical advantage no benchmark score can erase.