AMD Radeon RX 6600S vs NVIDIA GeForce MX330 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single direct benchmark comparison between the AMD Radeon RX 6600S and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330, and it is decisively one-sided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon RX 6600S scores 66,435, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 scores 7,896. This represents a delta of 741.4 percent, meaning the RX 6600S delivers roughly 8.4 times the raw compute performance of the MX330 in this specific workload. The win count stands at 1 for the RX 6600S and 0 for the MX330, so there is no countervailing benchmark result to consider.

Looking at the broader database averages, the gap remains substantial, though less extreme. The RX 6600S holds an average benchmark score of 10,629, while the MX330 averages 8,458. The RX 6600S sits at the 49th percentile among all GPUs, placing it just above the midpoint of the performance distribution. The MX330, at the 43rd percentile, is lower but not dramatically far behind in percentile terms. However, the percentile difference understates the real-world disparity in compute-heavy tasks, as the OpenCL result illustrates. The nearest rivals for the RX 6600S are the AMD Radeon R9 M275X (average score 10,582, delta 0.4 percent), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (10,690, delta -0.6 percent), the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (10,761, delta -1.2 percent), and the AMD Radeon RX 550X (10,481, delta 1.4 percent). This cluster shows the RX 6600S performing within a tight band of older desktop and mobile parts, none of which approach the MX330's league. For the MX330, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8,462, delta 0 percent), the AMD Radeon 880M (8,436, delta 0.3 percent), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8,427, delta 0.4 percent), and the Intel Arc A380 (8,558, delta -1.2 percent). These comparisons show the MX330 sitting in a lower performance tier, roughly comparable to integrated graphics and older discrete mobile chips.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers, different architectures, and different process nodes. The AMD Radeon RX 6600S uses the Navi 23 chip based on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process. It packs 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 uses the GP108B chip based on the older Pascal architecture, built by Samsung on a 14 nm process. It contains 1,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, with a transistor density of 24.3 million per square millimeter. The RX 6600S therefore has more than six times the transistor count and a significantly denser, more modern manufacturing process.

Clock speeds differ as well. The RX 6600S has a base clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz, with a game clock of 1881 MHz. The MX330 runs at a base of 1531 MHz and a boost of 1594 MHz. Memory configurations are also divergent. The RX 6600S uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, achieving a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s with an effective memory clock of 14 Gbps. The MX330 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 56.06 GB/s and an effective clock of 7 Gbps. The RX 6600S has four times the memory bus width and exactly four times the memory bandwidth.

Compute resources show a similar scale of difference. The RX 6600S features 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, along with 28 ray tracing cores. The MX330 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. Pixel rate for the RX 6600S is 128.0 GPixel/s, compared to 25.50 GPixel/s for the MX330. Texture rate is 224.0 GTexel/s versus 38.26 GTexel/s. Floating point performance: the RX 6600S delivers 7.168 TFLOPS in FP32 and 14.34 TFLOPS in FP16 (2:1 ratio), while the MX330 manages 1,224.2 GFLOPS in FP32 and only 19.13 GFLOPS in FP16 (1:64 ratio). The FP16 discrepancy is stark, reflecting the RX 6600S's modern shader design versus the MX330's Pascal-era limitations.

Power and interface specs also differ. The RX 6600S has a TDP of 80 W, while the MX330 is rated at just 10 W. Both are integrated GPUs with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs, but the bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RX 6600S versus PCIe 3.0 x4 for the MX330. API support: the RX 6600S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MX330 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 6600S also has a higher DirectX feature level, which matters for newer rendering paths.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600S has an average benchmark score of 10,629, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 has an average of 8,458.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the single head-to-head test?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 6600S scores 66,435 versus 7,896 for the MX330, a delta of 741.4 percent in favor of the RX 6600S.

Q: What are the memory capacity and type differences?

A: The RX 6600S uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the MX330 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory.

Q: Does the MX330 support ray tracing?

A: No, the MX330 has no ray tracing cores, whereas the RX 6600S includes 28 ray tracing cores.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The RX 6600S has a transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter, compared to 24.3 million per square millimeter for the MX330.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The RX 6600S is rated at 80 W, and the MX330 is rated at 10 W.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The RX 6600S uses a 7 nm process from TSMC, while the MX330 uses a 14 nm process from Samsung. Transistor count: 11,060 million for the RX 6600S versus 1,800 million for the MX330. Die size: 237 mm² versus 74 mm². Base clock: 1700 MHz versus 1531 MHz. Boost clock: 2000 MHz versus 1594 MHz. The RX 6600S has a game clock of 1881 MHz; the MX330 has no recorded game clock. Memory clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective). Memory size: 4 GB versus 2 GB. Memory type: GDDR6 versus GDDR5. Bus width: 128 bit versus 64 bit. Bandwidth: 224.0 GB/s versus 56.06 GB/s. Shading units: 1,792 versus 384. TMUs: 112 versus 24. ROPs: 64 versus 16. Ray tracing cores: 28 versus none. Pixel rate: 128.0 GPixel/s versus 25.50 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 224.0 GTexel/s versus 38.26 GTexel/s. FP32 performance: 7.168 TFLOPS versus 1,224.2 GFLOPS. FP16 performance: 14.34 TFLOPS versus 19.13 GFLOPS. TDP: 80 W versus 10 W. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x4. DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1). Release date: January 3, 2022 versus February 9, 2020. The RX 6600S has a predecessor listed as Polaris Mobile; the MX330 has no predecessor. Both are end-of-life products.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6600S wins decisively in raw compute performance. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 66,435 versus 7,896 is a 741.4 percent advantage, which points to workloads like GPU-accelerated rendering, machine learning inference, and other general-purpose compute tasks. The RX 6600S also wins on memory bandwidth, with 224.0 GB/s versus 56.06 GB/s, which matters for texture-heavy scenes and large data sets. Its 4 GB GDDR6 memory capacity doubles the MX330's 2 GB GDDR5, allowing larger textures and higher resolutions to fit within local memory. The presence of 28 ray tracing cores gives the RX 6600S a feature advantage in DirectX 12 Ultimate titles that the MX330 cannot access. The FP16 throughput of 14.34 TFLOPS, versus 19.13 GFLOPS for the MX330, indicates the RX 6600S is far better suited to mixed-precision workloads.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 wins on power efficiency. Its TDP of 10 W is one-eighth of the RX 6600S's 80 W. For thin-and-light notebooks where battery life and thermal limits are paramount, the MX330 draws far less power and generates less heat. It also has a smaller die (74 mm² versus 237 mm²) and a lower transistor count, which may contribute to lower manufacturing costs, though pricing data is not available. In the percentile rankings, the MX330 at the 43rd percentile is not catastrophically far behind the RX 6600S's 49th percentile, but this reflects the lower average score of 8,458 versus 10,629. The MX330's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 880M, an integrated GPU, indicating that the MX330 occupies a segment where light gaming and basic acceleration are the targets, not high-end workloads.

The Verdict

The database results are unambiguous. The AMD Radeon RX 6600S is the dominant performer in every measured compute metric. Its average benchmark score of 10,629 places it 25.7 percent above the MX330's 8,458. The single head-to-head OpenCL result, a 741.4 percent delta, reinforces this gap. For any user prioritizing graphical performance, compute capability, memory bandwidth, or modern feature support such as ray tracing, the RX 6600S is the correct choice. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, while the MX330 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1), which matters for future game compatibility.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 is only preferable in scenarios where power draw is the limiting factor. Its 10 W TDP versus 80 W means it can be passively cooled or placed in extremely thin chassis, extending battery life in basic productivity tasks. The MX330's 43rd percentile ranking, while lower, still indicates it can handle light workloads, and its nearest rivals include integrated solutions like the AMD Radeon 880M, suggesting it competes in the entry-level integrated graphics space. For users who need a discrete GPU for basic acceleration in an ultraportable notebook, the MX330 serves that role. However, the recorded data shows no benchmark where the MX330 beats the RX 6600S. The verdict is clear: the RX 6600S for performance, the MX330 for extreme power efficiency.